‘Clearly I was upset,’ says Reeves as she responds to questions about tears at PMQs – UK politics live | Politics
Reeves says it was her job to be at PMQs supporting government, but ‘clearly I was upset’
Rachel Reeves has said “clearly I was upset” when asked about being tearful during PMQs yesterday, PA Media reports. But it was her job to be at PMQs “supporting the government and that’s what I tried to do”, she said.
Reeves also appeared to reject suggestions that her tears were related to a conversation with Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle or another member of government.
Asked whether this was the case, the chancellor told broadcasters:
No, it was a personal issue, and I’m not going into the details of that. It wouldn’t be right or fair. People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday. Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.
My job as chancellor is to return the stability to the economy, bring investment into Britain, but most importantly to improve the lives of ordinary working people, which is why I’m so pleased that in this first year interest rates have come down four times, saving money for people with mortgages, I’ve been the chancellor who’s increased the national living wage… so I’m proud of what we’ve done this last year.
But is there more to do as a government? Absolutely there is, and I’m going to get on with that job.
Key events
A reader asks:
@andrewsparrow on your post about the ‘why are you so useless?’questions. What is the actual value in this line of questioning? No engagement in substance and won’t get anything good out of politicians
That is a reference to the post at 12.24pm.
That is a fair question. There are a lot of people in the media who worry that ‘Why are you so rubbish?’ questioning just perpetuates a false narrative that politicians are mostly or always corrupt or dishonest or useless.
But there are at least two good reasons why this style of interviewing can be justified. First, there are a lot of cases where broadcasters can say their viewers want to see politicians interrogated like this, because these are the harsh questions viewers would be asking if they had the chance. And, second, in an era where politicians routinely default to pre-scripted answers, questions that provoke them out of their comfort zone often produce a better answers than predictable ones.
On this occasion I think Beth Rigby achieved that. In response to the bit about why he did not notice Rachel Reeves’s distress yesterday, Starmer gave a long, and reasonably interesting and convincing, explanation as to why at PMQs he never has time to notice what is going on around him because it is just “bang, bang, bang”. (See 11.17am.) And in response to the attack on his record, he came out swinging, defending the government’s record more robustly than he usually does.
Starmer says last year’s tax-raising budget did ‘lot of heavy lifting’, but declines to say this year’s won’t be similar
Last year, in a Q&A at the CBI conference, Rachel Reeves said that after the 2024 budget she would was “not coming back with more borrowing or more taxes”. That is sometimes quoted as Reeves rolling out any further tax rises, but in fact anyone who heard the full Q&A will have understood that she was ruling out was future tax rises on the scale of what was in that budget. She also told the CBI: “We won’t have to do a budget like this ever again.”
The budget raised taxes by £25bn in 2025-26, and by almost £42bn by 2029-30.
Until recently, ministers have been happy to repeat that version of the Reeves promise – to say that the 2024 budget was a one-off, and that the government will never come up with tax rises that big ever again.
But this morning, when Gary Gibbon from Channel 4 News asked Keir Starmer if he was still willing to rule out tax rises “anything like” those in the 2024 budget, Starmer did not quite give that pledge. (See 11.20am.) Starmer replied:
First of all, let me say what every prime minister or chancellor says anytime they’re asked about a future budget – it’s always the same, thisn’t a Labour answer or Conservative answer – no prime minister or chancellor is going to write a budget in advance.
But we did really tough stuff in that budget last year. We made sure we stabilised the economy, and we took big decisions early on …
So I say again today, we’ve done a lot of the heavy lifting, we’ve done a lot of the hard yards. The result of that, we’re turning our economy around, fastest growth in the G7 in the first quarter of this year, business confidence at a nine-year high and record investment.
In the end, that’s what drives growth. That’s what we were saying a year ago, the other side of the election. And that’s what I’ll say it again here today.
Here some pictures of Rachel Reeves, Keir Starmer and Wes Streeting at the launch of the 10-year health plan at the Sir Ludwig Guttman Health & Wellbeing Centre in east London this morning.
Here is Beth Rigby, Sky News’ political editor, take on Rachel Reeves’ performance this morning.
CX came to NHS speech to show she was back in business but then did pool clip after not answering Qs put to her at event. All of this attempt to reassure markets. For all criticism she’s had politically seems investors view her as last defence from the spending hungry left
Reeves confirms ‘cost’ of welfare bill U-turn will be ‘reflected in budget’
In her interview with broadcasters Rachel Reeves was more explict than she has been before in hinting that taxes are likely to go up in the budget in the autumn.
Asked if taxes would have to got up as a result of the multiple concessions on the welfare bill, which have meant that it will no longer save £5bn a year by the end of this parliament, as originally planned, Reeves replied:
I’m not going to speculate because the budget will be in the autumn … We’ll get a new forecast and we’ll do the budget later this year.
But of course there is a cost to the welfare changes that parliament voted through this week and that will be reflected in the budget.
Reeves is expected to raise taxes because alternative means of filling the funding gap don’t seem to be available. She is not expected to cut spending, because she has just published a spending review, and the government’s fiscal rules rule out further borrowing.
Stressing her commitment to those rules, Reeves said.
I’m also very, very clear that that stability that we’ve been able to return to the economy which has enabled the Bank of England to cut interests rates four times is only possible because of the fiscal discipline which is underpinned by the fiscal rules.
And we’ll be sticking to those because they’re absolutely vital for the living standards of working people and also the costs that businesses face.
Reeves says she is ‘totally’ up to being chancellor in interview intended to show she’s recovered from ‘tough day’ at PMQs
Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has recorded an interview for broadcasters. The main aim of it seems to have been to show that yesterday was just a blip, and that she is back to normal (which in her case means dodging questions about whether taxes will go up in the budget). She also made a point of smiling quite a lot. She might have been overdoing the grinning, but she came across as a minister composed and reasonably confident about her standing, which is not how she appeared yesterday.
Here, from PA Media, are the key lines.
Clearly I was upset yesterday and everyone could see that. It was a personal issue and I’m not going to go into the details of that.
My job as chancellor at 12 o’clock on a Wednesday is to be at PMQs next to the prime minister, supporting the government and that’s what I tried to do.
I guess the thing that maybe is a bit different between my job and many of your viewers’ is that when I’m having a tough day it’s on the telly and most people don’t have to deal with that.
I totally am. This is the job that I’ve always wanted to do.
I’m proud of what I’ve delivered as chancellor. Look, I think all of your viewers have had tough days … I happen to be on camera when I have a tough day.
-
She said she was not crying as a result of the conversation she had with Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker, earlier. He is said to have reprimanded her for how she handled Treasury questions the previous day. Asked if he was to blame for her crying, she replied:
No, it was a personal issue, and I’m not going into the details of that.
It wouldn’t be right or fair. People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday. today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.
-
She said that she and Keir Starmer were “a team” – but would not say if she thought he should have backed her more fully at PMQs. In response to a question from Kemi Badenoch, Starmer declined to say Reeves would still be chancellor at the time of the next election – although he has confirmed that subsequently. Asked if she was surprised Starmer did not back her more strongly in the Commons, Reeves replied:
I think that people can see that Keir and me are a team.
We fought the election together, we changed the Labour party together so that we could be in the position to return to power and over the past year we’ve worked in lockstep together whether that is on the budget, on the spending review or indeed on our measures to improve public services like the 10-year plan for the NHS.
My job as chancellor is to return the stability to the economy, bring investment into Britain, but most importantly to improve the lives of ordinary working people, which is why I’m so pleased that in this first year interest rates have come down four times, saving money for people with mortgages, I’ve been the chancellor who’s increased the national living wage… so I’m proud of what we’ve done this last year.
But is there more to do as a government? Absolutely there is, and I’m going to get on with that job.
Jeremy Paxman used to be the TV interviewer best known for his mastery of the ‘Why are you so useless?’ question. These days Beth Rigby from Sky News is probably the lead expert at this style of questioning. Here is the clip of her question to Starmer.
Reeves says it was her job to be at PMQs supporting government, but ‘clearly I was upset’
Rachel Reeves has said “clearly I was upset” when asked about being tearful during PMQs yesterday, PA Media reports. But it was her job to be at PMQs “supporting the government and that’s what I tried to do”, she said.
Reeves also appeared to reject suggestions that her tears were related to a conversation with Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle or another member of government.
Asked whether this was the case, the chancellor told broadcasters:
No, it was a personal issue, and I’m not going into the details of that. It wouldn’t be right or fair. People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday. Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.
My job as chancellor is to return the stability to the economy, bring investment into Britain, but most importantly to improve the lives of ordinary working people, which is why I’m so pleased that in this first year interest rates have come down four times, saving money for people with mortgages, I’ve been the chancellor who’s increased the national living wage… so I’m proud of what we’ve done this last year.
But is there more to do as a government? Absolutely there is, and I’m going to get on with that job.
During his Q&A Keir Starmer sidestepped a question about whether President Trump should address parliament when he makes his state visit to the UK. Starmer said details of the visit would be announced nearer the time. (See 11.30am.)
Some MPs and peers have said they would oppose Trump getting an invitation to address them.
Streeting publishes 10-year health plan for England
In the Commons Wes Streeting, the health secretary, is making his statement about the health plan for England now.
The Department of Health and Social Care has now published the plan on its website.
Q: [From the Guardian’s Peter Walker] Are you concerned about being accused of nanny state politics? And the Guardian has calculated that health inequality is costing the NHS £50bn. Is tackling poverty part of your NHS plan?
Starmer said he wanted to take the nanny state charge head-on.
He said he was schocked to learn that tooth decay was the main cause of hospitalisation for children in Liverpool. The government is promoting teeth brushing in schools. He said:
I’m not interested in arguing about nanny state. If the price of not doing it is a child losing his or her teeth before they’re 10 years old, I’ll take those measures any day of the week, and I’ll defend them any day of the week.
And he said he “absolutely” accepted that there was a link between poverty and ill health.
Q: Have you given up hopes of getting rid of the two-child benefit cap?
Starmer says the government is still very committed to cutting child poverty.
Starmer says the death of Diogo Jota is “devastating news”. He says the thoughts of everyone will be with his family and friends. But millions of fans will be shocked too, he says.
Starmer sidesteps question about whether Trump should address parliament on his state visit
Q: What advice would you give yourself if could go back to this time last year? And, given that President Macron will be addressing parliament when he comes to the UK next week, would you like to see President Trump address parliament.
On the Macron visit, Starmer says the UK-France relationship is now in a “very strong place). He says the relationship with the US is very strong too. He does not address the point about Trump addressing parliament, but he says the details of Trump’s visit will be announced nearer the time.
On lessons, he says what is important is to remember who is in your “mind’s eye” when taking decisons.
