Election Year or Fear!

[Trickytreesreds]

So Rachel Reeves, from her own mouth, bragged about her 'best part of a decade' at the Bank Of England, yet the facts show she worked there for just over four. Given our collective and individual disdain for politicians who lie and are not competent in their role, can we all decide whether she should resign because she's a liar or because she can't count?

She's an economist, her CV said so. Made a damned good cup of tea as well apparently. You'd think that had been her professional job?

I always thought you could be sacked for lying on a CV?

[Andy_Faber]

She's an economist, her CV said so. Made a damned good cup of tea as well apparently. You'd think that had been her professional job?

I always thought you could be sacked for lying on a CV?

You didn?t answer the question. I didn?t expect you to be first not to answer the question.

[ramAnag]

So Rachel Reeves, from her own mouth, bragged about her 'best part of a decade' at the Bank Of England, yet the facts show she worked there for just over four. Given our collective and individual disdain for politicians who lie and are not competent in their role, can we all decide whether she should resign because she's a liar or because she can't count?

The BoE suggest she worked there between 2000 and 2006 which is not ‘just over four’ years and I suppose is - technically - the ‘best part of a decade’ in so much as it is for the majority of the decade. There seems to be no escaping the fact however that she has been ‘economical with the truth’ as far as her career details are concerned.
I doubt she’s alone in that respect but it’s not a good look.

[Geoff Parkstone]

So Rachel Reeves, from her own mouth, bragged about her 'best part of a decade' at the Bank Of England, yet the facts show she worked there for just over four. Given our collective and individual disdain for politicians who lie and are not competent in their role, can we all decide whether she should resign because she's a liar or because she can't count?

Not being able to count didn't cost Dianne Abbot her job; being a liar didn't cost Boris Johnson his job. So I'd say neither should cause her to resign because frankly what job she was doing 20 years ago isn't that relevant to what's she's doing now.

However those who manage her future direction - ie the toolmakers lad - should bear this in mind in allocating jobs in the next reshuffle. BUT show me one person whose CV hasn't stretched a truth a bit ....

[Trickytreesreds]

Not being able to count didn't cost Dianne Abbot her job; being a liar didn't cost Boris Johnson his job. So I'd say neither should cause her to resign because frankly what job she was doing 20 years ago isn't that relevant to what's she's doing now.

However those who manage her future direction - ie the toolmakers lad - should bear this in mind in allocating jobs in the next reshuffle. BUT show me one person whose CV hasn't stretched a truth a bit ....

stretching or just a damned liar?

You of all people know what an economist is.

[SithHappens]

Tough one. If you took someone on in a normal workplace and they were doing a great job would you sack them if you found out they exaggerated in their CV? Probably not.

Is she doing a great job, hmmm now that's the discussion to me. Personally I'm dubious but think its early days.

I'd judge her on the job she does now, not what she used to do.

[Trickytreesreds]

Tough one. If you took someone on in a normal workplace and they were doing a great job would you sack them if you found out they exaggerated in their CV? Probably not.

Is she doing a great job, hmmm now that's the discussion to me. Personally I'm dubious but think its early days.

I'd judge her on the job she does now, not what she used to do.

Absolute bull****.

This isn't an exaggeration, she's an habitual liar, in one of the most important jobs in the country.
Still you don't seem to see Two tier incapable of getting anything wrong, so it must be fine.

How far back do you want to go? Would you employ someone not qualified in a job that lied, or maybe an ex criminal who failed to reveal it when asked?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c77r05nx11po

[ramAnag]

Absolute bull****.

This isn't an exaggeration, she's an habitual liar, in one of the most important jobs in the country.
Still you don't seem to see Two tier incapable of getting anything wrong, so it must be fine.

How far back do you want to go? Would you employ someone not qualified in a job that lied, or maybe an ex criminal who failed to reveal it when asked?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c77r05nx11po

Oh do give it a rest, Tricky. I see you’re suddenly quoting the BBC now it suits, but Sith isn’t talking ‘absolute bull****’, he’s just trying to be even handed about it.
If you want an example of inaccuracy then it’s Andy saying she worked for the BoE for ‘just over four’ years. According to the BoE she worked there from September 2000 until March 2006 which, by most people’s reckoning, would be around five and a half years, but of course you won’t criticise AF’s account because 1) he’s the moderator and 2) his view supports your own.
Did she exaggerate? It would seem so, as have some of her critics. Is that acceptable? Not really and she should know better. Are we surprised? Hardly…she’s a politician talking about her achievements. Does it matter enormously? What GP said yesterday.

[Andy_Faber]

Oh do give it a rest, Tricky. I see you’re suddenly quoting the BBC now it suits, but Sith isn’t talking ‘absolute bull****’, he’s just trying to be even handed about it.
If you want an example of inaccuracy then it’s Andy saying she worked for the BoE for ‘just over four’ years. According to the BoE she worked there from September 2000 until March 2006 which, by most people’s reckoning, would be around five and a half years, but of course you won’t criticise AF’s account because 1) he’s the moderator and 2) his view supports your own.
Did she exaggerate? It would seem so, as have some of her critics. Is that acceptable? Not really and she should know better. Are we surprised? Hardly…she’s a politician talking about her achievements. Does it matter enormously? What GP said yesterday.

rA, my views don't 'support' Tricky's in any way, they happen to be similar in some places - nothing Tricky says as an opinion makes the slightest difference to my worldview, although some of his reports do warrant further investigation and can be fact checked as truthful. You still seem to have that moderator bee in your bonnet, Tricky's welcome to disagree with me, he won't get admonished for doing so, I thought we'd put all that to bed some time ago and the major protagonists of unrest have been better behaved (if a little childish still) since then

[Geoff Parkstone]

Oh do give it a rest, Tricky. I see you’re suddenly quoting the BBC now it suits, but Sith isn’t talking ‘absolute bull****’, he’s just trying to be even handed about it.
If you want an example of inaccuracy then it’s Andy saying she worked for the BoE for ‘just over four’ years. According to the BoE she worked there from September 2000 until March 2006 which, by most people’s reckoning, would be around five and a half years, but of course you won’t criticise AF’s account because 1) he’s the moderator and 2) his view supports your own.
Did she exaggerate? It would seem so, as have some of her critics. Is that acceptable? Not really and she should know better. Are we surprised? Hardly…she’s a politician talking about her achievements. Does it matter enormously? What GP said yesterday.

I think a couple of things are relevant if we must look at the details of this. (1) Did she really have to submit a CV in her job application to be an MP? (2) If she did, then surely whoever vetted it should have checked it's accuracy with a simple phonecall to BoE HR. That's what I've done in that past if CVs looked a tad fabricated. You just confirm it's veracity - and don't shout "GDPR" at me: you get the prospect to agree to you verifying the CV (and if they won't consent, that says all you need to know).

It's a non issue for me. I don't imagine that when elevating her to positions of authority anyone kept going back to her CV: it's about how well she performs in her previous work with the party (or more likely whose arse she licked &#128515