It's my party and I'll cry if I want to

But like big boys, Chancellors aren't allowed to and Reeves will be gone soon. (Free to Read)

It’s a tough game

“Look, she’s a human being…this will create sympathy for Rachel… don’t listen to all the misogynists…there’s nothing wrong with showing emotion… and so it goes on. Labour politicians have been in passive-aggressive denial about the consequences of the Chancellor of the Exchequer bursting into tears during Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday.

It was a “personal issue”, we were told by Labour officials, who then complicated matters by conceding that there had been an altercation with the Speaker, Lindsay Hoyle, before Rachel Reeves sat down. She had talked back to him, apparently, and he was cross. But is the Chancellor so feeble of will that she breaks down when this jumped-up backbencher criticises her? If so, how is she going to deal with all those Treasury civil servants with their booming voices and pompous put-downs? The Chancellor is supposed to be iron-clad, like a field marshall in a war. They cannot afford to be emotional.

“I’m not going to intrude on personal matters,” said the Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, on the Today programme this morning. “It has nothing to do with politics.” Oh yes it does. And it has even more to do with finance, since the bond markets – which you may recall forced the resignation of the Tory PM, Liz Truss, three years ago – reacted equally negatively to the tracks of the Chancellor’s tears by driving up government borrowing costs. I don’t recall the feministas leaping to defend Ms Truss when she broke into tears describing how her administration had been wrecked. Somehow, it isn’t misogynistic to be unsympathetic to lachrymose Tories – they deserve it.

Tears at the Dispatch Box are, of course, highly political. This wasn’t like Theresa May tearing up outside Downing Street on the day of her departure. This was the second most important politician in the land in a state of obvious psychological distress the day after a humiliating government climbdown on welfare reform.

This has ruined her financial strategy and fatally undermined the authority of the government – not that it had much authority left, following the succession of dismal U-turns. It’s as simple as that. To say these events and Rachel Reeves’ psychological distress are unconnected will simply not be believed. People are not stupid.

Of course, the PM is going to deny the obvious and claim that the Chancellor’s job is not on the line – though it is notable that he has still not repeated his promise that Rachel Reeves will be Chancellor until the next election. He has said: “She will be Chancellor for a very long time to come” he said on the Today programme,”into the next election and beyond it.” That isn’t quite as categoric as it sounds. It is like predicting a victory at the next election: it’s what you have to do.

To be clear: Reeves’s job absolutely is on the line. Indeed, I think we can guarantee that this Chancellor will be gone long before the next election. The only reason for keeping her in post is to take the blame for the massive tax increases that will be needed in her autumn budget to fill the hole left by the failure of welfare reform. She is there to take the fall.

That is, unless she goes of her own volition, which is possible. Like Nicola Sturgeon, Ruth Davidson, and other prominent women politicians, she has the option of blaming politics and claiming that her life has been made impossible by male rivals and internet trolls. For women, blaming misogyny has become the equivalent of saying you’re resigning to spend more time with your family.

Wes Streeting is being lined up as we speak to take over one of the key offices of state after he completes his stint at Health. He is the obvious choice, since he seems to be the only politician on Labour’s front bench who knows what he’s doing.

Looking across the rest of them – Lisa Nandy, Ed Miliband, Yvette Cooper, David Lammy – the talent cupboard is conspicuously bare. Indeed, this Labour Cabinet is largely composed of unknowns, has-beens, and rather-not-knowns.

The Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones, is capable and intelligent but doesn’t have the experience or the profile to become Chancellor of the Exchequer – at least not now. Perhaps after the next election, if and when Wes Streeting becomes Prime Minister.

I know – that is a fanciful projection, but given the dismal state of the Tory Party, it is hard to imagine Kemi Badenoch winning in 2028. Nor, I believe, will Nigel Farage become Prime Minister, though he will get a substantial vote and be a significant force in the next UK Parliament.

But nothing is impossible. This new broom administration has taken over where the last Tory government left off: in a state of confused disarray. Only a year after Labour won a historic landslide, it is in the kind of mess governments normally get into after a decade in office.

Indeed, so bad has been the performance of Sir Keir’s administration, it has actually made the Scottish Government look almost competent. And that should not be taken as a vote of confidence in First Minister, John Swinney, who has steadied the ship by sinking it more slowly.

Labour’s next date with destiny is the Scottish parliamentary elections in less than a year’s time. So bad has been the performance of his boss that the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, has almost given up hope of replacing John Swinney in Bute House. The unthinkable seems possible: the SNP, on the current run of polls, looks likely to be returned after 19 years in office.

The latest Ipsos opinion poll has the SNP nine points ahead of Labour in Scotland. Sarwar has lost 13% of his party’s support in less than a year and is now struggling at 22%. But it could be worse. Nigel Farage’s Reform is six points ahead of the Scottish Conservatives who, incredibly, are level pegging with the Scottish Green Party on 10%. It is hard to believe that the Scottish Tories are the official opposition in Holyrood.

So it looks like victory for Swinney, even though the SNP is only on 31% of the sample – 15 points down on where the nationalists were in the polls before Sturgeon resigned. The Scottish Government’s popularity continues to decline, just not as fast as Labour’s. Reform is stealing votes from both sides, and on both sides of the border too.

How naive it now seems to have believed, only a year ago, that Labour’s election landslide would bring a period of stability and competence to 21st Century politics. North and south the political situation is becoming ever more unstable. And there will assuredly be more tears before bed.