Rachel Reeves crying in the House of Commons

This is what happens when people with no business being near government get given the responsibility.

I'm not just referring to Reeves, but to the majority of our politicians who have no experience beyond their own spheres and despite their theoretic 'experience' having no grander context of what their decisions will mean beyond a book.

So, every single career politician can f**k off.

Source?

I don't like Rachel Reeves. I think she is an exceedingly poor Chancellor and not terribly bright.

However, I won't condemn her for crying. She is but human. She's probably mortified about it on top of whatever upset her in the first place.

Any reduction in state support is going to be hard, no matter what group are involved. No one wants to lose something they perceive to get for nothing be that child benefit, WFA, disability benefits, UC, inheritance tax relief. Everyone wants something for nothing and there’s a host of imaginary people lining up to pay for it. Except there isn’t. Everyone believes their particular circumstances mean they are most vulnerable in any situation where costs need to be cut.

So really, unless you can’t tell me where you would make reductions in the welfare budget, which is over 23% of government spending, I’m not going to worry too much. The reality is everyone thinks they are most in need, everyone has reasons why their piece of the pie should remain intact, and everyone has someone else that should pay for it. No one has any concrete ideas about how we stop 50% of the population being reliant on the state.

Yes but you need to control your emotions at work. Cry behind closed doors with trusted colleagues.
I feel sorry for her but I don’t want people in powerful positions who can’t control their emotions in public ( unless it’s the death or serious illness of loved one in which case don’t be on the front line at work)

That assumes RR is crying for those reasons and not from self pity and humiliation.

There certainly was a lack of empathy for the electorate and those most in need in the recent policies.

She is every bit as belligerent and bone-headed as Liz Truss, and equally economically illiterate. It’s not her personality but her policies that have been so disastrous, and her unwillingness to listen to sense when a bus could clearly have been driven through them. She’s a chancellor who has absolutely zero grasp of who and what drives growth FFS.

In fairness is takes empathy, compassion and emotion literacy, none of which were Hunts strong suit.

I am not a Thatcher fan. But her tears were on the front of every newspaper at the time.

It's a pity she doesn't care about the people she was elected to represent. Her usual demeanour is an unpleasant, sneering tone. A thoroughly unpleasant individual.

It was also decimated by the Lansley Act which sucked up millions that could have been used on frontline services and privatised swathes of it. Sorry you find the truth loathsome.

No I would think not. John Major was Chancellor, no degree. George Osborne, History. But they survived. Reeves did not understand what she had to do - the Treasury is full of economists. It did not need a chief economist

I’m not entirely sure you can compare Rachel Reeves and Margaret Thatcher. I’m fairly certain MT’s tears were the result of shoving glass up her own nails

The only ‘personal’ issue she has, is that it’s suddenly dawned on her, that having a degree in economics and having worked as a Junior Analyst on the Japanese desk for a couple of years does not qualify you for being Chancellor. I can’t work out if it was arrogance or naivety that led her to believe she could do the job. Being Chancellor isn’t a role where you can ‘fake it, until you make it’.

She made such a huge fuss of her sheer brilliance, how she’s pioneering women and in just a year, has completely humiliated herself - she’s a proud woman and she knows the history books won’t be kind to her. That’s what she’s crying about.

Yep no chance. He is as craven as they come for a politician.

Sure, but he’s not going to set himself on fire to save her, is he? I guess she knows that now - but not much of a politician if she didn’t.

Chancellors usually have their eye on the main job. That’s never happening now.

It’s Starmer too though. He’s leading in this then all
the heat is piled on Reeves.

She’s not great but he’s accountable.

I don’t rate Reeves but she was elected. Lying about her qualifications doesn’t seem to be issue, the issue is competence at political games, which she is bad at. Being Chancellor is a lot more than being an economist, after all many Chancellors aren’t the faintest bit qualified. The issue is she took on the job and did not realise that she couldn’t just come in and do whatever she felt was appropriate, but she had to sell it to her own party to survive. She did not seem to get that from the start.

Well now she knows why you don’t need to be an economist. You need other skills, which she doesn’t have.

Political persuasion aside, she’s embarrassing. And she’s done a total disservice to working women. The optics of the Chancellor of the Exchequer crying are just terrible-so unprofessional. She’s not up to the job and should stand down.

Couldn’t imagine Jeremy Hunt crying like that.

I don't think it's misogyny, I think if a male chancellor made bad decision after bad decision whilst smugly ignoring an entire population - and a vast community of bone fide economic experts - not only telling him he was wrong but demonstrating precisely how he was wrong with a dizzying array of impeccably researched data, people would jeer at him too. And probably wouldn't feel particularly sympathetic if he burst into tears when all the (blindingly obvious) eventualities they'd been predicting came to pass. At least she's no longer smirking...

She needs to be replaced and every single policy she enacted needs to be reversed, and then she needs to be investigated for fraud for lying on her CV. I'm fairly sure that if I fabricated a load of evidence to attest that I was an accomplished investment banker then lost a client money, I would find myself locked up - and that would have only harmed one person! She lied her way into commandeering control of an entire nation's finances, and in doing so has drastically harmed millions of people. So no I don't feel sorry for her, I think she's extremely fortunate to be walking free - and I strongly question both Starmer's judgment and morality that she is.

This with bells on.

Who doesn’t? Usually people attacking conservatives but now Labour are in.

She shouldn’t be in the job if she can’t handle what’s thrown at her. I couldn’t do it but RR said she could- so no sympathy for tears .

He was. Sorry. The other son is called Arthur.

I think it’s loathsome to accuse Cameron of hypocrisy about the NHS. The NHS got extra in real terms under Cameron just as it has done under all governments.

i wonder if she was given a hard time online, hence the tears