Labour Party officials have strongly defended Chancellor Rachel Reeves following claims that she exaggerated her CV and faced an investigation over her use of expenses while working at Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS).
Sir Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, supported Reeves, stating that she had “addressed any issues that arose” from the allegations about her CV. Health Secretary Wes Streeting also praised Reeves for doing a “brilliant and difficult job” amid the controversy.
However, recent reports on the matter have drawn criticism from some Labour figures, who have dismissed the claims as inaccurate. A cabinet minister went so far as to call the reporting “totally inaccurate.” This article explores the responses from Labour figures and examines the evidence supporting the allegations.
The Expense Controversy: What We Know So Far
An investigation revealed concerns over Reeves’s expenses while employed at HBOS between 2006 and 2009. A whistleblower filed a comprehensive six-page complaint, supported by extensive documentation, including emails, receipts, and memos. The complaint accused Reeves, along with two colleagues (one of whom was her superior), of using bank funds to “fund a lifestyle,” citing spending on events, taxis, and gifts.
In addition to these documents, more than 20 individuals, many of whom were former colleagues of Reeves, were spoken to in order to verify the claims.
Internal Investigation into the Allegations
The whistleblower’s complaint triggered an internal investigation by HBOS’s risk department, which was then passed to the bank’s internal audit team. According to a source with direct knowledge of the investigation, the audit team concluded that the allegations were substantiated and that there appeared to be evidence of misconduct by Reeves and her colleagues.
However, it remains unclear whether the investigation was concluded formally or whether any actions were taken as a result.
Reeves and Labour’s Response
Reeves has denied any wrongdoing, claiming she was unaware of any formal investigation into her expenses. She insists that her expenses were always approved according to proper procedures. The individual who signed off her expenses, her manager, was also part of the internal investigation into the claims.
Reeves also emphasized that she left HBOS in good standing and did not face any issues during her tenure. Several Labour figures have come to her defense, challenging the accuracy of the reports. For example, Science Secretary Peter Kyle described the reporting as “inaccurate” during an appearance on a radio programme.
One notable defense came from Jane Wayper, a former HR business partner at HBOS. Wayper, who spoke after receiving permission from Reeves’s team, stated that she would have been made aware of any investigation with serious findings, as it would have been her responsibility to oversee any disciplinary process. However, it has not been suggested that the internal investigation reached a formal conclusion or resulted in any disciplinary action.
It’s important to note that Kyle misrepresented Wayper’s role, referring to her as the head of HR. In reality, Wayper worked in the department where Reeves was employed.
Rachel Reeves’s Statement on the Expenses Claims
Reeves responded directly to questions about the expense claims, stating: “No-one ever raised any concerns about my expenses when I worked for Halifax Bank of Scotland.” She reiterated that her expenses were approved by her manager, who was also part of the internal investigation.
Reeves left HBOS in May 2009, as did her manager. The third senior manager implicated in the investigation was on sick leave and never returned to work. There is no indication that any of these departures were related to the investigation or the expense issues.
CV Exaggeration: What We Know
Another part of the investigation revealed discrepancies in the details of Reeves’s LinkedIn CV. While the Chancellor has frequently claimed to have spent the “best part of a decade” at the Bank of England, the timeline on her LinkedIn profile showed a tenure from September 2000 to December 2006—amounting to six years, with a year of that time spent studying at the London School of Economics (LSE).
Further research established that Reeves actually left the Bank of England in March 2006, meaning her time there was closer to five and a half years. Reeves’s spokesperson confirmed that the dates on her LinkedIn profile were inaccurate due to an administrative error and has since updated the information.
Labour’s Ongoing Defence
Despite these revelations, Labour figures continue to assert that the reporting on both the expense issue and the CV exaggeration was flawed. Reeves maintains that she has dealt with any concerns regarding her time at HBOS and has addressed the discrepancies in her CV.
Stay tuned to London Pulse News for updates on this developing story.
