LONDON — The weekly session in which the British prime minister is questioned by lawmakers in Parliament can be an ordeal for the government leader. For Cabinet members, it’s usually simply a matter of backing their boss.
But on Wednesday the spotlight ended up on Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves during the Prime Minister’s Questions session because it became evident that she was crying as she sat beside Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
It’s not known what triggered the tears, later said to have been personal. They came as Mr. Starmer sought to fend off attacks that his year-old government was losing its authority and that he was about to fire Ms. Reeves to regain the initiative.
Traders got spooked, with the interest rate charged on the U.K.’s 10-year benchmark bond in the markets up sharply, and the pound down. The moves were a sign investors had lost confidence in U.K. financial assets.
Ms. Reeves had become associated with fiscal discipline, in particular a rule of covering day-to-day government spending with tax revenue, said Andrew Wishart, an economist at Berenberg Bank.
“The markets are concerned that if the chancellor goes, such fiscal discipline would follow her out of the door,” he added.
With Mr. Starmer insisting Thursday that Ms. Reeves would remain in post, the markets calmed down.
Prime Minister’s Questions, or PMQs, can come as close to a gladiatorial contest as is possible in a modern legislative chamber. Very little deference is given to the man or woman holding the highest office in the land.
Wednesday’s session in the House of Commons appeared to have more at stake than usual following a chaotic run-up to a welfare reform bill. With scores of Labour lawmakers opposed, Mr. Starmer was forced to scrap key planks of the bill — at a cost, politically and economically.
For a prime minister, with one of the biggest majorities in history, it was a sign of weakness.
Many Labour MPs blame Ms. Reeves, for her rigid adherence to her budget rules.
As usual, Mr. Starmer was flanked to his left by Ms. Reeves, who didn’t look her usual self, clearly bloated around the eyes.
Ms. Badenoch showed little mercy, describing Ms. Reeves as “absolutely miserable” and a “human shield” for Mr. Starmer. She asked Mr. Starmer whether he could repeat a pledge that Ms. Reeves would stay in her post until the general election, which has to take place by the middle of 2029.
While praising Ms. Reeves’ handling of the economy, Mr. Starmer didn’t give that assurance, and it was around this point that Ms. Reeves wiped away a tear.
Mr. Starmer’s press spokesman later blamed the brief show of emotion on a “personal matter” and insisted Ms. Reeves was “going nowhere” and had the prime minister’s “full backing.”
Mr. Starmer reiterated Thursday that Ms. Reeves would remain chancellor “for years to come” and sought to explain why he hadn’t comforted Ms. Reeves during PMQs.
“In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,” he said at an event where he and Ms. Reeves hugged. “That’s what it was yesterday and therefore I was probably the last to appreciate anything going on in the chamber.”
Ms. Reeves appeared more like her usual self.
“People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday,” she told Sky News. “I guess the thing that is different from my job and many of your viewers is that when I’m having a tough day, it’s on the telly.”
