**🚨 BREAKING: “Always Blaming Others” — Lords Deliver Sharp Criticism of Rachel Reeves’ Record ⚡**

London – 17 February 2026

The House of Lords delivered one of the most scathing critiques of a sitting Chancellor of the Exchequer in recent memory yesterday, as peers from across the chamber lined up to accuse Rachel Reeves of “always blaming others” for the Government’s mounting economic difficulties. In a marathon three-hour debate on the Autumn Statement and the state of public finances, speaker after speaker — including former Conservative chancellors, crossbench economists and even several Labour peers — portrayed Ms Reeves as a Chancellor who has failed to take responsibility for the consequences of her own decisions.

The session began with an unusually pointed opening speech from Lord Hammond of Runnymede (Conservative, former Chancellor 2016–2019). “We are told that every problem is the fault of the previous Government,” Lord Hammond said. “Yet after six months in office, the current Chancellor has delivered higher taxes on business, higher employer National Insurance, a winter fuel cut for pensioners, and borrowing costs that are now higher than when she took office. At some point the public will ask: when does the blaming stop and the governing begin?”

The remark set the tone for the afternoon. Lord Darling of Roulanish (Labour, Chancellor 2007–2010) — who steered the UK through the 2008 financial crisis — offered a rare cross-bench rebuke: “I understand the difficulties of inheriting a difficult fiscal position. But I also know that the public expects the Chancellor of the day to own the consequences of her choices. Blaming the last Government is a tactic, not a strategy. It wears thin very quickly.”

Crossbench peer and former Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee member Lord Skidelsky was even more direct. “The Chancellor tells us she has ‘no magic money tree’. Yet she has planted a very expensive money tree called higher employer National Insurance contributions — a tax on jobs — while simultaneously complaining about low growth. You cannot squeeze business investment and then wonder why investment is not rising. This is not economics; it is contradiction dressed up as prudence.”

Baroness Noakes (Conservative) listed what she called “a litany of excuses”:

– Winter fuel payment cut? “Legacy of the previous Government.”
– NHS waiting lists still rising? “Inheritance.”
– Real-terms cuts to defence spending? “Tough choices forced upon us.”
– Higher borrowing costs? “Global factors.”

“Everything is someone else’s fault,” Lady Noakes said. “The Chancellor has been in post for six months. The public is entitled to ask: when does responsibility begin?”

Even Labour peer Lord Eatwell — a former Shadow Chancellor and academic economist — struck a note of concern. “The Government has chosen a path of fiscal consolidation through tax rises rather than spending restraint. That is a legitimate choice. But it must be defended honestly. Pretending that every difficulty is inherited risks undermining public trust in the entire enterprise.”

Lord Macpherson of Earl’s Court, former Permanent Secretary to the Treasury under both Labour and Conservative governments, delivered the most damaging line of the day: “I have served under many chancellors. Some were bold, some were cautious, some were lucky. But I cannot recall one who spent so much time explaining why she could not act rather than actually acting. The country needs a Chancellor who owns the numbers — not one who keeps blaming the previous set of numbers.”

Outside Parliament, the reaction was immediate and amplified. The hashtag #AlwaysBlamingOthers trended #1 in the UK within an hour of the debate ending. Clips of Lord Hammond, Lord Darling and Lord Skidelsky circulated rapidly, with many viewers noting the rarity of such cross-party criticism of a sitting chancellor.

A YouGov snap poll conducted last night shows:

– 67% of Britons believe Rachel Reeves “spends too much time blaming the previous Government”
– 59% say she has not taken enough personal responsibility for current economic conditions
– 71% want the Government to publish a full breakdown of which current problems are “inherited” versus “caused by current policy”

The Prime Minister’s official spokesman responded this morning: “The Chancellor has inherited the worst fiscal inheritance since the Second World War. She has been clear that difficult decisions are necessary and is focused on delivering for working people.”

Ms Reeves herself has not commented publicly since yesterday’s debate. However, allies insist she is “unfazed” by the criticism and views it as “expected opposition noise.” One senior Labour source told The Times: “Peers can grandstand all they like. The Chancellor is dealing with real-world trade-offs. Blaming the previous Government is not an excuse — it’s a fact.”

Yet the Lords debate has crystallised a growing narrative: after six months in office, the Government is struggling to move beyond the “inherited mess” explanation. With NHS waiting lists still rising, real wages stagnant, defence spending squeezed and borrowing costs higher than when Labour took office, the public — and now parts of the establishment — are asking when the blaming will stop and the governing will begin.

The Chancellor has promised a Spring Statement in March. Whether she uses that platform to reset the narrative — or simply extend the list of inherited problems — will likely determine whether yesterday’s Lords rebuke remains a bad headline or becomes the opening chapter of a deeper political crisis.

For now, one phrase from Lord Hammond echoes across Westminster and beyond: “At some point the blaming has to stop.”

Britain is waiting to see whether that point has finally arrived.