Business Secretary Accused of Fabricating CV – as Rachel From Accounts is Caught Embellishing Her CV Again
The Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds has been accused of fabricating his CV after it emerged he repeatedly described himself as a solicitor despite never qualifying. The Telegraph has more.
The Business Secretary previously claimed on his website that he worked as a solicitor in the Manchester branch of the law firm Addleshaw Goddard before becoming an MP.
He also told the Commons in 2014 that he “worked as a solicitor in Manchester city centre” before switching careers.
In fact, he didn’t qualify for the title because he never finished his training contract, having quit the course in 2010 to run for Parliament.
This means he never registered with the Solicitors Regulation Authority, which is required to legally practice as a solicitor in England and Wales.
He also previously stated on his LinkedIn profile that he was simultaneously a “solicitor” and a “trainee solicitor” between 2009 and 2010, according to screenshots obtained by the political blog Guido Fawkes, which first reported the discrepancies.
Mr Reynolds also implied he had worked as a solicitor in a tweet in 2011, the year after he was first elected as an MP.
“Personally, I find being an MP better for work/life balance than being a solicitor and a councillor,” he said.
The relevant webpage from Mr Reynolds’s site no longer exists, while his LinkedIn now only makes reference to his role as “trainee solicitor” at Addleshaw Goddard.
Elsewhere, Mr Reynolds has also described himself as a trainee, or training to become a solicitor.
According to Guido, a spokesman for the Business Secretary said his reference to working as a solicitor in 2014 was a mistake, and that he tries to make clear he was only ever a trainee.
Meanwhile, Rachel from Accounts has come under fire once more after it emerged that she falsely claimed to have published in one of the world’s leading economic journals. From the Mail:
The Chancellor’s entry in Who’s Who, the biographical reference publication, lists her as a contributor to the Journal of Political Economy.
But, according to the Times, the prestigious journal has no record of any article by Ms Reeves.
The Chancellor and an ex-colleague were found to have instead published a 2007 paper in a less well-regarded publication, the European Journal of Political Economy.
The error has been compared to claiming to have studied at the University of Oxford rather than the lower-ranked Oxford Brookes University.
Ms Reeves’ entry in Who’s Who also lists her as having worked as an economist at the Bank of England until 2009, despite her having left in March 2006.
An exaggeration of the Chancellor’s time at the Bank has previously attracted controversy, with Ms Reeves having once boasted of working there for “a decade”.
In total, the Chancellor spent five years and seven months at the Bank.
Her LinkedIn profile was recently updated after it was revealed to show she had worked there for months longer.
It was pointed out that those with entries in Who’s Who are asked to review, update and correct them each year.
Sir Richard Barnett, an Emeritus Professor at the University of Ulster, told the newspaper that the two economic journals were “chalk and cheese”.
“One is world leading, it’s where economists aspire to publish and it’s incredibly competitive to get published in the Journal of Political Economy,” he said.
Also worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I got A level biology so I suppose I’m a trainee doctor.
On LinkedIn you’d be a surgeon at a minimum!
It is a cultural thing. I would wager that at least eighty percent of people embellish their CV to a greater or lesser extent. It is more or less encouraged that a CV is a way of selling yourself or making yourself stand out. This is so stupid for so many reasons. A CV would be a better document all round if it were a list of all the major things that you messed up in your life. You could learn far more about a person if it were geared this way.
Embellishment is one thing, lying like a cheap Japanese watch is quite another.
Oi.. I’ll have nothing bad said about the Foxtrot Nine One Whisky Alpha… The casio classic watch has been the favoured timepiece of British military operations for decades! 😅
I have a couple of Casio’s but haven’t got an F91. I had one but I think I lost it in the garden somewhere. I have the “metal” version the A168 and got my first G Shock recently, the legendary DW5600.
Love Casio watches.
GBA-800 for me, present from No. 1 daughter. Bloody marvellous.
I will look that one up tof, thanks.
Not the G1098 watch of choice. Personal choice is another thing.🙄😁
I agree. I’d also add that if you aspire to public office and lie over something so easily provable to be a lie, then you are an idiot, or shameless, or arrogant, or guaranteed success either way, or brazenly corrupt. That or a combination of any/all.
They obviously have the sense that even if we do discern their lies, which they must know is at least a strong possibility, then it doesn’t matter anyway because we do not have the power to dislodge such people from power. They always end up like that in the last stages, no regard for perception and then they go down very rapidly.
And as a consequence of the above are unfit for Public Office.
They are all unfit for public office hence our current state of affairs. Any person who was fit for public office would steer well clear of this miasma. This is the issue not just infiltration but an ongoing infiltration for decades so that we live in a time where only the toxic can succeed. It isn’t just standards in public life that have gone it is all gone. Truth, beauty, everything. You can have a hard time working out how not to lie down and worship the beast.
Fair point.
One of my favourite interview questions to ask that one, ‘what’s the biggest mistake you’ve made at work?’. Naturally it leads to ‘and how did you manage the situation… however you’d be surprised the amount of people who try and say ‘I’ve not made any’ (which tends to write them off for me). If you aren’t making mistakes, then you aren’t trying hard enough…
So a trainee solicitor who never actually qualified as a solicitor has claimed he was a solicitor when he surely must have known the grounds for qualification; it would be impossible not to sum up thus… he lied and is therefore a liar.
Third World shithole being run by Turd World apprentice gangsters.
What a firkin state we are in.
I suspect trainee solicitors are subject to the same code of conduct as fully qualified ones. That could be checked.It is bound to contain obligations of honesty and openness.
He was clearly spoofing it on the CV… kind of expected tbh
Par for the Westminster imposters’ course. Didn’t qualify as a solicitor, but says he did. Degree in Politics and Modern History, worked for the council, political assistant, MP since 2010…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Reynolds
…Appointed Business Secretary, but no experience of business. Ditto, Chancellor with no experince of finance, Foreign Secretary with no experience of foreign affairs, etc, etc, etc.
GOV.UK in a nutshell for decades. Blind leading the blind.
They are so shit at this lying malarkey I mean if you’re that careless and inconsistent and lacking in nous then surely the best course of action is to keep your mouth shut and stay out of scrutiny. This is an interesting element that has appeared in the neoliberal era – the shamelessness, no sense of embarrassment. The comedian Barry Humphries said it about Blair and his ilk – there is no shame. They don’t care if you catch them lying they know that they are invincible. They will say the stupidest things in order to bolster their personal advancement.
I swear some of them don’t even know they are doing it, as they feel they are so ‘right’ they can’t possibly be wrong… lack of self awareness
Slightly Off-T but Sean Walsh at TCW provides a wonderful summary of the bolloking J D Vance gave to the EU politburo. Suck it up you t#ssers.
“Yes, I know, it is not recommended intellectual practice to grade a speech by looking at who was offended by it, but the anthropology is remarkable. The Zil lane Eurocommissars and their pet media outriders were forced to sit, open mouthed, as Vance spoon-fed them a three-course meal consisting of their own locally produced confusions, hypocrisies and tyrannical excesses.
By the end some of the prisoners looked a touch bilious, possibly because they were allowed only 20 minutes to eat it all up before being granted permission to leave the table. Sorry, conference room.”
On a similar note here’s a twitter post which if not already will definitely go viral…
J D Vance – Europe does not accept free speech.
Europe – the J D Vance speech is not acceptable.
😀😀😀
This should be investigated by the Solicitors Regulator Authority ( SRA) as it is actually a criminal offence to pass yourself off as a solicitor.
Fancy putting a liar in charge of what was formerly the DTI now the BIS ,responsible for regulating and prosecuting crooks in the world of business.
Maybe a file should be opened on him.
It is funny I mean why would you even bother who gives a fuck if you were a solicitor for a few months or not. Is that going to make you move into the super league, your brief stint with legal matters?
Clearly they think so…
Of course he’s a solicitor.
Every weekday evening he’s out soliciting.
It might be easier if we were notified when one of Two-Tier’s Ministers is found not to be a blatant liar.
I do hope you are correct.
Referred to Parliamentary Standards Commission. Come on, Reform, force a bye election, and thereby force the MSM to confront reality