The Budget

Mollygo Sun 30-Nov-25 11:06:25

That's an opinion, no facts Mollygo, and it's strongly biased against Rachel Reeves. To assess it we would need to know who said it. Have they always been biased this way? Have they supported her in the past and now changed their opinion? Is economics their subject or are the basically coming from a political point of view.

The days of "trust me, this is the truth" have long gone, both here and in other countries.

DAR you are welcome to suggest what you like.

I know what I have heard and from whom.

May I suggest that in fact you have "heard" it repeated often because the bias held by the media you chose to get your news from encourages them to do this.

So are you saying that those televised broadcasts of her saying that have been edited and are fake?

Nothing surprises me any more.

I can't believe that DAR is defending the chancellor. The letter from the OBR proves that she was told at the end of October that there was a £4.2 billion surplus and NOT the significant 'black hole' in the public finances that she used to try to prepare us for her dreadful budget.

So are you saying that those televised broadcasts of her saying that have been edited and are fake?

No Allira. GrannyGravy13 said "RR has mentioned the £20 + billion black hole in the nation’s finances at every opportunity since becoming chancellor" How many times do you think she actually said it and how many times do you think the right-wing media repeated it?

For example (just example) If she said it once and the media reported it 20, 50, 100 times, GrannyGravy could "heard" as if it were "mentioned ... at every opportunity". We all need to understand the bias of our sources of information.

sundowngirl

I can't believe that DAR is defending the chancellor. The letter from the OBR proves that she was told at the end of October that there was a £4.2 billion surplus and NOT the significant 'black hole' in the public finances that she used to try to prepare us for her dreadful budget.

I'm not actually defending the Chancellor sundowngirl. I am trying yo defend the facts and their relevance.

It looks very like lying to me, or at the very least hiding the truth so that loads of money can be spent on the welfare bill of getting rid of the two child cap to please the far left of the Party.

DaisyAnneReturns

^So are you saying that those televised broadcasts of her saying that have been edited and are fake?^

No Allira. GrannyGravy13 said "RR has mentioned the £20 + billion black hole in the nation’s finances at every opportunity since becoming chancellor" How many times do you think she actually said it and how many times do you think the right-wing media repeated it?

For example (just example) If she said it once and the media reported it 20, 50, 100 times, GrannyGravy could "heard" as if it were "mentioned ... at every opportunity". We all need to understand the bias of our sources of information.

I have watched RR in interviews ( any of them live ) on various news outlets and she has definitely mentioned the £20 + billion black hole.

This started just after she was made chancellor in 2024.

She also mentioned it in her breakfast TV announcement which was across all news channels several weeks before the budget.

Not any but many

From AI
'The figure frequently cited was a £22 billion black hole in the public finances"

She then went on to blame the previous government (again), the pandemic, Brexit, Liz Truss etc etc but obviously none of this was the fault of her previous budge!!

There is not, and never was, a 'black hole'. I've been telling you that ever since it was first mentioned. All it is is that Reeves still thinks that a national budget is just like a household budget, that the nation has a finite amount of money and that she can't make her revenue and spending figures the same when she's trying to add them up at her kitchen table.

I'd be very worried if the national economy were running a surplus because that would mean that the supply of money to the population has diminished, so people will be getting poorer and businesses losing custom. this is not a Good Thing for the economy.

DAR - it definitely appears from your posts that you are defending RR

DaisyAnneReturns

As I said on the other one, she may just have disagreed with the OPRs figures.

And why trust the OBR when they can't be trusted to post their budget report after the budget. They don't sound very reliable to me.

sundowngirl

From AI
'The figure frequently cited was a £22 billion black hole in the public finances"

She then went on to blame the previous government (again), the pandemic, Brexit, Liz Truss etc etc but obviously none of this was the fault of her previous budge!!

"Cited" by whom? The press? Other sources? A group know gor their politicsl leaning?

For the accusation to be true it needs to have been said by Rachel Reeves. She is the person accused of lying.

DaisyAnneReturns

^So are you saying that those televised broadcasts of her saying that have been edited and are fake?^

No Allira. GrannyGravy13 said "RR has mentioned the £20 + billion black hole in the nation’s finances at every opportunity since becoming chancellor" How many times do you think she actually said it and how many times do you think the right-wing media repeated it?

For example (just example) If she said it once and the media reported it 20, 50, 100 times, GrannyGravy could "heard" as if it were "mentioned ... at every opportunity". We all need to understand the bias of our sources of information.

On the morning need programmes, BBC and ITV, if she says it live at 8 am they will repeat it a couple of times in the original
Programme then again at lunch time, evening news and 10 pm and probably the next morning. Easy to hear the same review six or seven times in 24 hours.

News programme not need programme.

MaizieD

There is not, and never was, a 'black hole'. I've been telling you that ever since it was first mentioned. All it is is that Reeves still thinks that a national budget is just like a household budget, that the nation has a finite amount of money and that she can't make her revenue and spending figures the same when she's trying to add them up at her kitchen table.

I'd be very worried if the national economy were running a surplus because that would mean that the supply of money to the population has diminished, so people will be getting poorer and businesses losing custom. this is not a Good Thing for the economy.

That's your opinion too Maizie and you know not all economists agree with. Equally it has nothing do with whether Rachel Reeves lied.

Mind you. If you were just trying to change the subject - great!

DaisyAnneReturns

Mollygo Sun 30-Nov-25 11:06:25

That's an opinion, no facts Mollygo, and it's strongly biased against Rachel Reeves. To assess it we would need to know who said it. Have they always been biased this way? Have they supported her in the past and now changed their opinion? Is economics their subject or are the basically coming from a political point of view.

The days of "trust me, this is the truth" have long gone, both here and in other countries.

It came from the ifs.
Happy to know that IYO the ifs
hand out opinions instead of facts.
Not sure the ifs would be equally happy.

After the election, in a July/August 2024 spending audit, Rachel Reeves (as new Chancellor) and then Starmer claimed they discovered a “£22 billion black hole” in public spending that the Tories had bequeathed.

So did they lie?

sundowngirl

DAR - it definitely appears from your posts that you are defending RR

Interesting perspective. You know better than I do about why I'm posting. What I was really aiming for, as I said, was truth. I'm quite keen on it, whoever it applies to.

🙂

It was mentioned by Reeves or Starmer in Parliament many times, particularly in PMQ. Rachel Reeves spoke about it at the Labour Party Conference.

The Guardian reported
Rachel Reeves has told the cabinet that the UK still faces a £100bn black hole in the public finances over the next five years amid concerns that ministers are yet to grasp the full scale of the fiscal deficit ahead.

At a meeting of the political cabinet, the chancellor said the £22bn gap this year – which the government has blamed on their poor economic inheritance from the Tories – would be a recurring cost each year of this parliament.

The Black Hole has been mentioned many times - only the depth varies.

That was October 2024 and Rachel Reeves seemingly was happy to let statement this persist without adjustment.

DAR the so called ^Black hole* has everything to do whether RR lied/deceived the electorate.

She has repeatedly, along with Sir Starmer used it as a political weapon since they were elected.

Particularly for continuing austerity, raising taxes and as an excuse for their budget decisions.

DaisyAnneReturns

MaizieD

There is not, and never was, a 'black hole'. I've been telling you that ever since it was first mentioned. All it is is that Reeves still thinks that a national budget is just like a household budget, that the nation has a finite amount of money and that she can't make her revenue and spending figures the same when she's trying to add them up at her kitchen table.

I'd be very worried if the national economy were running a surplus because that would mean that the supply of money to the population has diminished, so people will be getting poorer and businesses losing custom. this is not a Good Thing for the economy.

That's your opinion too Maizie and you know not all economists agree with. Equally it has nothing do with whether Rachel Reeves lied.

Mind you. If you were just trying to change the subject - great!

What is 'my opinion'. DAR?

I'm happy to see that GG13 agrees with me about the relevance of my comment to the matter of the 'black hole'.

I hope there will always be people to support you Maizie.

To return to the previous subject. It's interesting how often people accept media claims about Rachel Reeves without question, especially when it fits their pre-existing views. Many are critical of Labour and assume the party is in the wrong, so they interpret events to match that belief. When the media suggests she lied, they tend to take it at face value.

What suprises me is how few consider that someone might be critical of Labour, or sceptical about the budget, while simply wanting the truth. Pursuing facts isn't the same as showing support; it's just not assuming you have to share any political bias to want the truth.