Angela Rayner

What do people think about what Rayner did ?
Should she lose her job or get away with it ?
Comments
-
Who cares!
0 -
I feel sympathy for Angela Rayner, though I do not know all the facts. If she knowingly broke the rules, that would be serious. But from what has been shared, it is easy to see how someone could be caught out.
She set up a trust for her disabled son and described a nesting arrangement, where the children stay in one home and the parents take turns living there. While this makes emotional sense, tax law does not recognise it.
HMRC applied deeming provisions, treating certain trusts as if the parent still owns another property. This can create tax liability even when the home is held in trust.
It highlights risks for disabled families, especially around trusts and property. The system needs review to better reflect real-life care, not just technical ownership. Life is hard enough for families trying to secure a future for disabled children, and the rules should be simpler.
I give her the benefit of the doubt. Trust law is complex, and HMRC’s approach can be harsh.
2 -
I don't care, and nor should you. This circus with Rayner is a distractino from the {removed by moderator - uncivil} government's democide of marginalised Brits (such as disabled people, trans people and asylum seekers) {removed by moderator - uncivil}
{removed by moderator - again, see house rules}
1 -
All this 'ee ba gum' , she's one of us rhetoric, Prescott was the same.
They are no better than the posh boys, just were later to getting their snouts in the trough.
2 -
Can I please just remind everyone that name calling and uncivil language is not allowed on the community. Opinions are fine (facts are better,) name calling is not. If you're unsure, please see the updated house rules. Thanks. 😊
1 -
During the so-called "Welfare Reform Bill" vote, she said that any Labour MP who would have voted against the bill should have been kicked out of Labour Party. Therefore, I feel no sympathy for her whatsoever, as she doesn't have any sympathy for others.
In addition, Labour is currently discussing a proposal that would impose a new tax on properties valued over £500,000, while she's dodging the stamp duty herself.
5 -
Couldn't see beyond the end of her nose - too firmly stuck in the trough.
3 -
{Link removed by moderator - uncivil language used}
"Tax avoidance costs lives" - Angela Rayner.
2 -
Yanno. It's crazy to be so out for blood with this. If they do the enquiry and she's purposely broken laws then of course she cannot remain. But untill then I guess innocent untill proven guilty.
2 -
She should be sacked we get questioned for uber eats and minor purchases its not acceptable and we will face more misery in months to come
1 -
Given her position she needs to be scrupulous in every transaction, and it appears she may not have been scrupulous.
This BBC article outlines the timeline.
My view is if she was given incorrect advice, she should publicly sue the lawyer/financial advisor.
If she was given correct advice, and then proceeded illegally, then she should pay the same price as anyone else who has committed fraud.
2 -
Deleted: duplicate post
0 -
She was given incorrect advice, but she asked advice from a firm who was not qualified to give formal advice
You're allowed to ask a financial advisor for informal advice outside of their remit but they have to be very explicit that they are not giving formal advice
If they didn't make it clear that they're not experts and their answer didn't constitute formal advice, they would be liable
If they did make it clear, it's up to her to scrutinise the advise - if she acts on it without doing any more diligence then it's on her
To make it more complicated it's been suggested she gave incorrect information to the company and so was given correct advice based on the information she chose to disclose, so that would shake things up a bit as well
1 -
Personally, it doesn't matter what I think, it's up to the independent enquiry to decide on the outcome and I trust they'll be fair. I think we should all be focusing on other things in the news.
2 -
She's resigned probley sent off with good package
2 -
No @Catherine21 MPs who resign receive no extra pay outs.
0 -
GGood to know still some justice on this country
0 -
The ethics report said she "breached the ministerial code and did not heed the caution in legal advice received" I'll be reading the enquiry later for sure. It's certainly be a loss for the Labour party.
0 -
She hasn't resigned as an MP. She's resigned from Cabinet and as Deputy PM.
2 -
She's still resigned @Zipz and thus would be entitled to no benefit packages.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 15.5K Start here and say hello!
- 7.3K Coffee lounge
- 90 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 122 Announcements and information
- 24.1K Talk about life
- 5.8K Everyday life
- 426 Current affairs
- 2.4K Families and carers
- 873 Education and skills
- 1.9K Work
- 533 Money and bills
- 3.6K Housing and independent living
- 1.1K Transport and travel
- 627 Relationships
- 1.5K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.5K Talk about your impairment
- 867 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 923 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.1K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 39.9K Talk about your benefits
- 6K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.7K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 8.5K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.8K Benefits and income