Analysis Breaking comment

Reeves blames Corbyn for party’s financial collapse – and says member exodus is a good thing

Labour had £13m surplus at the end of Corbyn’s leadership, but MP who said Labour would be tougher on benefit claimants than the Tories thinks near-bankruptcy is his fault

Rachel Reeves

Keir Starmer’s Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves appears to have decided that the way to convince voters they can trust Labour with the country’s coffers is by talking blatant nonsense about the party’s own finances.

The MP, who infamously once promised that Labour would be harder on benefits claimants than the horrors of David Cameron’s government, has told the Financial Times that Labour’s near-bankruptcy is – you’ve guessed it – Jeremy Corbyn’s fault. Corbyn, of course, left Labour in strong financial health for the first time in decades after a surge in membership and in hope of real change – with a £13.5 million surplus in the last year of his leadership despite having to fight and fund a general election campaign.

Reeves, an avowed fan of notorious antisemite Nancy Astor, also said that the huge exodus of Labour members along with around £8 million a year of their dues – including in her own constituency – since Keir Starmer became leader and dragged the party to the Stalinist right was a good thing:

The arrogance of claiming that 200,000 people, a third of Labour’s membership under Corbyn, who have left the part are all antisemites is staggering – and just goes to show the extent of the now-exposed antisemitism fallacy. But even more astonishing is the idea that Labour being on the verge of bankruptcy because of the exodus is great because they were the the wrong type of people.

By Reeves’s logic, presumably each of Starmer’s abject electoral failures under his leadership – record lows in by-elections and a string of local election humiliations even in its historic strongholds – is fantastic. You wouldn’t want the ‘wrong kind of people’s votes, after all, so really those have all been successes in the blighted minds and worldview of the Labour right.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. Well, I suppose that if Corbyn had never been leader in the first, these members would never have joined, so in a way Rachel Reeves is right!

      1. Unfortunately there are no emoticons available to scream ‘I’m not being serious’, but her statement clearly about as nonsensical as saying ‘if you hadn’t parked your car in that bay, I wouldn’t have crashed into you’.

      2. What can you expect from a pig but a grunt Andrew. Rachel Reeves is hard Right and her views are incompatible with traditional Labour values of honesty decency and integrity. If she had one iota of principle she would join the Tories instead of sitting on our benches where she never fails to show herself up. If the party had one iota of principle she would be expelled for bringing it into disrepute. The reason she is still there is that Labour values and principles are alien concepts in Starmers Labour. Disgusting.

      3. What can you expect from a pig but a grunt

        A big steaming pile of 🐖 💩. And, of course, the reeves pig’s obliged.

  2. Graham Bash was a member of the Labour Perty since before Reeves was born & so was Diane Neslen. Maybe the Labour Party could have not paid £600,000 to members of staff who worked to undermine it, because they considered “jumping out Jennie Formby’s window” – yet they are somehow still here.

    1. Thank you for this Julie T It is absolute horrific. It is a “stain” on the Labour party that this man, Keir Starmer who failed to prosecute the UKs most prolific sex offender is leader.

  3. many of us were in the Labour party before that numpty was born and to acusse a quarter million people of being Anti Semitic is a absolute disgrace in the same way that they fitted up Corbyn….That sort of talk shows total immaturity and brainless motor mouthing from a fascist supporters of the knights shadowy Labour party.

    1. 🎯 Julie, I once watched a magic act. Lying on a table in front of him were four golden hoops. He picked each one up and transfered it to his free hand the he threw them to the floor keeping hold of one of them. As you have already guessed they were linked. Not a brilliant act, but this isn’t about magic it’s about rings or is it about magic? I dunno, I am too dumb to be an aethist and I know that there is something about rings that make me squirm. Local authorities love their rings. It’s not all about kebab shops and taxis.

  4. These persons are thoroughly repulsive. They blame and smear innocent decent people to divert away from their nasty, treacherous behaviour.

  5. How much longer will we all put up with this bunch of lying bastards?
    Surely Corbyn must leave and start a new party? I mean for phuxake!

  6. Isn’t it ironic? Starmer welcomes a Tory defector with open arms while still withholds the Labour’s whips from Corbyn. It would appear that the Tory jumping seat believe that he has more chances of remaining MP by jumping ship and joining Labour.
    Wouldn’t it be ironic in the people of Bury South were to vote Conservative at the next General Election? What the hell between am incompetent and careerist Red Tory an a competent careerist Blue Tory they could be forgiven for voting for the competent one.

      1. Andrew, the only way for the left to retake the Labour Party back is by making sure that Labour loses under Starmer big time.
        I have left the Labour Party after more than 30 years membership because I couldn’t stand what it has become any longer.
        I still a member of an affiliated Trade Union and will use my vote to vote for a left candidate, the worse the Starmer’s defeat is, the better the chances.
        This is what the right of the Party teach us when they sabotaged Corbyn in 2017 and 2019, some of us are advanced learners and learned the lesson well.

      2. HEAR!!! HEAR!!!
        We have to take their seats with a Sharpie and an X!
        Taking out the Saboteurs, the Bastards who stuck TWO RUSTY NAILS in The PEOPLE’S EYE, 2017 & 2019! has to be Priority! If we want a voice for The PEOPLE in Parliament we can do it with an opposition TORY Party no matter how few MPs we start off with, but it is impossible to do with a TORY Parasite Infestation Sabotaging, Backstabbing, Undermining, Smearing, Lying, etc, etc absolutely every bit of good work we do.

  7. On the BBC’s Today programme this morning, Reeves stated that the EHRC report on the Labour Party found the party to be ‘institutionally ‘anti-semitic’. It did not say this: it’s as simple as that. She was not challenged on this by the interviewer. I suspect neither had read the report.

    1. That sort of talk about institutional anti Semitic should draw in a good number of fascists to stomp their jack boots.Really bright 🌞 this girl,I wonder if shes escaped from a institution .They really are the cream of the new Labour party.

    2. Paul, I suspect that she knew she wasn’t telling the truth but, it served her narrative. Nowadays with most politicians we know they are lying because their lips keep moving.
      Starmer? Johnson? Paraphrasing Galloway the two cheeks of the same arse

      1. Did he just repeat something the he had heard at the birth of thr Christ. He was there wasn’t he?

  8. On another matter 3rd February is the latest date for NHS Staff to get first jag or face dismissal
    100,000 of this countries finest sacked by cheap and Nasties
    You could almost think they had a visceral hatred of the NHS and were determined to destroy it
    What say you

    1. The BMA says between 69,000 – 70,000 of their members who work for the NHS are not “vaccinated”. In the main it is a choice and based on my own experience the 69K+ unvaccinated ’employees’ include many former-colleagues who work in Pathology. They work in
      Blood sciences
      Clinical haematology
      Phlebotomy (also known as blood tests)
      Point of Care Testing (providing results closer to the patient).

      We should respect the informed choices of such people.

      I undertsand the BMA is in discussion with Dept of Health and NHS senior managementand will make a public statement on mandatory vaccination two weeks before the deadline.

      1. but just incase you’re in any doubt, the editor of the BMA’s sister publication, The British Medical Journal, has made his position (about vaccination and the sham covid ‘tests’ the NHS provide) Abundantly Clear when summoned by the US Senate.

        (Credit to D4CE for the video, which lasts about 5mins).

      2. qwerboi
        You and JVL have saved my sanity on so many occasions
        We live in a world that murders the English Language and destroys our basic human right to learn and move forward
        Will say it again, not shocked Scientists are just as bent as politicians and journalists just really disappointed how cheap it is to buy one
        As me grandad always said ‘follow the money’
        He also used to clip us around the lugs
        What was that for Grandad
        For being naughty
        But we haven’t been naughty
        Right so put it in the bank for when you are !

      3. Qwertboi, thanks for the info. Our armed forces could never plug that hole. They are screaming for my wife to come and rejoin the Billy’s army on the wards, streets, pharmacies. Shiny things, offer ex staff Shiny things, because they do their underpaid job for the money. They are ideologues not idealists (just like them) and believe that everyone, everything can be bought and restructured. We’ll see.

      4. Wobbly, good on her! You’ll remember that back at the start of the “emergency” ( BEFORE we knew that infection (I) and infection/fatality (IFR) were remarkably low for CV2 (comparable to a so-so year’s ‘flu), retired and inactive doctors were appoached. Reportedly, nearly 50,000 put themselves on “the books”.

        Since then, the vast majority have removed themselves mostly due to emergency-authorised ‘vaccine’ medication and the dangerously unscientific “covid narrative”. To me, that’s a good example of how, with people who understand the workings of things, we can NEVER ‘be in this together’.

    2. Doug
      A little bird told me they’ll withdraw the threat. Firing 10% of the NHS workforce when there’s a record number of vacancies and everyone’s worried about health threats would be the last thing Johnson needs right now…

  9. Even the treacherous SDP were well to the left of these rogues. They’re in the party purely to blunt the Labour party’s radicalism and stymie it as a viable vehicle for delivering meaningful change to the system.

    Any spell in govt would be miserable for supporters and cruelly short. Doubtless to be followed by another 20 years in the opposition wilderness. That would probably suit most of them just fine however, as long as they retain their seats or go to the Lords. Their precious political careers being their main concern.

  10. Reeves demonstrating yet again that she IS indeed as green as she is cabbage looking.

  11. In a previous post I remarked on the difference to LP finances
    voluntary (small) contributions made.

    I happened to come across our CLP financial report for the year 2020
    and discovered the following.

    The Labour Party membership subscriptions
    increased in 2020 by around 20% compared with 2019.

    However voluntary donations for 2020
    were one fifth of those of 2019.

    Even in 2020 donations
    were massively more than subscriptions.

    I wonder what will be the case when (IF?) the current
    party files unlocked ?

  12. She’s a neighbouring MP – and not very popular with the working people of Leeds West. One of whom said Rachel Reeves was Ed Balls in (not-very-good) drag, which is cruel, but economically they are exactly the same. “Public policy analyst”? Yes, for the WEF.

    I hope to heaven that a new left party (or individual) stands against her at the next GE. I can think of few things that would satisfy me as much as helping someone with principles, integity and class consciousness displace her as MP for Leeds West.

    1. qwertboi – I forgive you for mentioning the awful Balls. He threw Sharon Shoesmith under the bus to save his own “career”. She was a thoroughly effective leader who had made significant improvements to Haringey SocServ in pretty quick time but that meant nothing when Balls was in the frame. What a joy when the good burghers of Morley and Outwood gave him the heave-ho. Ended up on some inane TV programme which was still too kind a fate.

      1. Yes I remember Ed Balls jumping in and condemning Shoesmith –
        before any proper investigations had taken place.

        Another who was scapegoated was the paediatrician who examined Peter:

        The background – after a previous case they lost a lot of staff – both medical
        and social workers and those with the relevant experience refused to work
        for Haringey.

        The Medic who was then blamed got the job under completely false pretences –
        for it turned out to be not as advertised.

        She was blamed for “not spotting” a broken back – but there was no evidence
        that that particular injury had happened when she examined him.

        Unfortunately – according to a TV program about the case she is
        now a broken woman having abandoned her medical career.

      2. Yes, Maria, but unfortunately the money came from Haringey rather than Balls.
        …… and most of the money was for lost earnings and costs. About 40% was compensation.

    2. ……… and, as for Reeves, the most charitable thing that can be said is that she, like Starmer, would benefit from voice coaching.

      1. And, like Starmer, some kind of nasal passage unblocking operation, too!

    3. Q – Another little birdie told me he believes Ms R moved to a part of Leeds cos (they suggested) she was anticipating (with the possible boundary changes) that this would be in a strong Labour constituency?
      But that hasn’t worked out and it’s very marginal!
      The little birdie added that a stronger area (if the changes go ahead) where she would have a claim is Leeds Headingley and they thought the NEC would shoehorn her in as candidate?
      But birdie told me a strong socialist, and an effective propagandist, with a budget and a manifesto is waiting there patiently.
      Apparently it’s bring it on Right Wing Labour Lightweight Labour loser?

    4. WEF. That tennis ball hitters mob. Yes that crack about Reeves and Balls was cruel because he didn’t choose his appearance.

  13. Of course, we have to see it from *her* point of view: these people don’t want a Labour government. They want to keep the status quo. Why? Well, so many (not very nice people at all) stand to lose if only a fraction of Labour policies were to pass.

    It’s all to do with the state of Israel risking disappearing in its current unsustainable form if any permanent member of the UNSC were to put a bit of pressing on it: the only option left now for a viable peace is the “one state solution”, formerly annexing Palestinian territories and giving equal rights to Palestinians. This state would be multicultural, multiconfessional, meaning the end of a strictly “jewish” state.

    That’s what is at stake.

  14. as Labour dont share my values I’ll take my vote elsewhere, see whose the big shots after a few lost General elections (not that I’m saying my votes that important)

  15. Rachel Reeves’ fears about people joining the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn are reminiscent of similar fears set out in a study by the Trilateral Commission in 1975. It was entitled the ‘Crisis of Democracy’ with one of its co-authors, Samuel Huntington, expressing deep regret about how ordinary people in the United States had now organised and mobilised in order to help shape their futures.

    He looked back with fondness to an earlier age when the population was much more docile:

    “(President) Truman had been able to govern the country with the cooperation of a relatively small number of Wall Street lawyers and bankers.”

  16. Another thought – We need to get these “career”-focused people out of parliament. A simple requirement for adoption as a candidate should be that a person should have been living in the constituency, or county, for a minimum of 1 year.

  17. Before you even entertain the idea, wee fella…An analogy.

    If I inherit £13m and spunk the lot within 18 months or so, are you gonna blame the deceased for leaving me the legacy in the first bleedin’ place?

    We all know – as well as you do – that that’s what you want to do.

  18. I was told about the Reeves interview this morning. Her accusation that all those lost members as antisemites is quite appalling. She’s very confident that not only she’ll get by with reduced canvassers and people willing to vote for her.
    Thanks Skwawkbox for reminding me of Reeves’s adulation of Aster.

  19. Question: Which current MP is responsible for the WORST performance for a governing party since 1991?

    Answer: Rachel Jane Reeves of course.

    Wiki tells us “She also contested the 2006 by-election in the same constituency ( Bromley and Chislehurst), following the death of sitting Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) Eric Forth, and finished in fourth place – while the Lib Dems jumped to second. Labour support fell from 10,241 votes to 1,925, in what was described as a “humiliation” for Labour. The result was the worst performance for a governing party since 1991.”

    FOURTH!! She’d come second the time before (2005), but in 2006 UKIP AND the LIBDEMS both beat her! She’s the perfect loser for Sir Keir’s pretend Labour party.

    1. Yes and whilst JC, despite Right Wing Labour sabotage (twice) got 12.8m and 10.2m, Miliband and Reeves (with no Left sabotage, we gave Ed a chance) got a miserable 9.3m!
      Ms R – A Right Wing Lightweight Labour Loser?
      Oh and Ms R, the radical socialist feminist network (see New Left Review) have a question for you: Why do Right Wing Labour MPs (like you) vote to bomb our Black and Brown sisters?

      1. Obvious answer. They’re all anti-semitic and dark skinned. That or to teach them about human rights and rule based order, Bandera Boys, Contras, ISIS, House of Saud, most Moral Army etc.

      2. Bazza – There is an interesting correlation between the loss of votes in 2017/19 and the loss of members over the same period

        July 2017 538,606
        November 2019 430,359
        Difference -20%

        2017 12.8M
        2019 10.2M
        Difference -20%

  20. My understanding was that Labour was £20m in debt before the Corbyn surge and hundreds of thousands of new members which bailed Labour out at a stroke, so perhaps some try to re-write history?
    But remember Brown in 2010 got a petty 8.6m.
    Miliband & Reeves in 2015 (with NO Left sabotage, we gave Ed a chance) got an abysmal 9.3m.
    Corbyn in 2017 (despite Right Wing Labour sabotage) got 12.8m
    Corbyn in 2019 (again with Right Wing Labour sabotage) got 10.2m.
    So as some suggest perhaps Ms R is a Right Wing Lightweight Labour Loser?

  21. I had a terrible conscience about leaving the Labour Party after all these years………..problem solved.

  22. If losing members is good for New New Labour, I’m sure more good news is on the way

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: