If you enjoy the Spectator's podcast, why not subscribe to the magazine as well?

You can get 12 weeks of the Spectator for just 12 pounds, plus a free 20 pound John Lewis or

weight trace voucher if you go to Spectator.

K. UK forward slash voucher.

This is a podcast only deal, and we hope you take us up on it.

Hello and welcome to Coffey House Shots

The Spectators Daily Politics Podcast.

I'm Katie Balls and I'm joined by John McTern and Kate Andrews.

So on Monday Rachel Reeves stood up at the dispatch box and said, despite perhaps previously indicating

there would be no need for additional tax rises, there could be more coming in autumn, and

in the meantime here are some spending cuts to beat. John

looking back on Rachel Reeves performance on Monday would you say it was good

politics even if it perhaps wasn't a hundred percent true?

Well look I think it was truthful and the total gap that

was found by the Treasury exercise by Rachel Treasury-led exercise was 35 billion

pounds but then she took off that and account for reserves, took off that and

account for some of the overspend that Treasury don't believe will happen around $7 billion.

And so I think the anger was real because the gap was real and the fact that immediately after the statement, about an hour after the statement, the OBR said they're going to be investigating how they came to give and such misleading information

for the preparation for the spring budget. I think that shows you that this that the

Rachel's touched a nerve and she's found something real and she for going forward

she's legislate for a different discipline on chancellors. She genuinely believes that the government played fast and loose with the numbers. I think she made the point pretty well yesterday and it is an important thing for her to do to say we had this inheritance from those people and she

wants to tie this deficit around the neck of the outgoing government on the specifics of

...