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.

That is nonsense. Oaps are more vulnerable and they took away their miserly £200 fuel allowance without any qualms whatsoever. They make me sick. I doubt I will ever vote for them again

Yes I think so too. She does know.

I'll try again, clearly my last reply hit a nerve.

Yes you are being unreasonable.
Speculating on why someone is clearly upset, after it has been made clear by others close to them that it is due to a personal reason, is, in my opinion a despicable way to behave. It shows in my opinion, a lack of empathy and humanity.

Dont you think it is interesting that the first time a woman got to do this job was in the middle of the complete balls up left behind? I thought the same about May as PM - women often only get their chance when no man wants to chance it.

I think it's very clear Starmer is also fighting for survival tonight.

Same. She’s been that upset for a while.

What fraud, deception and lies? Your comments would be laughable if they weren’t so ridiculous.

Not sure who your post is in reply to but would you say that Reeves has shown ‘empathy and humanity’ to the following?

SME owners
Farmers
Pensioners
Welfare claimants
Private school parents, kids and teachers

Await yours, please.

The last time the media/armchair critics were shocked about a high profile woman being human, it turned out she had cancer. (Catherine)

Do you really think op that if Reeves just received a cancer diagnosis or got a message to say a relative had died that she owes you an explanation!?

A lot of people need to get over themselves.

Yes the Conservative Party did not do this to her, did they? But you can expect them to point it out.

It’s her own actions and her own party.

Reeves joined the Bank of England in September 2000 as part of their graduate scheme.[10] In a 2021 interview with Stylist magazine, Reeves said she had spent a decade working as an economist at the Bank of England, however her LinkedIn CV listed six years at the Bank, from September 2000 to December 2006,[12] and during one of these years she was pursuing a master's degree at the LSE.[10] In February 2025, BBC News reported that Reeves' LinkedIn CV had also been incorrect, and that she had left the Bank of England by March 2006.[13]

In 2006, Reeves moved to Leeds to work for the retail arm of HBOS.[14][15] In 2024, due to criticism of Reeves saying she had worked as an economist at HBOS, her LinkedIn CV was changed, and her role at the bank was updated to "Retail Banking".[10][16] The Times reported her actual role was "running a customer relations department dealing with complaints and mortgage retention".[10] The report led to the media and opposition politicians nicknaming her "Rachel from accounts".[17][18]

Absolutely not. My school friend's DH is an MP - returning. Before he was an MP, he had a very good job. In the "in between times", he had a very good job. Both were much higher paid than his current salary.
He is an MP because he has a very strong social conscience and wants to do what he can: but the UK political system is shot (as are most other democracies):

• short term-ism. Politicians are voted in for five years and meant to "change the world" - to make real change you need a clear run that policies aren't going to be derailed for at least a decade
• Some policies are going to be "pain before the gain". But the electorate doesn't see that
• For some reason, politicians put very complex decisions to a public vote (yes, this is Brexit). Politicians were minimal on the truth and it hasn't solved the more more complex problems

To borrow from W. Churchill.

Reeves has the opposition in front of her, and the enemy behind her.

On that, I shall bid you all goodnight.

It’s Rayner’s incessant bullying.

The strong arming, plotting and leaking to the press. Rayner is an absolutely nasty individual.

You won’t be so jubilant when Reform wins the next general election.

good points!

Keir is very chilled out. He’s not in politics for his own self aggrandisement like Boris and the like. Apart from Daily Mail readers, he low key popular with the general public.

He was actually elected unlike several past PMs so it’s not a case of needing to call a GE to prove himself.

That depends on the income of the OAP surely? Some are pretty wealthy tbf.

I don't want to completely derail this and I do want to correct myself a little as I've googled a bit further - Dad was a teacher, Mum was a social worker - you didn't need degrees to do either in the 1970's - I also don't want to drag myself down and internet rabbit hole attempting to research her mum and Dad (so I won't ..)

They are - of course - both professions - but the social status of Primary teacher and social worker in the 70's is arguably not quite up there with lawyers and Doctors (respect due, both tough jobs)
Reeves when to a comprehensive in Lewisham.

My point is the unhelpful stereotype attached to her background - the same as Rayner, 'thick', 'common' 'ideas above her station', 'out of her depth'.

I internet-rabbit-holed just a little. Only three chancellor's before RR were state school educated. Denis Healey, Gordon Brown and Philip Hammond. This is part of 'Rachel-from-accounts' Not only minimised because of her sex, but also her state school education..

I agree,it’s not worth it. She’s not been in her role that long but it’s aged her so much. She looks terrible.

I don’t know - he’s always been orange with weird blond hair. But facially he doesn’t look old beyond his years or like he has the weight of the world on his shoulders, despite being the most powerful person on the planet.

Starmer is the very opposite of chilled. He looks terrified most of the time. He's woefully out of his depth as PM but is too arrogant to admit he's lost the confidence of his party and of the country. He's deeply unpopular with the public.

What an utterly thankless job she has
i do genuinely feel thankful the grown ups are in charge at the moment.
I don’t agree with everything, but our future feels a damn sight safer

Thank you Fraud , deception and lies. Pretty clear isn’t it? She thought she could carry on using* the same approach ad infinitum. Well at last people are starting to notice. If she thought her lily livered boss would protect her then she’s even more dense than I thought.

No, that is what they were saying - that he has looked older than his age for a really long time. I remember him from way back when he looked quite normal - tasteless, and tacky, yes, but more in an '80s way, rather than the current look. Not surprising that he might have been ages badly for decades when you hear about his lifestyle.