Rachel Reeves made a candid seven-word admission about her teary day in the Commons this week. The Chancellor’s emotional display during PMQs sent shockwaves through the financial markets and sparked speculation about her future. Ms Reeves dismissed any notion of resigning despite some Labour backbenchers’ dissatisfaction with her economic management, saying: “I didn’t work that hard to then quit.”
Downing Street was quick to support her, affirming that she and the Prime Minister are in complete agreement. Ms Reeves expressed regret for attending prime minister’s questions in tears after a “tough day in the office” yet hoped the public “could relate” to her emotional state. She added: “I probably wished I hadn’t gone in.”
She told the Guardian: “It was a personal matter but it was in the glare of the camera. And that’s unfortunate, but I think people have seen that I’m back in business and back out there.
“I went to prime minister’s questions because I thought that was the right thing to do, because that’s where I always am at lunchtime on a Wednesday.
“You know, in retrospect, I probably wished I hadn’t gone in … [on] a tough day in the office. But, you know, it is what it is. But I think most people can relate to that – that they’ve had tough days.”
Ms Reeves’ difficult week was compounded by a backbench revolt that led to the scrapping of major welfare cuts, leaving her to address a £5billion shortfall in the nation’s finances. She said: “It’s been damaging.
“I’m not going to deny that, but I think where we are now, with a review led by Stephen Timms [a work and pensions minister], who is obviously incredibly respected and has a huge amount of experience, that’s the route we’re taking now.
“That’s the right thing to do. It is important that we listen in government, that we listen to our colleagues and listen to what groups outside are saying as well.”
The Chancellor also refused to rule out further tax hikes in her next Budget, saying “there are costs” to the Government’s policies.
She said: “I’m not going to, because it would be irresponsible for a chancellor to do that. We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement.
“So we’ll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.”