As Rachel Reeves becomes embroiled in a fresh row over the transparency of her CV, we sifted through the research paper at the centre of her latest controversy.
The research paper can be read as a paean to the importance of "clear" and "transparent" communication at a time when the Chancellor is grilled over the accuracy of her credentials.
The 2007 paper, jointly penned by Reeves when she was working as an economist, examines how the UK's financial markets react to Bank of England communication.
"Effective communication can help anchor expectations and assist in achieving the central bank's objectives," the 2007 paper states.
Reeves and her colleague note that "openness and communication" can play a role in enhancing the credibility of a central bank's actions, adding: "As a result, clarity and congruency of communication becomes more important."
GB News has sifted through the research paper at the centre of Rachel Reeves' latest controversy
Getty Images
An entire section of the paper is dedicated to the "relationship between transparency and the conduct of policy".
"Transparency is increasingly regarded as beneficial to an independent central bank with clear policy objectives," Reeves and her co-author wrote.
Reeves cites a comprehensive survey of the literature, which argues that "greater central bank transparency could reduce private sector uncertainty, give the central bank greater flexibility to stabilise economic disturbances, and reduce the volatility of output".
The then-economist also cites the work of one prominent academic who "makes the case that clarity is pre-requisite for transparency".
All told, we found 31 mentions of "transparency" in the single academic article.
This once obscure article has come under scrutiny this week because the Chancellor's ‘Who’s Who’ entry (short, standardised paragraph outlining a biographee's life) claimed she was previously a contributor to the prestigious Journal of Political Economy - one of the most prestigious and influential academic journals in the field of economics - when, in fact, this paper appeared in the less renowned European Journal of Political Economy.
There is no record of the Chancellor contributing to the much more respected journal.
This is said to be the equivalent of saying you went to the University of Oxford when, in fact, you went to Oxford Brookes.
Critics accuse Reeves of inflating her academic credentials to enhance her reputation as an economist.
LATEST MEMBERSHIP DEVELOPMENTS
Critics have accused Reeves of inflating her academic credentials to enhance her reputation as an economist
GB NewsAs she comes under fire, people close to her have said there was no record of how the entry had come to be made or who had approved the description of her publication record.
The Chancellor might have easily batted this away if it did not follow a slew of similar accusations about her CV, which include embellishing how long she worked as an economist at the Bank of England and her use of expenses during her time working with HBOS, a bank.
This followed an earlier investigation by the Financial Times, which claimed Reeves had lifted 20 passages wholesale from other sources without proper attribution.
Reeves held her "hands up" to the allegation, telling BBC Broadcasting House at the time: “It is true that there were some sentences in the book that were not properly referenced in the bibliography. I’m the author of that book, I hold my hands up and say I should’ve done better.”
