Starmer’s worst week yet - and the image that defined it

As Starmer struggles to hold his party together, it was the chancellor’s emotional moment that captured the chaos.

This is my 100th article on Substack and it definitely feels like a milestone worth celebrating.

It’s been seven years since I left my full-time journalism job, and five years since I started writing about the news and current affairs on Instagram.

What started as me venting on Instagram stories about news reports and highlighting scaremongering headlines has led to this. It’s not a lucrative endeavour, that’s for sure, however I absolutely love writing this weekly newsletter and talking daily news updates with you.

Thanks for all of your support over the last 18 months here on Substack - it really means everything to me that people want to read and back my journalism. Here’s to the next 100 articles!

I can only keep doing what I do on Instagram and Substack thanks to your support. If you are able to upgrade to a paid subscription it helps to keep this newsletter afloat. Thank you.

---

Need to know

Politics is a tough (and cruel) business at the best of times. However in a week when Labour had hoped to celebrate a year in government, the party has instead faced a rebellion that wrecked a flagship policy, a crying chancellor and a directionless prime minister.

There’s nothing wrong with crying, or even crying in public. Most people will have instinctively felt concern at the sight of Rachel Reeves in distress in the Commons on Wednesday.

However it’s a different story when you’re the chancellor of the exchequer, holding back tears behind the prime minister in full view of the Commons, just hours after a humiliating government defeat. And when that prime minister can’t even say he still backs you.

The issue isn’t that Reeves cried. It’s that she cried in the Commons, in this week, at the heart of a government rapidly losing authority, with a party turning on itself and no one visibly in control.

It was a brutal moment, and although the story remains Keir Starmer’s humiliating defeat at the hands of his own MPs this week, Reeves has become the image of government chaos. As Starmer strived to shrug off the humiliation of losing control of rebel MPs who sunk his welfare reform bill, Reeves shed visible tears on the benches behind him.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch sought to capitalise on what was clearly a highly emotional moment by going on the attack, pointing out the chancellor looked “thoroughly miserable”. Later on Twitter, Conservative Robert Jenrick wrote that Reeves’ “benefits bill is dead, and so is her career”. The SNP’s Stephen Flynn took a very different tone, saying afterwards that “seeing another person in distress is always very difficult, and we are wishing her well”.

I cannot help but wonder why Reeves chose to go into the chamber yesterday. We don’t know the reason for her tears. Initially it was suggested this was because of an altercation she had with speaker Lindsay Hoyle right before PMQs. The government’s official line is this is a “personal matter” and nothing more will be said about it.

It’s hard not to feel sympathy for Reeves. Crying at work is awful. Displaying such emotion in front of not just your colleagues, but also the entire country, is horrendous.

And ultimately the reason for her tears could have been nothing to do with the political turmoil of this week. It could be that this moment will be forgotten within a week, lost in the noise of the next churn of the news cycle.

But in politics, an image has power - often far more power than words. And this week, Reeves’ tears didn’t just reflect personal distress. Fairly or not, they may become the defining image of a government losing its grip.

Here’s what unfolded in Labour’s terrible week:

Welfare bill explained: The government introduced its welfare reform agenda earlier this year in a bid to save £5billion by 2030. Welfare spending on working age adults is set to increase from £48.5billion now to £75.7billion by 2030. Nearly 3million working-age adults in England and Wales claimed disability or incapacity benefit in 2019. Today, that has grown to 4million people, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. This rise has been fuelled by claimants citing mental health conditions, the IFS said. The bill outlined by the government would have made it harder to access Personal Independence Payments (PIP) by raising the level of support needed to qualify for payments. Receiving PIP is not about whether you can work, it’s designed to cover additional costs of being long-term sick or disabled. The Taxpayers’ Alliance released a breakdown showing the largest increases in PIP since 2019 have gone to people with autism, anxiety and depression.

Rebellion: A group of over 120 Labour MPs formed to fight the bill. They argued removing PIP would not only plunge 250,000 people into poverty, but it may also prevent people from working who are capable of doing so with some support. Rebels wanted a wealth tax to be deployed instead of making cuts to welfare, including increasing capital gains tax.

U-turn: Faced with potentially losing the vote on the welfare reform bill on Tuesday, Starmer relented and watered down the changes last week. He proposed that existing claimants would be exempt from the cuts to eligibility. In addition, changes to the health element of universal credit were also altered so that payments would rise in line with inflation, rather than being frozen. But the rebels still were not happy, saying the PIP compromise would create a two-tier system with new claimants unable to get the same level of support. With government whips warning Starmer on Tuesday that the bill may still not pass, the government shelved the plan to restrict PIP until after a review of the benefit.

Hollow victory: The bill passed by 335 votes to 260, with 49 Labour MPs still voting against their own government. Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall insisted the Labour Party is “100% behind” Starmer, despite the rebellion, but acknowledged there were “lessons to learn”. Starmer now faces anger from rebel MPs furious to have been put in this position in the first place and those who backed the bill through all its changes. Labour MP Ian Lavery declared “this is crazy, man”, calling the bill a “hodgepodge” that “means nothing to nobody”. One loyal MP, referring to Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier who had campaigned for the first climbdown, told the BBC: “Meg better own any autumn tax rises and go out and sell them on the airwaves every day until the end of the parliament. She marched them all up to the top of the hill and couldn't bring them down again.”

Counting costs: Analysts say that without changes to PIP, the bill will not deliver any savings over the next four years. Pat McFadden, chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that “there’s definitely a cost to what was announced”.

Why it matters: Labour had pledged not to increase income tax, national insurance or VAT at the general election. However they have already tinkered around the edges of this promise by increasing employers’ national insurance. Now that savings cannot be made on welfare spending, the money for this (along with other commitments such as increasing defence budget) will need to be found from elsewhere. Analysts say tax rises are likely. This could be from directly breaking the election pledge, or by extending the freeze on income tax thresholds. This is considered a stealth tax, as over time more taxpayers are dragged into higher tax brackets. Director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies Paul Johnson says the chancellor will have no choice but to increase taxes at the next budget in autumn. He wrote in the Times that there is “no scope” for borrowing or spending, which leaves only tax. In addition, Starmer’s last-minute climbdown on his flagship bill makes him look weak and his government chaotic.

Carrying the can: Speculation about Reeves’ future as chancellor has been rife for months. Much of that is linked to a right-wing media campaign aimed at undermining her capability as chancellor. The Mail and others have referred to her as “Rachel from Accounts” after it emerged she had exaggerated the length of time she worked at the Bank of England. There have been other controversies such as the cut to pensioners’ winter fuel allowance (and the partial U-turn) and the rise in employers’ national insurance.

Sparring: This brings us to Wednesday’s PMQs in the Commons where Tory leader Kemi Badenoch capitalised on the government’s humiliation. She asked whether the chancellor would still be in post at the next election, to which Starmer replied that Badenoch “certainly won’t”. The fact he didn’t immediately back his chancellor was seized upon, however a Number 10 spokesperson later insisted: “The chancellor is going nowhere. The chancellor has the prime minister’s full backing. He has said it plenty of times. They are focused entirely on delivering for working people. It’s thanks to the chancellor’s management of the economy that we have managed to restore stability, which has led to four interest rates cuts, wages rising faster than inflation and a spending review investing in Britain’s national renewal.”

(Of course it always always worth remembering that the PM always maintains full confidence in his cabinet, right up until the moment he announces a reshuffle.)

Why was Reeves crying: We still don’t know why Reeves was crying in the Commons, but Number 10 insists it is a “personal matter”. Health secretary Wes Streeting told ITV News that: ""It is easy to forget we are all humans as politicians, and we have lives like everyone else.” Do we have the right to know? Badenoch’s spokesman said after PMQs that “personal matter doesn’t really clear it up” as “you normally tell people what the personal matter is”. Unfortunately for Reeves and No 10, by not providing context, they allow room for people to assume the emotions were due to the turbulent political week.

The fallout: After Reeves was seen in tears, UK government borrowing costs jumped and the pound declined - a reaction to the uncertainty for Reeves’ future in the job. City traders are concerned that anyone who replaces her may not commit to the government’s strict fiscal rules. The rebel Labour MPs have shown they have little appetite for spending cuts, and the money has to come from somewhere. Increased borrowing would hit the already high government debt hard, and increased taxes will be unpopular with voters and could lead to more wealthy taxpayers departing the UK.

The List

PM’s regrets: In interviews with The Observer and The Times over the weekend, Keir Starmer said he “deeply regrets” his “island of strangers” speech on immigration. He said he was not aware of the similarities with comments by Enoch Powell that Britain’s white population would find themselves “strangers in their own land” if immigration were not checked. Starmer explained that he had other things on his mind the day of the speech, such as diplomacy around Ukraine and the firebombing of his home in Kentish Town. Media coverage and public criticism of the government is entirely right, but it often has the effect of making it sound as if being in government is easy. While the government certainly is not covering itself in glory at the moment, the thorny issues facing Starmer - war in Ukraine and the Middle East, Trump tariffs, defence spending, immigration, small boats - are not simple ones to solve. U-turns and errors get relentlessly picked over, instead of any constructive focus on how to actually govern in a world that’s volatile and short on good options. Starmer’s missteps deserve scrutiny, but so does the impossible tightrope he’s walking, between public pressure, global crisis and a party that’s at war with itself.

Crossings soar: Small boat arrivals from France have reached their highest ever level for the first six months of the year. So far this year, 19,982 people have arrived by small boat – an increase of 48% on last year. The reasons for this are good weather making the crossing easier, a willingness by smugglers to load more people onto boats and new tactics that involve launching boats from inlets to avoid intervention from police on beaches. French police cannot intervene once boats are in the water. The issue represents yet another challenge for Starmer, who pledged to “smash the gangs” during the election last year. It is this issue which is helping Nigel Farage’s Reform UK to gain ground. The party has made tackling small boats its key focus and has vowed to deport every migrant who arrives in the UK illegally.

Gaza ceasefire deal: Hamas is reviewing a 60-day ceasefire proposal that Donald Trump claims Israel is prepared to accept. Talks have been taking place with Qatari and Egyptian mediators. However Hamas has previously indicated it wants a guarantee Israel won’t resume military action once the remaining hostages have been released and Israel says Hamas must be dismantled as it may regroup to execute future terror attacks. Trump wrote on Truth Social: "I hope... that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better - IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE.” There are 50 remaining hostages who were taken on October 7 by Hamas. Only half are believed to still be alive. Meanwhile more than 170 charities have called for the US-Israel aid distribution scheme in Gaza to be shut down. 500 Palestinians have been killed while waiting for aid since the scheme started operating in May. The organisations, including Oxfam and Save the Children, say Israeli forces and armed groups "routinely" open fire on Palestinians seeking aid. Israel has denied this, but has begun reviews of several incidents of shootings at aid sites.

Glastonbury chants probe: Punk rappers Bob Vylan have lost their US visas and been axed from festival performances after the group led a crowd at Glastonbury to chants of “death to the IDF”. The government and Glastonbury organisers have condemned the language used during Saturday’s performance. While defenders of Bob Vylan say the group was not calling for literal deaths of Jewish people, but for the dismantling of the Israeli military for its actions in Gaza, where tens of thousands have been killed since 2023, others have pointed out IDF personnel are Jewish people and any chant that calls for their death is antisemitic. Reporter Hugo Rifkind told Times Radio said the remarks were “obviously” antisemitic and it was “almost impossible to imagine” any rapper leading a chant like that for any other military force “on earth or almost in history”. He said Jews are “not afforded the same humanity” as everyone else. In addition, calling for the loss of Israel's defence forces would effectively dismantle the state and lead to the deaths of civilians, as it would be unable to defend itself from Iran and other hostile organisations such as Hamas in the region. The issue of a performer on a stage chanting "death to the IDF" with thousands joining in has been one element of the story and led to much public debate about whether this was hateful language or an issue of freedom of speech. The Telegraph has drawn parallels with the case of Lucy Connolly, the woman jailed for tweeting that hotels of asylum seekers should be set on fire. Bob Vylan's performance is being investigated by police. However the key focus of this story has been the BBC's response to what happened, with questions as to why the BBC allowed the performance to be broadcast and remain on iPlayer for hours afterwards. The BBC said it regretted broadcasting the "unacceptable" words, adding: "The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves. We welcome Glastonbury's condemnation of the performance.” The issue for the BBC is it is a public-funded broadcaster that has platformed what the government and the BBC accept to be an antisemitic chant. Bob Vylan said: "We are not for the death of jews, arabs or any other race or group of people. We are for the dismantling of a violent military machine. A machine whose own soldiers were told to use "unnecessary lethal force" against innocent civilians waiting for aid.”

Impartiality: Critics of the BBC have used the Glastonbury incident to again raise concerns about its impartiality. The broadcaster has faced accusations of being both pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli since the conflict in Gaza began after Hamas launched a terror attack on Israel. A documentary titled Gaza: Doctors Under Attack was shelved by the BBC after concerns that another documentary it aired was narrated by the son of a Hamas official. The documentary has this week instead been aired by Channel 4.

Diddy denied bail: Sean “Diddy” Combs has been denied bail as he awaits sentencing after being convicted on two counts of transportation for prostitution. A jury cleared Combs of the more serious charges of racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking, which could have seen him jailed for life. Fans of the rapper sprayed each other with baby oil - which the trial heard Combs used in “freak-offs” involving his girlfriend and male prostitutes - outside the courtroom in New York. Sentencing will take place in October.

Defiant pride: Tens of thousands of people gathered for the Budapest Pride march, defying Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's legal threats against LGBTQ rights activists. Nationalist conservative politicians and police had threatened to stop any display of pro-LGBTQ material. The police had issued a ban in line with a new "child protection" law restricting gatherings considered to be promoting homosexuality.

Transition “lies”: The claim that not allowing children to transition would lead to suicide “isn’t true”, journalist Helen Lewis writes in The Atlantic. The claim is a “zombie fact”, she writes, that is repeated by liberals who are unaware of its lack of evidence because they are “stuck in media bubbles”. When the Cass report was published in England - recommending extreme caution when using gender transitioning medication in children - the evidence was rejected by some medical bodies in the US. This means, Lewis says, that “many on the American left now believe that the Cass review has been discredited". In the UK, there is an indefinite ban on puberty blockers for under 18s as a result of the Cass review.

Going viral

Taxing treat: Marks & Spencer, which has faced a battering after hackers took down its website for weeks at a cost of millions to the company, is enjoying a viral boost thanks to its strawberries and cream sandwich. Inspired by the viral Japanese “sando”, it’s available as part of the store’s meal deal range. But there’s speculation that M&S may fall foul of HMRC with the new treat. The sweetened bread and strawberries and cream filling may mean the food does not qualify for the same VAT treatment as other savoury lunchtime options. VAT manager at HW Fisher VAT manager Simon Knivett said the sandwich’s composition might fall within a 1980s legislative amendment covering “sweetened prepared foods eaten with the fingers,” a clause historically used to define confectionery items. Has anyone tried it? I don’t fancy this particular “lunch” myself, but maybe I’m not giving it enough of a chance!

marksandspencer

A post shared by @marksandspencer