I know why Rachel Reeves cried at PMQs – and it's a frightening scenario for our country
What was significant was that it was in full public view, on the floor of the House of Commons.
4
4
She seemed hot and bothered.
The atmosphere in the house, particularly in the summer, can be oppressive and the chamber of the Commons is not a comfortable place, even at the best of times.
To my mind, however, Reeves was under a different kind of pressure.
The waterworks on display from her this week were more about the future than the past.
Her plan to cut spending by reforming welfare has been sabotaged.
She will have to find more money.
This includes £1.5billion to pay for Labour's winter fuel U-turn.
Sheer helplessness
And a £4.5billion gap after Sir Keir Starmer ditched plans to cut disability benefits.
Coupled with sluggish growth, we all know what is coming.
In the words of Fagin's song from the musical Oliver!, she will 'have to pick a pocket or two', entirely legally of course, to make the sums add up.
Kwasi speaks out after being sacked & reveals he 'fled' after being ousted
The impact of high immigration, low growth and already high taxes means that we can barely afford to pay for our welfare state.
Her crying, I am sure, was a sign of the frustration she feels in her job.
I did the job for some short turbulent weeks and I know the feeling of helplessness that it often entails.
There is the feeling of being besieged.
In politics, you are never in control of events, but the sense of sheer helplessness often does occur when you are in a senior position.
At times like that, you have to adopt the old English 'stiff upper lip', in my view.
Senior figures have to hold things together, when things are getting sticky.
Nobody was better at that than our late Queen.
She never cried, never got teary or outwardly sentimental, even under the most extreme provocation.
Yet, as I saw Reeves on the front bench on Wednesday, I totally understood her predicament.
The left-wing backbenchers in her party despise her.
They haven't even bothered to conceal their contempt.
They want her out.
Left-wing outrage is now being expressed by the creation of a new party.
Jeremy Corbyn has said 'there is a thirst for an alternative ' and 'a grouping will come together'.
Time will tell if any of Labour's left wing — the usual awkward squad — actually join Corbyn's 'grouping'.
Now Zarah Sultana, another left-wing firebrand MP, is going to join.
For all these types, Reeves is the scapegoat for everything they think is wrong with Labour in power.
For hard-left MPs, Reeves and Keir Starmer stand for nothing.
There is no love lost between them and the Labour leadership.
In addition to the trouble from the Left, we read that some of Reeves's Cabinet colleagues have been briefing against her.
She had warned them on Tuesday that tax rises in the autumn budget will be needed to cover the costs of the welfare U-turn.
While the Institute for Fiscal Studies says she could be facing a £30billion black hole.
Clearly, the welfare climbdown has made Angela Rayner more powerful.
Reeves's position is obviously weaker.
It is obvious that Reeves is a totally isolated figure within the Labour Party.
Reeves's weak position is made worse by the fact that the prospects for the economy and taxes remain grim
Kwasi
Her position is similar to the school swot shunned by her peers in the playground.
She provokes their antagonism and distrust.
She is entirely dependent on the goodwill and patience of the PM.
I know how that feels.
Based on my personal experience, I think Starmer would be mad to get rid of her.
Such a move would merely shorten his shelf life.
His critics within Labour would feel emboldened to come after him.
Yet I can tell you Prime Ministers, under extreme pressure, can do crazy things.
He may well yet kick her to the kerb.
Reeves's weak position is made worse by the fact that the prospects for the economy and taxes remain grim.
Failing to get the welfare bill through in its original form means the £5billion savings won't materialise.
Taxes, she has hinted, will have to go up.
Nobody knows which taxes will go up, but increases are on the way.
All this pressure, and the prospect of more challenging days ahead are clearly weighing on the mind of the Chancellor.
I know what the pressure feels like. I never felt like crying but we all deal with pressure differently.
I won't condemn her for her tears.
'Doom loop'
It's the substance of what they are doing and the tax-and-spend policies which I object to.
There doesn't seem to be an end in sight.
More spending and higher taxes.
When she was in Opposition, Reeves spoke about the 'doom loop' we faced as a country.
Low growth accompanying high spending and even higher taxes.
Rinse and Repeat. That's the doom loop.
A world where Britain spirals downwards, economically, to reach a point where living standards decline.
Even Reeves knows in her bones that higher taxes will kill our prospects for economic growth, for greater prosperity.
It is this frightening scenario, I suspect, which caused the teary outburst from the Chancellor.
4
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
28 minutes ago
- The Guardian
We have only ourselves to blame for the UK's land monopoly
While we might fume at the eviction of a whole village by its landlord, we only have ourselves to blame for allowing such power to remain in the hands of so few (An entire village in Dorset is facing eviction – proof that private money holds all the power in rural England, 28 June). Even socialist governments have balked at dealing with the issue of land monopoly, and we have failed to hold them to account. In 1909, when landed power was largely synonymous with the aristocracy, Tom Johnston, later to become secretary of state for Scotland, noted that land titles had originally been created 'either by force or fraud'. He urged the people to 'shatter the romance that keeps the nation numb and spellbound while privilege picks its pocket'. As George Monbiot's article shows, land monopoly today is not confined to the aristocracy. The most effective way to neutralise its power would be through land value taxation, which would ensure that those who claim to own the country bear its running costs. In 1910, the Inland Revenue initiated a full survey of land use, value and ownership across Britain. It was completed in five years, but the outbreak of war and a change of government meant the proposed tax measures were never implemented. Our present Labour government has four years to repeat the exercise and reform our broken tax system. It should start DigneyStirling The eviction of the inhabitants of Littlebredy in Dorset by their new owner Bridehead Estate Ltd, excoriatingly exposed by George Monbiot, has a strong historical echo from the 1770s at Milton Abbas, less than 30 miles away. Lord Milton bought Milton Abbey, near Dorchester, in 1752. Capability Brown was brought in to 'improve' the surrounding landscape. He faced the problem of what to do about the unsightly medieval village of more than a hundred households. The solution was to move it. In 1774 Brown drew up plans for a new 'model village' of new homes. Over the next decade the villagers were decanted, some against their will, to new homes in Milton Abbas. Barely a trace of the old village exists. Lord Milton is often cited as one of the worst examples of the callous ostentation common among the English landowning Whig oligarchy of the 18th century. But at least he felt obliged to rehouse his tenants. Judging from Monbiot's piece, it seems that a corporate landowner in today's Britain is not even obliged to do that when it decides to socially engineer an inconvenient community out of house and GutchLondon Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
The National
30 minutes ago
- The National
Keir Starmer told not to 'punish' children by keeping two-child cap
The SNP urged the Prime Minister to end the limit amid reports it could stay as a result of Labour watering down most of its welfare reforms. KEIR Starmer has been urged not to 'punish' children by keeping the two-child cap following Labour's partial U-turn on benefit cuts. The UK Government had attempted to save around £5 billion a year by cutting welfare, mostly for those claiming disability and health benefits, but made concessions following a revolt from MPs. READ MORE: At least 42 Palestinians killed by Israel as doctors warn babies facing death The move means the Treasury may not see any savings at all as the welfare budget is still set to rapidly rise in the coming years. Media reports suggest the move could see ministers keep the cap in order to save money. The Prime Minister previously indicated the Government would only abolish the two-child cap, which prevents parents from claiming child tax credit or universal credit for more than two children, when it had the money to do so. Asked in May whether he would scrap the policy, he said: 'We'll look at all options of driving down child poverty.' The SNP, which will mitigate the limit in Scotland by 2026, has urged the UK Government to scrap the cap, which it says is pushing thousands of children into poverty. The party said analysis from the House of Commons Library found that 2.3 million families could be lifted out of poverty if the UK Government matched Scottish Government policies. These included the Scottish Child Payment, abolishing the two-child benefit cap and scrapping the so-called bedroom tax. According to the House of Commons Library, these measures would lift 96,000 families in Scotland out of poverty. The analysis also shows that over the past decade the number of children living in poverty in the UK has risen from 3.7 million (27%) in 2013/14 to 4.5 million (31%) in 2023/24. That number is expected to rise to 4.6 million (33%) by 2029-30, according to the data. SNP deputy Westminster leader Pete Wishart urged the Prime Minister to have a rethink on his welfare plans. Pete Wishart MP (Image: PA) He said: 'Keir Starmer must not punish children for his disastrous mistakes over the Labour Party's cuts to disabled people. 'It is utterly shameful that as a direct result of Labour Party austerity cuts, child poverty is rising to record levels in the UK – and the Prime Minister is failing to lift a finger to tackle it. 'Scrapping the two-child benefit cap is the absolute bare minimum – and it should have been done on the Labour Government's first day in power. READ MORE: Here's why banning Orange marches would be a bad idea 'It's pathetic that senior Labour Party figures now want to keep this punitive welfare cut just to show rebel MPs who's in charge. 'Saving Keir Starmer embarrassment is not more important than tackling child poverty.' Wishart urged Starmer not to 'drag his feet' on the two-child cap and to instead match the SNP's Scottish Child Payment with a similar policy for the entire UK. He added: 'Thanks to SNP action, Scotland is the only part of the UK where child poverty is falling. 'Unless Keir Starmer urgently follow's Scotland's lead, his lasting legacy will be pushing millions of children into destitution.' A UK Government spokesperson said: 'We are determined to bring down child poverty. We've just announced a new £1 billion package to reform crisis support, including funding to ensure the poorest children do not go hungry outside of term time. 'This comes alongside the expansion to free breakfast clubs and the move to make over half-a-million more children eligible for free school meals. 'We have also increased the national minimum wage and are supporting 700,000 of the poorest families by introducing a fair repayment rate on universal credit deductions. 'We will publish an ambitious child poverty strategy later this year to ensure we deliver fully funded measures that tackle the structural and root causes of child poverty across the country.'
The Herald Scotland
35 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Shona Robison urges Labour to tax rich to fill £5bn gap
In the 2023 Budget, the SNP created a new 'advanced' rate of 45% on incomes between £75,000 and £125,140, and increased the top rate to 48%. READ MORE The Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) forecast that the Scottish rate of income tax would raise around £1.4 billion more than if Scotland had retained the same tax policy as the rest of the UK. However, last year the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned that the new top rate might actually bring in less money, as some higher earners change how they work, where they live, or take measure to avoid or evade paying tax. Despite Tuesday's chaos in the Commons — when ministers offered rebel MPs last-minute concessions to pass a welfare bill originally intended to make £5bn in savings — Labour has insisted it will keep its election promises not to increase income tax, National Insurance or VAT. The changes put pressure on the Chancellor ahead of the autumn Budget, especially as she has committed to her fiscal rules: not to borrow to fund day-to-day public spending, and to get debt falling as a share of UK economic output by 2029/30. The prospect of those rules changing has already spooked the markets. Ms Reeves's tears saw the pound plummet When Ms Reeves was seen crying in the Commons at Prime Minister's Questions, after Sir Keir Starmer refused to back her, the pound fell against the dollar and the euro, while gilt yields soared. The Prime Minister has now very publicly backed his Chancellor. But with no prospect of more borrowing, Ms Reeves has two main options: raise taxes or cut spending. Ms Robison said the Chancellor should opt for the former. 'People voted for a Labour government last year because they wanted change from the Tories — but after a year of attacks on the incomes of pensioners, the poor and the disabled, they are rightly wondering exactly what, if anything, is different,' she said. 'When Keir Starmer took office, he could have chosen to ask people on higher incomes to pay a little more in tax in order to protect public spending. Choosing instead to target the vulnerable is not leadership — frankly, it is political cowardice. 'If Keir Starmer had done in England what the SNP have done in Scotland with taxation, Labour would not be in the complete fiscal mess that they are in now.' The Finance Secretary said asking people on higher incomes to 'pay a bit more in tax' meant that a majority of taxpayers in Scotland pay less than they would elsewhere in the UK. Currently, those earning less than £30,300 — around 51% of Scottish taxpayers — pay slightly less income tax in 2025–26 than if they lived elsewhere in the UK. Taxpayers earning the median income of £29,800 are £5 better off than if they lived south of the Border. However, a taxpayer with an income of £50,000 pays £1,528 more a year in Scotland than in the rest of the UK, while someone on £100,000 pays £3,332 more, and someone on £125,000 pays £5,221 more — equivalent to a 7% reduction in their after-tax income. Ms Robison said: 'Labour used to tell Scotland that we didn't need independence and we just needed to get rid of the Tory government — but the last year has completely demolished that argument. 'No Westminster government will ever deliver the truly fair society which I believe the vast majority of people in Scotland want to live in — and that is why independence is the best future for Scotland.' READ MORE Ms Reeves's most likely option is to freeze income tax thresholds beyond 2028 — a stealth measure that could raise around £8bn a year by 2029–30, thanks to what is known as fiscal drag, where workers are pulled into higher tax brackets as wages rise with inflation, even if their real incomes do not increase. Other possibilities include targeted wealth taxes, such as cutting pension lump sum allowances, scrapping dividend tax reliefs, or reducing the inheritance tax exemptions on certain shareholdings. Labour is also under pressure from backbenchers to consider increasing levies on banks or the gambling industry, both of which have seen windfall gains in recent years. Responding to Ms Robison's comments, a Scottish Labour spokesperson said: 'The SNP have broken Scotland's NHS, overseen falling standards and rising violence in our schools, and left 10,000 children in temporary accommodation with nowhere to call home. 'Even in a cost of living crisis, SNP ministers keep using higher taxes as a substitute for economic growth. Scots pay more and more and with John Swinney, we all get less and less. 'While there's much more to do, this past year a UK Labour Government has ended Tory austerity, delivered a pay rise for 200,000 of the lowest paid Scottish workers, and ensured the largest budget settlement for Scotland in the history of devolution. 'This SNP Government has failed Scotland — and next year, we'll have the chance to get rid of them.'
