Rachel Reeves is the United Kingdom (UK) Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Labour government. Her position parallels the United States Treasury Secretary. Prime Minister Keir Starmer selected her to serve in his cabinet. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is one of the most senior government positions because they develop the yearly budget that influences the UK economy and governmental services, such as the National Health Services (NHS) and the military. She sits in the Parliament frontbench beside the Prime Minister and is constantly hounded by the media and opposition parties. As the first woman Chancellor since the formation of the UK government over 800 years ago, she carries an even heavier burden.
The UK economy is in poor condition. The Covid pandemic caused the NHS to exceed its budget and the Ukraine war with Russia raised natural gas prices which caused the government’s winter fuel payments to rise above budget. Both events resulted in more UK debt. Taxes, already high, were increased to record high levels. All eyes were on the new Labour government and Rachel Reeves to find solutions.
On the 2nd of July during the Prime Minister’s Questions, Reeves sat at her usual position behind Starmer as he fielded questions from Members of Parliament (MPs). Under pressure, the Labour government had recently reversed their plans to lower social spending to balance the UK budget. Reeves supported holding firm, but the Prime Minister did not back her. The UK press and several MPs speculated that Starmer had lost faith in his Chancellor and would sack her. British politicians and the press can be brutal to those in power. Appearing weak during tough times goes against the British culture.
As Starmer fielded questions on public TV, Reeves was filmed with tears flowing down her cheeks. The Prime Minister was completely unaware of it during his half hour of answering questions. After he left the chamber, an aide suggested that he check on Reeves. One Conservative frontbench MP stated, “It was horrible to watch.”
Why was Reeves crying? Speculation ran rampant. Just before the Prime Minister’s Questions, Reeves was seen in a disagreement with Speaker Lindsay Hoyle. “They had a row. I think he ended up apologizing to her.” Others speculated that she had succumbed to too much pressure. “She’s under massive amounts of pressure. But she has good strong women around her.”
Starmer later publicly answered a question of whether the benefits U-turn caused her tears. “It’s wrong. That’s absolutely wrong. Nothing to do with politics. Nothing to do with what’s happened this week. It was a personal matter for her. I’m not going to intrude on her privacy by talking to you.” Reeves stated the following day: “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.”
It was obvious to all watching, either in-person or via the media, that Reeves’ tears were personal. Viewers, whether in agreement with Reeves or not, should be sympathetic. Politicians are human and have the same emotions as the rest of us. The tears she shed were not in anger or spite, but of deep personal grief. She attended the Prime Minister’s Questions because her absence would have been noticed and gossip would have abounded about her political future in the Labour government. Publicly attending while in a state of personal grief had its downside too.
As I reflect on Reeves’ tears, my first thoughts were on fairness. If a man was seen with a tear on his cheek, would he have received equal treatment? A woman crying is seen as weakness. A man crying over a personal matter shows his humility and character. Second, none of Reeves frontbench colleagues offered her a comforting shoulder or asked her if they could help her in any way. They just sat there as if nothing happened. Or, as the British say, “just keep a stiff upper lip.” When Paula Radcliffe, the great British marathoner, cried after dropping out of the Athens Olympic marathon, a running friend of mine yelled into the TV screen: “Paula, please don’t cry!”
The shortest verse in the Bible is John 11:35: “Jesus began to weep,” or “Jesus wept.” Mary had just informed Jesus that her brother Lazarus had died. The next verse explained why Jesus wept: “So the Jews said, “See how he loved him!” The Jews knew that his tears were related to his great love towards his friend. Tears signify the painful grief surrounding death. Those few drops of water running down our cheeks signify our compassion and humility. It is the core of our humanity to love so much that our eyes flow salty fluid.
I am so fortunate not to live under constant public scrutiny. I can travel and not be hounded by the media. When I am personally saddened, I can grieve alone or surrounded by loving friends and family. Reeves’ tears testify to her humanity. She showed up at Parliament to support the public causes she advocates and risked public gossip over her tears. I applaud her sincerity. I only wish that I could have sat next to her, given her a comforting hug, and loosened my stiff upper lip.
