Opinion
British PM Starmer’s vain attempt to defend Reeves
British Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves’ tax-hiking budget prompted criticism from businesses and farmers, and despite Labour pledging to boost the economy at the centre of its plans, growth has been sluggish. Now the chancellor is facing questions about whether she exaggerated her experience on her online CV and her use of expenses while working in the banking sector before she became an MP.
Her career at HBOS has come under scrutiny, after the BBC revealed that Reeves and two colleagues were the subject of an expenses probe while she was a senior manager at the bank. The initial stage of the HBOS investigation found that a whistleblower’s complaint was substantiated, and the three employees appeared to have broken the rules, according to a senior source with direct knowledge of the probe. The BBC has not been able to establish what the final outcome of the investigation was and it might not have concluded.
A spokesman for Reeves said the chancellor had no knowledge of the investigation, always complied with expenses rules and left the bank on good terms. A spokesman for Reeves said the chancellor had no knowledge of the investigation, always complied with expenses rules and left the bank on good terms. A spokesman for Reeves confirmed that dates on her LinkedIn were inaccurate and blamed an administrative error by the team.
Last year, her LinkedIn profile was also changed to describe her role at HBOS as “Retail Banking”. It had previously claimed she worked as an economist at the bank, but she instead held a management role in the bank’s customer relations department, which dealt with complaints. Entering Parliament in 2010, an early mentor on economic policy was Alistair Darling – the last Labour chancellor, during the financial crisis.
She quickly rose up the party’s ranks, shadowing roles at the Treasury, Work and Pensions, and the Cabinet Office.
Throughout Jeremy Corbyn’s four and a half years as Labour leader, she remained on the backbenches because she felt she could not endorse his policies. Called a “Red Tory” by some in the party, she described this as a “very unpleasant period” in an interview with the BBC’s Nick Robinson.
In October 2023, she admitted she “should have done better” after it emerged some passages in her book, The Women Who Made Modern Economics, had been lifted from other sources without acknowledgment. She told the BBC some sentences “were not properly referenced” and this would be corrected in future reprints.
Last July, Reeves became the country’s first female chancellor and quickly faced what she described as “tough choices”.
She claimed a “black hole” in the nation’s finances meant winter fuel payments would have to be cut for millions of pensioners and National Insurance hiked for employers.
Despite Labour’s attempts to win over businesses during the election campaign, many were disappointed they bore the brunt of the £40bn in tax rises announced in her first Budget. Before winning power, Reeves promised she would govern with “iron discipline” and bring stability to the public finances, leading to comparisons with Conservative “Iron Chancellor” Margaret Thatcher.
On Friday, Reeves was asked about the expenses claims directly. She said: “No-one ever raised any concerns about my expenses when I worked for Halifax Bank of Scotland.” She said her expenses had been “signed off in the proper way” and “no issues were ever raised” during her time at the bank.
Her expenses were signed off by her manager, who was also one of the three employees who were the subject of the expenses probe. Reeves left the bank in May 2009, as did her boss. The other senior manager was on sick leave in May and never returned to work at the bank. There is no suggestion any of the departures were linked to the investigation or spending issues and a spokesman for Reeves said the chancellor left the bank on good terms. Reeves has accepted the findings of another part of our investigation, this time over her CV. We established that the chancellor had exaggerated the length of time she worked at the Bank of England. The BBC News investigation revealed that concerns were raised about Reeves’s expenses while working at HBOS between 2006 and 2009. A detailed six-page whistleblowing complaint was submitted, with dozens of pages of supporting documents including emails, receipts and memos.
The complaint led to an internal investigation by the bank’s risk department.
This was passed to internal audit, which reviewed the allegations and concluded that they were substantiated and there appeared to be evidence of wrongdoing by Reeves and her two colleagues, according to a senior source with direct knowledge of the investigation. What we have not been able to establish is what happened next and whether the bank ever reached a formal conclusion.
On Friday, Science Secretary Peter Kyle told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the reporting was “inaccurate”.
Both he and Siobhain McDonagh, a Labour MP who appeared on BBC’s Politics Live on Thursday, raised comments by a former HR manager, Jane Wayper – which, they said, disproved the BBC News’s story.
Wayper spoke to the BBC after being given permission to do so by Reeves’s team.
She provided an on-the-record statement which said she “would have been made aware of any investigation which concluded there was a case to answer” on the basis that she “would have been required to organise and oversee a disciplinary process”. However, the BBC has not reported that the case reached a formal conclusion, or that there was disciplinary action. Kyle incorrectly claimed that the quote had not been included in our report – but it had been in the article since it was first published on Thursday morning. He also incorrectly referred to Wayper as the head of HR at the bank. In reality she was an HR business partner working in the department where Reeves worked. On Friday, Reeves was asked about the expenses claims directly. She said: “No-one ever raised any concerns about my expenses when I worked for Halifax Bank of Scotland.” She said her expenses had been “signed off in the proper way” and “no issues were ever raised” during her time at the bank. Her expenses were signed off by her manager, who was also one of the three employees who were the subject of the expenses probe. Reeves left the bank in May 2009, as did her boss. The other senior manager was on sick leave in May and never returned to work at the bank. There is no suggestion any of the departures were linked to the investigation or spending issues and a spokesman for Reeves said the chancellor left the bank on good terms. We established that the chancellor had exaggerated the length of time she worked at the Bank of England. Reeves has often said she spent the “best part of a decade” working at the bank when setting out her credentials to run the economy to voters.
However, her LinkedIn profile said she only worked there for six years – from September 2000 to December 2006. A year of that time was spent studying at the London School of Economics (LSE).
The BBC has now established that Reeves left the Bank of England in March 2006, meaning the time she spent working there amounts to five and a half years. A spokesman for Reeves confirmed that dates on her LinkedIn were inaccurate and said it was due to an administrative error by the team. Her profile on the social media site has since been updated.
Shame on both the Prime Minister & the Chancellor!!
Sunil Dharmabandhu
Wales, UK
Opinion
Tribute to Vijitha Senevirathna
APPRECIATION
On Friday, the 20th of March, Vijitha Senevirathna would have celebrated his 85th birthday if not for his sad passing away nearly a year ago.
The passing of Vijitha was a moment of great sorrow to all who knew him.
He was my classmate from Montessori to pre-university at Maris Stella College, Negombo. As a Maristonian, Vijitha excelled in his academic studies.
Eventually, he entered the Law College and practised as an Attorney-at-Law and Notary Public for over 50 years.
As an Attorney-at-Law, Vijitha earned the respect of the judiciary and a wide circle of clients. He upheld the highest and most cherished values of the legal profession and earned the trust of all who knew him. His 50th anniversary in the noble profession of law was celebrated with much pageantry, amidst a distinguished gathering of friends, relations, clerics, and the rich and famous of Sri Lanka.
Vijitha dearly loved his proud wife Nirmali and his six children, who are in the highest professions in Sri Lanka. He inculcated among his children professional efficiency, diligence, and honesty.
We who associated closely with Vijitha miss his warm friendship, sense of humor, and animated conversation. He was a raconteur, and people gathered around him and listened to his narrations and tales of yore, especially at the many celebrations at his residence in Dehiwala, where the waters of Scotland flowed generously.
I have personally admired Vijitha’s patience, grit, and lifetime achievements, despite a physical dysfunctionality he suffered over his lifetime.
For Vijitha, the song has ended, but the melody lingers on, in the words of the popular composer Irving Berlin.
Merrick Gooneratne
Opinion
Contrasting Strategy – Aggression vs support
China has invested more than USD 60 Billion in Venezuela and plans to invest further in that country. This is happening despite the abduction by the US of Venezuela’s president Maduro and his wife and US President Donald Trump’s boastful claim that he will be selling Venezuela’s oil. And what is even more surprising is that the Venezuelan Ambassador to China says nobody but Venezuela will decide the price of its oil and to whom it sells. He has assured that Chinese investments in his country will be safe and secure.
According to media reports, Venezuelan Ambassador to China, Remigio Ceballos, has stated that Venezuela will determine the price of its oil exports to China independently, asserting that prices will follow international market trends rather than dictates by the United States. Ceballos has stated that Caracas “will not heed the arrangements of the US or other countries” on oil pricing. The remarks followed reports that the U.S. is planning to exercise control over Venezuela’s state-run oil company, PDVSA, and potentially push prices down to $50 per barrel. Ceballos sought to reassure China that its investments in the South American country remained secure, emphasising that China and Venezuela are “trusted partners”. The ambassador clarified that despite geopolitical tensions, Venezuela would not follow Washington-led pricing structures, ensuring its oil remains competitive. These statements came in response to intense geopolitical maneuvering in early 2026 regarding Venezuela’s oil sector and its ongoing energy relationship with China (CNBC, 4th Feb. 2026).
Failure of agression
These developments reveal the failure of aggression in the face of support and cooperation. The US imposed crippling sanctions on Venezuela while China helped it to survive. Finally, true to form, the US did what it does best, take out the leader, like it did in Iraq, Libya and several other countries. Nowhere has this strategy succeeded, whereas the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative has been welcomed in most countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. China provides leadership in several key international associations and organisations designed to foster, or in some cases offer alternatives to, the existing global order. Key groupings include the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), BRICS, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), alongside specialised UN agencies and regional forums like the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC). In contrast most of the US led organizations such as NATO, QUAD, AUKUS, are military alliances. Further, the US has defence agreements with several countries which are strategically vital for its interests, in the Middle East, Africa, Americas and Asia. China does not have a formal alliance requiring it to fight for another country. China adopts an anti-alliance policy and officially opposes NATO-like military alliances, arguing they create “small cliques” that cause confrontations in the region. China focuses on strategic partnerships rather than formal blocs, treating various countries as partners to avoid the confrontational nature of alliances.
With regards to aid, while the US focuses on capacity building China seems to believe that infrastructure development is more beneficial and would help the recipient country to develop its economy and be independent. Sri Lanka has experience with these US capacity building programmes and know that they are more often aimed at influencing the participants to change their political orientation and to be aligned with Western socio-political ideology. It is said that these programmes may have helped the US to bring about a regime change in the country. In Cambodia, too, the US has conducted capacity building programmes which the discerning Cambodians are suspicious of. China is the largest source of Foreign Direct Investment and top trading partner for Cambodia, with investment totaling over $23 billion by mid-2024, heavily focused on manufacturing, infrastructure, and real estate. Key projects under the Belt and Road Initiative include highways, hydroelectric dams, special economic zones, and the $1.7 billion Funan Techo Canal.
Bid to counter Chinese influence
The US attempts to counter the burgeoning advances of China by use of force. The abduction of President Maduro of Venezuela, the country with the largest oil deposits and increasingly coming under the influence of China, was its diabolical response. This criminal act shows the poverty of the US strategy. What it could do instead is develop cordial relations and respect the rights these countries must have in deciding on their socio-political structures and help them to come out of poverty without bullying and exploiting their resources. If that had been their policy no other country would have an opportunity to get a foothold in their backyard.
Iran joined the BRICS and was in the process of mending its fences with Saudi Arabia, a staunch ally of the US, with Chinese mediation. Saudi Arabia was also joining the BRICS, which is not well-disposed towards the US. China was planing to invest heavily in Iran. China and Iran signed a 25-year, $400 billion strategic cooperation agreement in 2021, aiming to boost energy and infrastructure.. The US and its ally in the Middle East, Israel, could not silently watch those developments that they saw as a threat to their hegemony and dominance in the region. The US felt the need to thwart the Chinese advance and also the growth of BRICS while Israel saw it as an opportunity to wipe out the opposition to its master plan of total genocide of Palestinians and grabbing their ancestral land in whole.
After killing Iranian supreme leader and bombarding the country into what they thought was submission, Trump said he must have a say in the appointment of the next leader and also that Ayatollah’s son was not acceptable to him. He demanded unconditional surrender of Iran and said there probably would not be anybody in Iran even to declare a surrender. Iran has not only said it will never surrender but also gone ahead and appointed the murdered supreme leader’s son as his successor. Trump said the Iranian navy was gone, its air force was gone, missile stockpiles were gone and it was already defeated. But Iran miraculously continues to fire missiles at Israel and US bases in the neighbouring countries.
Iran probably will be defeated in the war, but whether the US and Israel will achieve their goals is most unlikely. The underlying reason for this conflict is the problem of Palestine. The two-state solution adopted by the UN could be the basis for peace. The US knows this but it does not want peace in the Middle East. It can exploit the oil resources in the region by keeping it under eternal turmoil. This policy perfectly suits Israel as well and it exploits the situation to commit genocide of the Palestinians and grab their land.
In this era of multipolarity with several countries possessing long range missiles and nuclear capability and several of those countries being not in friendly terms with either US or Israel, re-arming, re-grouping and re-emerging of forces that will continue the anti-imperialist, anti-expansionist struggle cannot be prevented.
If only US, Europe emulate China
If the US and also the influential Europe could see how beneficial the policy adopted by China could be to everybody living on this planet, there would be peace in the world. This is what the Chinese have been telling the West while it engages in confrontation and aggression against those who do not fall in line and abide by their dictate. Chinese have shown their readiness to help everybody without discrimination, whether foe or friend of the US. China has significantly increased its investment in Saudi Arabia and other US allies in the Middle East, with 2024 seeing a record high in BRI (Belt and Road Initiative) engagement—reaching $39 billion in construction contracts and investments in the region. Saudi Arabia has emerged as the top recipient of Chinese investment, with over 93 projects initiated since 2021 despite it being one of the staunchest allies of the US in the Middle East with a large US military presence. The US has its largest military base in the Middle East in Qatar. Yet China has heavily invested in Qatar, primarily focusing on energy, infrastructure, and financial sectors. Major investments include Sinopec and CNPC securing stakes in Qatar’s North Field East LNG expansion projects, as well as significant participation in infrastructure projects like the Hamad Port and Lusail Stadium.
Vietnam, a victim of US aggression, has recently signed a defence cooperation agreement with it. Yet China has invested heavily in Vietnam, becoming a top source of foreign direct investment and leading in new projects as of 2025–2026. Chinese firms are investing billions in high-tech, electronics, and manufacturing in Vietnam, with over $6.7 billion pledged between January and November 2025.
Based on reports from international human rights organisations, the U.S. Department of State, and various news analyses, Saudi Arabia is widely considered a highly repressive, authoritarian country with intensified crackdown on political dissent, freedom of expression, and human rights activists. In 2016, the kingdom executed 146 people, including a mass execution of 47 men on January 2. The US says it’s attacking Iran because it is repressive, but in truth it is doing so because Iran does not toe its line, Saudi Arabia does and goes scot-free.
All in all, in this imperfect world what everybody must do is help each other disregarding their imperfections. If the US and also Europe try to emulate China, the world, in the least, would be safer.
(Some information contained in this article is from Wikipedia.)
by N. A. de S. Amaratunga
Opinion
Governance by beliefs
My father was an ardent believer of astrology. It was his hobby. As a result, not only my family, friends, and neighbours had horoscopes, but our pets also had their own. No need to say, my early life was choreographed according to celestial movements. When I sat for my ordinary level exam, father came up with an auspicious time to leave for the exam. This posed a huge logistical and psychological challenge. I was at Ananda hostel at that time, and he suggested that I leave at the auspicious time, which was more than an hour ahead of start time, sat in the basketball court until the doors open to the examination hall.
I told him no way. Not only that I would be laughingstock, but it would also disrupt the daily routine of study hall, breakfast, and arriving on time without wasting precious time, and disturbing the important mental harmony. By this time, I also had developed enough courage not to accept tradition without justification, mainly thanks to Ven. Kotagama Wachissara thero, our Dhamma teacher. It must have hurt his feelings, but my father backed out. I did well in the exam, and that was the last time I had anything to do with astrology.
Not exactly, when we got married, our parents came up with an auspicious time for the traditional ceremony, but due to a logistical hitch, we missed it. Not to worry, after five decades, the spark has not left and things are going smoothly. Since then, we have moved across continents, taken up jobs, moved into houses, and brought up kids without the assistance of astrology. Similarly, I know countless people who lead successful, happy, and prosperous lives without ever having heard of astrology.
Vedic Astrology, also called Jyotish, originated over 5,000 years ago in India. It is deeply rooted in the Vedas, ancient Hindu scriptures. Western Astrology began around 2,000 years ago in Mesopotamia and developed further in Greece and Rome. For millennia, humanity has tried to correlate celestial movements with terrestrial events, especially seasonal changes, for the benefit of agriculture, maritime navigation, and trade over long distances. This “mundane astrology” was a practical effort to bring order to a chaotic world. Naturally, the ancients extended this study to interpret the effect of celestial events on the individual. Vedic Astrology emphasises spiritual growth, while Western Astrology focuses on personality and psychological traits.
Until the 17th century, astrology and astronomy were virtually indistinguishable. Great scientists like Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton practised astrology or lived in a world where it was considered a legitimate academic discipline. However, Enlightenment, or the Age of Reason in the 17th–18th century, which emphasises reason, individualism, and skepticism toward tradition introduced a rigorous scientific method that astrology could not satisfy. From a physical standpoint, the gravitational or electromagnetic influence of distant planets on a newborn human is negligible compared to the influence of the immediate environment. Parenting, education, and social background, for example.
Consequently, the scientific community classifies astrology as a pseudoscience, noting that its predictions rely on the tendency for people to find personal meaning in vague, generalized statements. Once a person starts believing this system, they tend to seek out and remember information that confirms their beliefs while ignoring or rationalising the many times the predictions were wrong. Phrases like “You will go through a difficult time during such a period” feel personal, but who would not go through challenging times in their lives. This is called the Barnum Effect. In times of high stress or uncertainty, astrology provides a sense of structure and predictability, making a chaotic world feel more manageable.
Vedic Astrology uses the sidereal zodiac, which aligns with the actual positions of stars and constellations. In contrast, Western Astrology relies on the tropical zodiac, based on the Earth’s seasons. The sidereal zodiac reflects fixed star positions, while the tropical zodiac shifts due to the Earth’s axial precession. Unlike my father, I know nothing about astrological calculations, but I wonder if the current disagreement on the New Year auspicious times is a result of following such different methods.
There is some validity in having a unified timetable for major events as it can coordinate and bring together a community, or an entire nation in this case. It is a good thing. However, it cannot be denied that astrology is a belief system that the individual must decide to accept or reject depending on their own wishes. Expecting the government to take any part in endorsing a belief system that has absolutely no empirical evidence goes beyond lunacy. Where would it stop? Do we expect the government to decide the auspicious time to get married, indula katagema, or akuru kiyaweema of children? Instead, we must demand our government get out of pandering to belief systems of any nature and focus on the business of governance based on facts and figures.
In our household, we celebrate New Year to suit our lifestyle: we cook a special meal, but on the same old stove, at our convenience so that it does not disrupt the regular mealtimes and share it with family and friends. It is a social event for sharing fun and goodwill. We tell the children about the traditions, how they started, and the food, but we do not expect them to subscribe to any belief systems and engage in meaningless activities that waste their time and resources. We expect them to grow up to be realistic, yathabutha, not bahubutha, as my grandfather would have said.
by Geewananda Gunawardana
-
News7 days agoHistoric address by BASL President at the Supreme Court of India
-
Sports7 days agoThe 147th Royal–Thomian and 175 Years of the School by the Sea
-
Business3 days agoBrowns EV launches fast-charging BAW E7 Pro at Rs. 5.8 million
-
Life style4 days agoFrom culture to empowerment: Indonesia’s vision for Sri Lanka
-
News7 days agoPower sector reforms jolted by 40% pay hike demand
-
Latest News4 days agoQR code system will be implemented for fuel with effect from 06.00 a.m. today (15th)
-
Opinion6 days agoM. D. Banda: Memories of Appachchi – II
-
News2 days agoAustralian HC debunks misleading travel risk claims for Sri Lanka
