to believe Rachel Reeves was crying because

[LargeDeviation]

1. she was upset when Lindsay Hoyle told her to keep her answers short

2. she had an argument with Keir Starmer (possibly about her keeping her job, or about how to handle the inevitable questions about the new £5.5bn per annum black hole) just before PMQs

3. Keir Starmer refused to say she would keep her job in front of the whole country. If he genuinely wanted her to stay, he would just say 'of course she's going to still be Chancellor' and that would be that.

4. she is under immense pressure because she knows she will have soon to breach her fiscal rules, she knows she is responsible for many of the decisions that will lead to that, and she knows the how serious the consequences of her failure will be. We have seen recently (even just today) how vicious the bond market can be.

In short, I believe she was crying because of professional pressures (understandable ones, though largely of her own making, and about which I have little sympathy) and not nebulous 'personal' reasons.

If her parent or partner or child or grandparent or pet is ill the natural thing is to just say 'sorry, a close relative is in hospital and my emotions got the better of me'. Everybody would understand. You don't need huge reams of evidence but you need to give the bare bones of an explanation. She is trying to style it out but we can all see through it.

I will apologise if I'm wrong but long experience shows that 'personal reasons' almost always means 'I'm skiving or jobhunting' when a colleague in the workplace uses it to excuse their time off.

I believe it means even less when uttered by a politican.

I think many feel as you and pp.

I read that Labour was contemplating that everyone’s salary should be made public.

I would like to propose a variation to this - all welfare claimants benefits receipts should be made public.

It’s very easy to see what benefits claimants get. The rates are all available online.

No - I am talking individually.

Let’s make EVERYONE accountable.

You don’t need it individually. Anyone can check out the rates and work out what an individual is getting. It couldn’t be more transparent.

The top 1 pct of earners (those on £213,000-plus) contribute c. 28 pct of all income tax revenues, with the top 5 pct (£100,000-plus) accounting for 48 pct and the top 25 pct (£47,000-plus) paying 75 pct of all income tax.

All of us who fall into the above category should fight back. Mitigate, mitigate, mitigate our tax liability.

After watching her smirking in the HOC at the news of independent school closures around the country and children having to leave friends and find new schools…I couldn’t give a shit about her tears.

Looks like Labour’s next backbench rebellion is brewing….

Sir Keir Starmer is facing a fresh wave of dissent from Labour backbenchers over his deal with France to stop small boat crossings.

Under the “one in, one out” scheme, Britain would send migrants coming in from the Channel back to France within weeks of their arrival in return for the UK taking asylum seekers from France.

Details of the plan are expected to be set out during a state visit by Emmanuel Macron, the French president, to London this week.

But restless backbenchers who recently rebelled against Sir Keir’s welfare plans have threatened to revolt again over his proposed migrant deal.

Labour might be in Government, but they are patently not in power.

But restless backbenchers who recently rebelled against Sir Keir’s welfare plans have threatened to revolt again over his proposed migrant deal.

None of those three Telegraph articles contain that sentence, where did it come from?

It clearly could be more transparent by listing how much benefits they receive individually.

Yes there’s something particularly vile about someone enjoying children suffering, especially when they’re supposed to represent those children’s best interests. There are lots of red flags from her not just her inexplicable obvious hatred of a group of school children, when asked if she was going to resign she responded she’d worked too hard to resign. No concern for her low competence or the harm she continues to spread.

Okay babes you tell yourself that x

You told me that through your posts or were you ‘saying’ something completely different?

A perfect end to Starmer's worst week in office. 😂

So the more immigrants France allows to cross in the boats, the more they can exchange for them? If I were France I would be collecting them from the ferry and driving them straight round to a boat back to the UK. I might even pay then for their troubles!

Are the Labour back benches rebelling against limits on immigration or because this opens the door to more?

Because it would seek to impose limits on immigration.

I don’t know which ‘three’ articles you refer to, but I can assure you that was copied verbatim from the article.

You were recently wrong on the Corbyn article, I remind you.

I take it they think one term in power would be enough?

I never said carers and doctors should be paid the same - show me exactly where I said that? Or did you just infer that because you have your own agenda you want to push? The response was to a post about a poorly paid career. It’s not my fault you were so fixated on doctors.

That’s because we go to school and use healthcare. What’s your point?

Judging by their first twelve months, I can’t imagine that the UK can bear another four years of this government.

The point is you don’t contribute anything financially.

It’s going to have to because the only person who can pull the plug is the PM. Now you know how it felt to endure 14 years of a government you detest. It’s your turn now.

You know school and healthcare needs to be paid for out of taxes don’t you?