To Opposition MPs, she’s “Rachel from Accounts”.
However in addition to being accused of embellishing her CV, she’s now being challenged about her own accounts – her bills claims.
The chancellor has been accused of being concerned in an “bills scandal” when she labored at Halifax Financial institution of Scotland (HBOS).
It is claimed she spent a whole bunch of kilos on purses, earrings, wine, taxis, a Christmas celebration and – sure – even fragrance.
They’re the type of allegations that do not seem to go the scent check, although she insists she wasn’t conscious of an investigation and wasn’t interviewed.
Not surprisingly, nonetheless, Kemi Badenoch is demanding she comes clear “not nearly her CV however in regards to the circumstances by which she left HBOS”.
Her solicitor says his “clear understanding on the time” was that Ms Reeves left on good phrases, stored her firm automotive and different advantages for six months and was given a “beneficial reference”.
“Completely no allegations of wrongdoing or misconduct had been talked about by the HBOS HR workforce throughout this course of,” insists David Sorenson of Leeds-based Morrish Solicitors.
And a former HR boss at HBOS, Jayne Wayper, additionally insists: “I don’t recognise any of the accusations or claims which have been made towards Rachel Reeves.”
All this comes on high of extra “CV-gate” allegations, suggesting “Rachel from Accounts” is much less “Rachel from the Financial institution of England” and extra “Rachel from HBOS” than she claimed.
It has been fairly a day for Ms Reeves. It is her forty sixth birthday. That is good.
New figures confirmed the financial system grew slightly at the end of last year. That was a reduction.
However the newest accusations imply MPs are as soon as once more questioning whether or not she’ll survive Sir Keir Starmer’s first huge reshuffle, within the spring or summer season. Not good.
We would already realized that “Rachel from Economics” was additionally “Rachel from Retail Banking”, “Rachel from IT” and “Rachel from Administration”.
This time it is claimed she exaggerated how lengthy she spent on the Financial institution of England. Now it is getting much more complicated.
Learn extra:
Treasury launches inquiry into leak of growth forecasts
More than 100 new towns being considered by ministers
The chancellor initially claimed she labored on the Financial institution of England for “the perfect a part of a decade”, then she mentioned it was from September 2000 till December 2006.
Now it is emerged she left the Financial institution in March 2006, after she was photographed with HBOS colleagues at a Council of Mortgage Lenders lunch in March 2006. Whoops!
Political opponents – and a few Labour MPs too – are an unforgiving lot and as soon as once more the lady who likes to be considered an “iron chancellor”, within the Gordon Brown mould, is wanting badly tarnished once more.
Her huge downside is that she has continually boasted about how her time as a Financial institution of England economist and her banking expertise means voters can belief her with the nation’s funds.
That results in a second downside. If every little thing within the financial system was going swimmingly proper now it will be simpler for her to dismiss the accusations about her CV and her bills.
However critics declare the financial system is heading for the rocks and that she’s in charge for most of the authorities’s issues: winter gas funds, national insurance increases, inheritance tax on farmers, and so forth.
So after a brand new 12 months fightback after a earlier bout of hypothesis about her future, the stability sheet for “Rachel from Accounts” is wanting fairly unfavorable once more.
What she desperately wants is best financial information, a few of that development that is proving so elusive.
In any other case, regardless of Sir Keir’s backing for her to date, she’ll be “Rachel for the Reshuffle”. Or worse.