| Rayner resigns 13:04 - Sep 5 with 10037 views | Mullet |
A feather in the cap for the hypocritical right and a loss to British politics. A shame she’s gone but it shows a moral fibre that’s rarer these days in politics. |  |
| |  |
| Rayner resigns on 22:29 - Sep 5 with 1778 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Rayner resigns on 16:56 - Sep 5 by BlueForYou |
How are the right in any way hypocritical here? She's made her bed, she's made her decisions, she chose to bad mouth Conservatives in similar circumstances. She had become an embarrassment & had to go. A shame in that a young politician who clearly has passion for her party & beliefs, has had to receive such a public lesson in morality. Maybe she should have spent longer gaining experience in local government first? |
Angela Rayner was older when she became Deputy Prime Minister, than David Cameron was when he became Prime Minister. |  | | |
| Rayner resigns on 09:01 - Sep 6 with 1385 views | Bangor31 |
| Rayner resigns on 22:07 - Sep 5 by DJR |
I am not sure where my answering that question would take us given it effectively appears to amount to the following.
"If she intended to evade tax, would this change your opinion to meet the evasion threshold?"
For my own part, there doesn't seem any indication that she intended to evade tax and indeed the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards said she acted with integrity. |
For someone who is in the legal profession I would have thought better than petulant frostiness.
My point is quite clear. Is your opinion, in your personal capacity, that if she were aware of this legislation at some point prior to this event this would meet your threshold you would require to say this goes from mistake to evasion. I think it plausible that she didn't remember this information given it was 2 years ago but not sure if this is a valid defence, i also imagine Labour were in full war room mode re election campaign being imminent.
I clearly didn't say if you could prove she did it deliberately did this, is that then evasion. [Post edited 6 Sep 9:07]
| | | |
| Rayner resigns on 09:24 - Sep 6 with 1349 views | DJR |
| Rayner resigns on 09:01 - Sep 6 by Bangor31 |
For someone who is in the legal profession I would have thought better than petulant frostiness.
My point is quite clear. Is your opinion, in your personal capacity, that if she were aware of this legislation at some point prior to this event this would meet your threshold you would require to say this goes from mistake to evasion. I think it plausible that she didn't remember this information given it was 2 years ago but not sure if this is a valid defence, i also imagine Labour were in full war room mode re election campaign being imminent.
I clearly didn't say if you could prove she did it deliberately did this, is that then evasion. [Post edited 6 Sep 9:07]
|
I wouldn't' regard it as petulant frostiness but I just don't see where this is leading us.
Indeed, I think I have been fairly patient given I didn't understand what you were trying to ask me. I could, for example, have ignored your initial question and its follow up because of that but I did try to engage.
I am in any event not a tax lawyer or expert on tax evasion so am not really qualified to answer questions in this area.
All I would say is on the evidence I have seen, it doesn't appear to amount to tax evasion (which involves criminal intent), and I can't see HMRC pursuing her for that.
[Post edited 6 Sep 10:00]
|  | | |
| Rayner resigns on 12:11 - Sep 6 with 1235 views | DJR |
Interesting to note that the Cabinet has moved to the right with Miliband the only member from the so-called soft left.
It looks like it's all or nothing. | | | |
| Rayner resigns on 12:43 - Sep 6 with 1194 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Rayner resigns on 09:24 - Sep 6 by DJR |
I wouldn't' regard it as petulant frostiness but I just don't see where this is leading us.
Indeed, I think I have been fairly patient given I didn't understand what you were trying to ask me. I could, for example, have ignored your initial question and its follow up because of that but I did try to engage.
I am in any event not a tax lawyer or expert on tax evasion so am not really qualified to answer questions in this area.
All I would say is on the evidence I have seen, it doesn't appear to amount to tax evasion (which involves criminal intent), and I can't see HMRC pursuing her for that.
[Post edited 6 Sep 10:00]
|
She will presumably be in a difficult financial position even without a penalty charge.
She has £40,000 to finance on a salary that has just dropped £67,000. |  |
| |
| Rayner resigns on 15:16 - Sep 6 with 1099 views | OldFart71 |
| Rayner resigns on 13:27 - Sep 5 by baxterbasics |
Also, even ignoring the rights and wrongs of the tax situation, how does someone in her position manage to accumulate that much wealth? Career as a union rep and then MP / minister shouldn't be quite so rewarding. Similar to the millionaire Jeremy Corbyn and his career as an agitator at taxpayer expense.
Realise it's not just about these individuals but the whole parliament / government gravy train. |
We all want to be on that train, but for some it never reaches a station. I think we can say with a large degree of certainty that many ministers and MP's have in the past and currently lined their pockets when in power or have come out of power with nice little earners afterwards.
I think the question has to be asked whether the right type of people are putting themselves forward to serve us and that their objectives have to be brought into question.
I also believe that the aims of government have to be questioned when a large proportion of what they are doing in no way benefits those that put them into power. | | | |
| Rayner resigns on 16:59 - Sep 6 with 1030 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Rayner resigns on 12:43 - Sep 6 by Pinewoodblue |
She will presumably be in a difficult financial position even without a penalty charge.
She has £40,000 to finance on a salary that has just dropped £67,000. |
BUT salary is only part of political perks - the expense system means they don’t even need to spend much of their net income so disposable income is very high. In 2023 she claimed over 150k of expenses (admittedly some of which was staff costs). You’d also need to earn double that amount if you were to pay for those things out of a regular salary (ie it’s expenses are not taxable). Certainly means you can live a much more comfortable life than someone on an equivalent salary in the private sector- she’ll be fine I’m sure.
Not aimed at her specifically, but a general point around the net worth of politicians (that a couple have raised on here). | | | |
| Rayner resigns on 08:05 - Sep 7 with 571 views | nrb1985 |
Without wishing to be provocative, on another thread you told me you were outraged about tax avoidance.
Why is it you see no issue here out of curiosity?
FWIW - on the wider issue, I think she was a wonderful example of somebody whose succeeded when odds were stacked against her. Never the less, if you break the ministerial code, your personal circumstances should be irrelevant. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Rayner resigns on 08:28 - Sep 7 with 536 views | DJR |
| Rayner resigns on 16:59 - Sep 6 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
BUT salary is only part of political perks - the expense system means they don’t even need to spend much of their net income so disposable income is very high. In 2023 she claimed over 150k of expenses (admittedly some of which was staff costs). You’d also need to earn double that amount if you were to pay for those things out of a regular salary (ie it’s expenses are not taxable). Certainly means you can live a much more comfortable life than someone on an equivalent salary in the private sector- she’ll be fine I’m sure.
Not aimed at her specifically, but a general point around the net worth of politicians (that a couple have raised on here). |
In another life, I was involved in drafting the Parliamentary resolutions that govern the allowances and expenses of MPs.
In those days (the late 80s and 90s), as now, increasing the salaries of MPs to what they should be was unpopular, and so the allowances and expenses system was used as a clandestine means of overcoming that.
Its generosity ended up with the expenses scandal and things have been considerably tightened since then. For example, it is no longer possible for the system to effectively help fund the acquisition of a second home but instead expenses are limited to the cost of renting or staying in a hotel in the case of someone with a constituency outside London who needs a place in London to carry out their Parliamentary duties.
There was some suggestion at the time such changes were made that they could cost the taxpayer more, and if it were down to me I would prefer that the salaries of MPs properly reflected the importance of their work, along with a very limited expenses system. But that ain't ever going to happen. [Post edited 7 Sep 8:34]
| | | |
| Rayner resigns on 08:50 - Sep 7 with 495 views | Mullet |
| Rayner resigns on 08:05 - Sep 7 by nrb1985 |
Without wishing to be provocative, on another thread you told me you were outraged about tax avoidance.
Why is it you see no issue here out of curiosity?
FWIW - on the wider issue, I think she was a wonderful example of somebody whose succeeded when odds were stacked against her. Never the less, if you break the ministerial code, your personal circumstances should be irrelevant. |
Not provocative in slightest. I’m not praising Rayners actions, but lamenting the fact that she has been treated differently for what is essentially a much lesser offence/mistake (politics dependent). One she has resigned over.
Politics on the right is riddled with schemes, companies and active attempts to hide money abroad whilst lamenting the mess they created and talking the country down. Reforms live speeches on bbc news yesterday did just that. Once from tice who has fled to Dubai to avoid it, the other from Farage who has spent years providing, advising and using every scheme possible to avoid tax.
Let alone he is guilty of the same thing as AR on a larger scale. She is a massive loss to British politics because she is so different and has achieved so much as you say.
The media treatment of her is the hypocrisy most at the forefront of this. | |
| |
| Rayner resigns on 10:03 - Sep 7 with 375 views | DJR |
| Rayner resigns on 08:05 - Sep 7 by nrb1985 |
Without wishing to be provocative, on another thread you told me you were outraged about tax avoidance.
Why is it you see no issue here out of curiosity?
FWIW - on the wider issue, I think she was a wonderful example of somebody whose succeeded when odds were stacked against her. Never the less, if you break the ministerial code, your personal circumstances should be irrelevant. |
Had Rayner intended to underpay SDLT it would be tax evasion not tax avoidance but as she was found to have acted with integrity, it is not clear to me that that was her intention.
However, she didn't seek further tax advice and for this (which indicates to me a lack of thoroughness on her part) she was (rightly in my view) found to have broken the ministerial code. | | | |
| Rayner resigns on 10:07 - Sep 7 with 364 views | nrb1985 |
| Rayner resigns on 08:50 - Sep 7 by Mullet |
Not provocative in slightest. I’m not praising Rayners actions, but lamenting the fact that she has been treated differently for what is essentially a much lesser offence/mistake (politics dependent). One she has resigned over.
Politics on the right is riddled with schemes, companies and active attempts to hide money abroad whilst lamenting the mess they created and talking the country down. Reforms live speeches on bbc news yesterday did just that. Once from tice who has fled to Dubai to avoid it, the other from Farage who has spent years providing, advising and using every scheme possible to avoid tax.
Let alone he is guilty of the same thing as AR on a larger scale. She is a massive loss to British politics because she is so different and has achieved so much as you say.
The media treatment of her is the hypocrisy most at the forefront of this. |
I don't disagree with any of that.
I just would have thought that given your earlier comments on tax avoidance you may have taken a slightly dimmer view of AR.
Tice is a piece of sh1t as is his missus. Fortunately, as this episode has shown, most of our MPs are able to hold themselves to a much higher standard than him or the shower of cnts in his party. | | | |
| Rayner resigns on 10:07 - Sep 7 with 363 views | EdwardStone |
Powerful article, many thanks for sharing |  | | |
| Rayner resigns on 10:08 - Sep 7 with 359 views | nrb1985 |
| Rayner resigns on 10:03 - Sep 7 by DJR |
Had Rayner intended to underpay SDLT it would be tax evasion not tax avoidance but as she was found to have acted with integrity, it is not clear to me that that was her intention.
However, she didn't seek further tax advice and for this (which indicates to me a lack of thoroughness on her part) she was (rightly in my view) found to have broken the ministerial code. |
This is pretty much my sentiment exactly.
My post was rather in relation to the OP's previous comments on tax avoidance. | | | |
| Rayner resigns on 10:12 - Sep 7 with 342 views | Mullet |
| Rayner resigns on 10:07 - Sep 7 by nrb1985 |
I don't disagree with any of that.
I just would have thought that given your earlier comments on tax avoidance you may have taken a slightly dimmer view of AR.
Tice is a piece of sh1t as is his missus. Fortunately, as this episode has shown, most of our MPs are able to hold themselves to a much higher standard than him or the shower of cnts in his party. |
I don’t know how dimmer I can be someone who has thrown away their career and credibility at a time when she needed to be at the top of her game.
I also genuinely think it was done from ignorance not avarice, unlike those wanting her blood do. I’ve not said it’s right or ok, I think the assumption that you have to be binary on everything these days is incredibly damaging.
She’s paid the price and it’s much higher than much worse which is my main issue. I also think the classism and sexism at the heart of it are appalling. | |
| |
| Rayner resigns on 10:29 - Sep 7 with 311 views | Swansea_Blue |
Whatever your thoughts on her tax issue, she’s undoubtedly a loss to the government and as that article shows to the people. It’s a perfect outcome for the rich and powerful who she was a threat to though. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
