Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Rachel Reeves crying in PM questions

1000 replies

AnotherBrickIn · 02/07/2025 12:39

She’s visibly crying

OP posts:
Thread gallery
16
Dwimmer · 02/07/2025 17:59

User32459 · 02/07/2025 17:52

There won't be a country left in 4 years after Labour have finished. Farage won't want the job.

I don’t think he would want it now - he is a self-publicist. And a successful one at that. But I don’t think he would be keen on the work involved in being PM.

Mumble12 · 02/07/2025 18:00

OnlyLittleOldMe · 02/07/2025 17:59

Whilst I agree the welfare costs need to be reformed its not right to start with the disabled who can't work or those on PIP who are trying to work but can't find jobs to fit in with their disability. Start with the Universal Credit and make it more worth while to work than to be on benefits. Make sure there are enough jobs for people to do. Definitely stop paying for boat people to stay in luxury hotels while illegally working for food delivery companies. Thee are many ways to get more money into the economy than making the people who really need help lose their support. Just tax the weakthy and cut the outrageous expenses the MPs claim.

Universal credit is already designed so that being in work is more worthwhile.

Namechangefordaughterevasion · 02/07/2025 18:01

3luckystars · 02/07/2025 12:43

I think I would keel over first and get carted out before I’d let the tears out in front of people at work

Edited

Some people cry more freely and openly than others. There should be no more shame or embarrassment about expressing emotion through tears than there is by expressing them by laughing or smiling or frowning. .

Jellycatspyjamas · 02/07/2025 18:02

TeenagersAngst · 02/07/2025 17:39

The majority of people making new claims for PIP are young people claiming for mental health and behavioural conditions.

Instead of wringing our hands about people killing themselves because they feel like they’re a burden (a very tiny % I’m sure) we should be discussing why the profile of claimants has changed in this way.

Why are young people so anxious they can’t use public transport or deal with the public as part of their job? These are two examples I’ve read on MN this week.

Absolutely. Why is it that transition planning for young people with disabilities seems to purely consist of setting them up for the next round of benefits. The profile of claimants shifting is very worrying if we’re writing off a whole swathe of young people before they’ve even left school.

Xenia · 02/07/2025 18:02

They got elected only because they promised no income tax, employee NI nor VAT rises. Obviously the sensible solution is more cuts all round but instead RR is caught between a rock and a hard place and those on £70k+ have the highest trax burden for 70 years so there is nothinng more to squeeze from them particularly as many in Jan had a £10k tax rise (VAT on 2 sets of private school day fees) so who is going be paying for the massive rise in mental disability?

Depression has replaced the "bad back" - both are easy to make up - for some of these claims by the many who invent their conditions to get free money from tax payers. Of course there are genuine disabled people of course too. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/mar/12/mental-ill-health-is-behind-soaring-disability-benefits-bill-in-england-and-wales-report-says

Mental ill-health is behind soaring disability benefits bill in England and Wales, report says

Institute for Fiscal Studies says half of the rise in working-age people claiming the benefit last year is linked to mental health

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/mar/12/mental-ill-health-is-behind-soaring-disability-benefits-bill-in-england-and-wales-report-says

angela1952 · 02/07/2025 18:03

The only thing I can say about Reeves that at least she knows she's blown it and the Labour party aren't behind her. To this day Truss has never accepted that she made a total balls-up of everything. Both women have been promoted beyond their level of competence, though there wasn't anybody obvious to become Chanceller when Starmer took over.

Bluebellwood129 · 02/07/2025 18:05

Roselilly36 · 02/07/2025 17:48

I agree OP, she has done some terrible things, but on a human level seeing someone collapse like that isn’t pleasant at all. How on earth do you recover professionally from that.

Would she want to though. I don't think any job is worth sacrificing your health and wellbeing for. She's clearly the wrong fit for the job and being brave enough to admit that and walk away might be the best thing for her.

TeenagersAngst · 02/07/2025 18:05

BIossomtoes · 02/07/2025 17:47

Absolutely. But austerity was supposed to be about repaying it, wasn’t it?

You can’t be serious. Brexit? Covid?

alexalisten · 02/07/2025 18:05

Mumble12 · 02/07/2025 17:44

Single parents can’t replicate dual incomes on a whim.

Low wage earners likely earn low wages for a reason, if they could suddenly hop into £50k a year careers, don’t you think they would.

we have a system that supports people in need thankfully, people need to stop trying to trump one need with another and accept that we can help everyone.

The difference is although its hard its not physically impossible like it is for a lot of disabled people and pensioners. The problem with what Labour was originally proposing was that they was going to take disabled people's whole income thinking they magically wouldn't be disabled anymore.

alexalisten · 02/07/2025 18:07

Elderflower14 · 02/07/2025 17:47

I agree about helping disabled people into work. Ds2 would love to work.. He can only work so many hours and then his benefits are cut...

What disability benefits are cut from working. ?

Mumble12 · 02/07/2025 18:08

alexalisten · 02/07/2025 18:05

The difference is although its hard its not physically impossible like it is for a lot of disabled people and pensioners. The problem with what Labour was originally proposing was that they was going to take disabled people's whole income thinking they magically wouldn't be disabled anymore.

That isn’t at all what was being proposed.

MyDeftDuck · 02/07/2025 18:09

I think her and Starmer were having an affair, his wife caught them, she demanded a divorce, Rachel announced she was pregnant, and Mrs Starmer told him that he had to marry her………Rachel was horrified at spending her life with Two Tier Kier 🤣🤣

BIossomtoes · 02/07/2025 18:09

TeenagersAngst · 02/07/2025 18:05

You can’t be serious. Brexit? Covid?

There was six years of austerity before the Brexit vote - which was supposed to make us all better off - and another four years before COVID. The national debt climbed steadily throughout those years. Where the fuck did all the savings from those cuts go? It certainly didn’t go into paying off the debt.

alexalisten · 02/07/2025 18:11

Mumble12 · 02/07/2025 18:08

That isn’t at all what was being proposed.

Originally it was it was said to us that if you lose pip you would also lose the health element of universal credit

Puzzledandpissedoff · 02/07/2025 18:11

EasternStandard · 02/07/2025 12:55

Her mh is likely in pieces. She’ll be too stressed to
function.

To paraphrase Sir Humphrey, "Well it's your job and you wanted it Chancellor"

A shame for her to be so far out of her depth, but I guess the party can use the alleged "personal matter" to make things look better when they get rid

Jellycatspyjamas · 02/07/2025 18:13

TeenagersAngst · 02/07/2025 18:05

You can’t be serious. Brexit? Covid?

Well Brexit was supposed to save millions to invest in the NHS, it was on the side of a bus so it must be true.

EasternStandard · 02/07/2025 18:13

Puzzledandpissedoff · 02/07/2025 18:11

To paraphrase Sir Humphrey, "Well it's your job and you wanted it Chancellor"

A shame for her to be so far out of her depth, but I guess the party can use the alleged "personal matter" to make things look better when they get rid

Yes if they do they’ll probably use the same line as today.

ForgeOfEmpires · 02/07/2025 18:14

TeenagersAngst · 02/07/2025 17:39

The majority of people making new claims for PIP are young people claiming for mental health and behavioural conditions.

Instead of wringing our hands about people killing themselves because they feel like they’re a burden (a very tiny % I’m sure) we should be discussing why the profile of claimants has changed in this way.

Why are young people so anxious they can’t use public transport or deal with the public as part of their job? These are two examples I’ve read on MN this week.

I can help answer this maybe. My son is autistic. Aged 21. We have never had that much money, and although he is diagnosed since age 4 and his life has been hugely impacted by his autism. But when he was 16 a man came to our house from the DWP and told my son he was autistic and did he want to claim for DLA (it was DLA back then). My son had struggled with the idea of himself as disabled, so he said "no", and turned down the money. The man pressed him and told him he was entitled to it, but my son didn't need it and didn't want it so he never claimed it.

Last year, he started a claim.

And I will explain why.

He is at university now, which is now extremely expensive. His loan is massive, the money they give from the loan doesn't cover his accommodation even which is £900 a month (more than the rent of our actual bloody house). His food bills have gone up, everything costs, costs, costs.

Add to that, his autism impacts him massively at university. To a point that last year he needed an 8 month leave of absence due to autistic burnout that left him suicidal and unable to cope at all. He was in a terrible state and didn't intend to return to university at all because the idea terrified him.

I will add to this, he's exceptionally gifted and was at one of the best universities in the country, which while prestigious was also expensive and very stressful in terms of the workload and expectations.

When he was off for 8 months, he very much wanted to do a job so he could save some money and also get our of the house a bit, but our house has no public transport so he couldn't get anywhere. He tried really, really hard to find some simple WFH work, but he couldn't find it. The only places with jobs nearby are farms and pubs and he applied to them all but got rejected. He doesn't come off well in interviews as he struggles with eye contact and so on.

He contacted the job centre, and what followed was the most useless pointless waste of time that had him literally screaming. He asked for help finding work, but they don't do that. Instead they just have arbitrary, ridiculous suggestions (like suggesting they give him a moped to drive 1.5 hours to a major city for a job, when he is autistic and has mobility and coordination issues). Just totally, utterly bloody USELESS. I even got on the phone to them and said "look we have a really clever person here, 4 A levels at A* and he wants to work - don't you have access to a database of employers for ND people? But they had nothing at all.

So in the end he volunteered locally at a few places which helped his confidence but wasn't an income. And that's when he decided to claim DLA. He wnated to work and would have preferred to work, but he couldn't find anywhere that would take him and the job centre and medical system are not helpful.

So eventually he was well enough to want to return to university and we had to put in place changes which made it possible for him to continue without undue stress.

One step is that we upgraded his accommodation from the already extortionate £900 a month one to a significantly more expensive option which included breakfast and dinner. This enabled him to cope much better with his self care, as the shopping and planning along with cooking in a shared kitchen when he gets very stressed was just beyond him and he was not eating.

Another step is that he was having real difficulty with the bus to uni being too full for him to fit in the mornings, and whereas most young people would just take that in their stride, this was causing him to have a real fit and complete meltdown a few mornings a week. So we instead paid £24 a week for a taxi to take him and ensure he could reliably get to his lectures.

Another step is that he got a private counsellor who he sees every two weeks to help him manage stress.

With these changes, all paid for by his PIP, which he could not afford without them, have enabled him to carry on at university and complete his course and he is on track to do a pdh now. He will become a far more useful and beneficial member of society if he is not hospitalised with a breakdown or unable to live his life normally and complete his studies.

But he would far prefer not to need PIP.

He would far prefer that accommodation at uni was affordable.
He would far prefer that buses were not overcrowded and unreliable.
He would far prefer there were small changes to the world that made like possible for him to navigate without such intense stress.
He would far prefer the environment wasn't as stressful as it is at university, with rabbles of angry protests and people fighting all the time. He was very upset by his close Jewish friend being antisemitically attacked three times in a year.
He would far rather he was safe from crime when he goes out.
He would far rather the job centre helped him find paid work during his leave of absence so he earned his own money.

He is one example, and someone who's autism has always profoundly affected his life, but my point here is that young people would probably not be struggling quite as much if the world was a bit less shit.

And we have been expecting them increasingly to live in a world with crushing financial pressure, negativity surrounding them, danger every time they go anywhere, people nicking phones, accommodation outrageously expensive, educational debt, overcrowded schools, unavailable NHS services, Mums working their backsides off to make ends meet and generally people have become rather horrible.

So I don't think the fix is to cut off the most vulnerable people, but instead to work out how we let life get so much harder and what we can do to meaningfully fix it.

tommyhoundmum · 02/07/2025 18:15

AnotherBrickIn · 02/07/2025 12:42

It was uncomfortable to watch, yes she’d fucked up but I feel for her. Let’s be honest she doesn’t really make these decisions on her own does she

I understood it was a personal matter, not about her role.

TesChique · 02/07/2025 18:16

Mumble12 · 02/07/2025 17:44

Single parents can’t replicate dual incomes on a whim.

Low wage earners likely earn low wages for a reason, if they could suddenly hop into £50k a year careers, don’t you think they would.

we have a system that supports people in need thankfully, people need to stop trying to trump one need with another and accept that we can help everyone.

Unfortunately for the most part we have a system that supports people in want

TesChique · 02/07/2025 18:16

tommyhoundmum · 02/07/2025 18:15

I understood it was a personal matter, not about her role.

Aye right.

EleanorReally · 02/07/2025 18:16

she looks exhausted

channacelane · 02/07/2025 18:16

I'm distracted by the extremely low cut slinky blouse she wore in parliament. Its that business attire? You can see her boobs. She looks an absolute mess, and like a rejected puppy.

ThisTicklishFatball · 02/07/2025 18:18

CaspersMum24 · 02/07/2025 17:09

Agreed, apart from PIP. Those changes would have pushed people into poverty, and that is just not acceptable. It was, and is heartening that so many Labour MPs are fighting hard for their constituents. I can't imagine Tory or Reform MPs doing the same if they were in government

I too was angry at the change of tack with WFA; and I'm speaking as someone who is going to benefit from it, though not as much as the energy companies will. My payment will be going to charity, I am certainly not sending it to my electricity suppliers. We should not need WFA at all. Why should taxpayers money be sent indirectly to energy companies who are making obscene profits for themselves and their shareholders? In my view the what the government need to do is make OFGEM fit for purpose. They are supposed to work for the consumers to ensure we are treated fairly, but they are failing miserably at this. If people want to get angry about anything relating to this, get angry at the energy companies, not a Government which is trying to put things right after 14 years of Tory fiscal mismanagement.

Non doms. No need for further comment on this. I just hope they don't U turn on farmer's Inheritance Tax. The rich should cough up, end of story.

The top 10% of PAYE earners already contribute over 60% of the total tax receipts in the country. They are essentially funding the NHS and welfare payments.
The UK is in a dire situation, and overtaxing the few net contributors until they leave is counterproductive. It’s clear the current government taxes based on ideology rather than fiscal responsibility.
Government spending continues to rise, but tax revenue isn’t keeping pace. We can’t simply tax our way out of this crisis. What’s needed is significant economic growth and a reduction in spending, which seems unattainable as everyone demands their share from the state.
We need to acknowledge that there aren’t enough people contributing to the system, and the welfare system is overly generous. Higher and middle earners face some of the highest taxes globally, while lower earners pay some of the lowest. At the same time, we have a very significant number of physically able individuals reliant on state support and one of the largest unproductive working-age populations in the West.
These uncomfortable truths must be addressed. Over-taxation has long been shown to reduce tax revenue at certain income levels, as many economists have pointed out. Now, this issue is being extended nationally, with businesses being overtaxed to the point of cutting employment.
You can’t keep taxing the same narrow group repeatedly because they will leave, and tax revenues will decline further. Everyone needs to contribute more.
It's also incredibly ignorant and foolish to assume that all farmers are wealthy. Some farmers don’t own the land they work on, while others do, but they’re neither landed gentry nor aristocracy. They often face excessive taxes and mandatory financial obligations that tend to go unnoticed. It’s ironic that the Labour government intends to force farmers, who aren't part of the landed gentry or aristocracy, to sell their land for housing developments at reduced prices, without compensating them for the land’s true value.This move could leave farmers relying on benefits to get by, adding to the number already dependent on them, while also creating the challenge of finding homes for displaced farmers and ensuring jobs for everyone impacted.

NeverDropYourMooncup · 02/07/2025 18:18

Jellycatspyjamas · 02/07/2025 12:55

e.g. taking away the winter fuel allowance - first announcement for the new government - saved a pittance and was terrible optics impacting on those just above pension credit - they could easily taken it away from higher rate taxpayers - much more acceptable

You realise higher rate tax payers means anyone earning above £43k in Scotland - hardly earning a huge salary.

Well, that's put all the people in London and the South East who are working for twenty odd grand a year in their place, as they don't even earn the pittance those Scots pensioners are receiving from pensions.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread