Angela Raynor still doesnt get it.

Zero hours contracts were born as a result of minimum wage.

bear in mind when I worked in a supermarket when I was in my teens I was paid £3 an hour. They no longer employ Saturday teenagers anymore like they used to as not cost effective. We were a small army of cheap resource who were happy to work the shifts the regular staff didn’t and were thrilled to get double pay on a Sunday. Still super cheap for the supermarket. Zero hours contacts emerged as a result of not being able to employ this cheap pool of labour

i keep hearing about this whole- if a business can’t afford to pay then they should go under. Then no one will have a job at all. That is the better solution? I find that baffling.

I grew up working part time jobs in the hospitality and retail industry. Zero hour contracts didn't exist. You had a part time job and that was the end of it, you worked your hours every week. If you had a quiet day, you had a quiet day, we were set to cleaning or sorting out stock rooms or whatever to earn our money instead. Zero hour contracts were pretty much born out of companies exploiting staff, especially women, keeps people in poverty and is why there are going to be changes soon regarding holiday pay etc. The only people that really seem to work ok with ZHC are students.

If a business is totally reliant on not paying for a member of part time staff when they have a quiet week then it's a shit business or badly managed and probably should go under rather than exploit workers. You seem to think that the businesses are the victims here?!

Not paying yourself much as an owner of new companies is normal, no medal from me there and has been the norm for years, way before Labour got involved.

While I agree taxes on businesses is hard for businesses it doesn't make it ok to exploit workers.

I didn’t say she could get it for free.

I reiterate, as Deputy PM, she had access to the best and most accurate tax advice available.

Her office as Deputy PM gave her no access to tax advice of any kind. It would have been quite improper for civil servants to give her advice on her private tax affairs. She would have needed to pay for professionals to give her tax advice just like anyone else.

That’s not quite how HMRC see it.

As of May 2026, former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner is in discussions with HMRC to resolve an underpayment of approximately £40,000 in stamp duty from her £800,000 Hove flat purchase in May 2025. She resigned in September 2025 after it was found she wrongly paid a lower rate by failing to declare it a second home

She didn’t refer herself to HMRC, she was caught out by an investigation by the Telegraph. She may have referred herself to the Parliamentary watchdog, as failure to post tax due is a breach of ministerial code. Hence her resignation.

I reiterate, as Deputy PM, she had access to the best and most accurate tax advice available. She is aware of the scrutiny that comes with any public office. She is either unbelievably incompetent or dishonest.

I grew up working part time jobs in the hospitality and retail industry. Zero hour contracts didn't exist. You had a part time job and that was the end of it, you worked your hours every week. If you had a quiet day, you had a quiet day, we were set to cleaning or sorting out stock rooms or whatever to earn our money instead. Zero hour contracts were pretty much born out of companies exploiting staff, especially women, keeps people in poverty and is why there are going to be changes soon regarding holiday pay etc. The only people that really seem to work ok with ZHC are students.

If a business is totally reliant on not paying for a member of part time staff when they have a quiet week then it's a shit business or badly managed and probably should go under rather than exploit workers. You seem to think that the businesses are the victims here?!

Not paying yourself much as an owner of new companies is normal, no medal from me there and has been the norm for years, way before Labour got involved.

While I agree taxes on businesses is hard for businesses it doesn't make it ok to exploit workers.

It’s still not resolved, HMRC is still awaiting a £40,000 repayment.

And that’s aside from fraudulently having overvalued the family home so she could draw down sufficient for the deposit in the £600,000 beachfront flat down south! From her son’s Trust Fund. How???
Those that have the means will find ways to circumvent the system. They’re all mired in corruption.

No she wasn't.
She referred herself so she could get a definitive answer to her attempt to provide housing for her severely handicapped son. (He was very premature and is blind).

But you are missing the point. Businesses have been relying on those sort of contracts as they can’t afford to take on lots of employees and have them sitting around not doing anything when not needed. They simply would go out of business. Paying employees for when they are actually working and have flexibility to do meant that the business can function. Now is that fair to workers? Not all but for many it is a practical way to operate their business. There will always be exploitative businesses but having worked on the ground for a while now, most do not operate like that. Many owners don’t even take a large salary themselves. I know one who lived of minimum wage trying to get the business off the ground. The fact is the minimum wage, whilst good for workers mean that businesses will look for ways to only pay for what they need. In the business I work in currently, we have just let a few people go and moved a couple to part time as they weren’t being fully utilized. Hard choices but with customers struggling themselves it is tough out there. If business rates and Ni were reduced it would honestly be transformative right now.

Why are you so focused on Angela Rayner? It’s looking a bit concerning tbh. Almost verging on obsessive. Is she your local MP? Did you go to school with her or something, and you’re now jealous she’s very wealthy and successful whilst you’re just scraping by? Is that it?

This always happens. We get rid of a PM and replace with someone worse.
We don’t need far left politics - it’s very worrying if she gets made PM. Not to mention wasn’t she done for tax evasion not long ago? Why is she allowed to stand for PM?

If you take every word literally, then yes, you got me. For the more sensible debate, it is such a low number who take the piss, it isn't worth mentioning. In fact, it is similar to the fact that overall, small boat crossings are fairly insignificant in the great scheme of things, but the focus is also disproportionately on them.

I guess this is why Reform are doing so well as they are directing focus to areas that don't need focus in order to tap in to certain traits, whereas solving the issues of the country really requires focus on more important areas.

I asked questions and didn’t make any assertions.

You literally said this:

And she didn’t lie to HMRC twice.

That is an assertion. And if you actually read what I said I didn’t mention lying to HMRC. You also made that up.

She didn’t lie about the CGT issue. And both are allegations anyway.

So she is just paying £40,000 in stamp duty owing out of the goodness of her heart and resigned as Deputy PM for giggles? You didn’t even know about the CGT issue just now, how are you now so confident that she did nothing wrong?

She also didn’t lie about Reform policies.

How do you know? Have you watched the video I’m talking about? Do you even know which video I’m talking about?

Before you come on here with these statements, perhaps do some research yourself.

I did do the research, that’s why I made the statements 🤷‍♀️ from your previous posts you obviously haven’t had a chance to read up on many current issues - I’m just giving you the facts.

Labour had their own soundbite ‘smash the gangs’ at GE, which some bought in to.

The part about France isn’t correct either.

What confident but incorrect assertions did you make? I asked questions and didn’t make any assertions.

Oh, and she hasn’t lied to HMRC twice - only once. She didn’t lie about the CGT issue. And both are allegations anyway.

And you’ve not said anything to me before about quoting posts?

She also didn’t lie about Reform policies.

Before you come on here with these statements, perhaps do some research yourself.

Okay, so we've gone from "nobody is abusing the system" to "it isn't the majority", so I've proved my point.

Your business may be decent, a heck of a lot are not. Business are there to make a profit and the bigger the profit the happier they are.

Many companies offer zero hour contracts, min wage for pretty much all of the hospitality sector, no pay rises for years for many companies (my partner for example works at a well-to-do company that turns over millions and no pay rise for 6 years for any of the staff).

While I agree it is getting difficult for businesses, businesses don't value their workers, these issues were happening before Labour came into power.

So US inflation is 3% on your figures, UK is 3.3%. US unemployment is 4.3% according to your figures, UK is 4.9%

So again Trump's US is doing better than Labour's Britain. So again if Reform only do what Trump is doing economically then we would be better off than under Labour.

@ProudCat was saying Reform would just copy Trump's policies. In reality the numbers show we'd be better off than under the Labour government if that happened.

So US inflation is 3% on your figures, UK is 3.3%. US unemployment is 4.3% according to your figures, UK is 4.9%

So again Trump's US is doing better than Labour's Britain. So again if Reform only do what Trump is doing economically then we would be better off than under Labour.

@ProudCat was saying Reform would just copy Trump's policies. In reality the numbers show we'd be better off than under the Labour government if that happened.

@ProudCat wasn’t talking about growth but living standards. It is true that living standards have gone down under Trump, as shown in a wide range of media sources:

https://www.epi.org/publication/47-ways-trump-has-made-life-less-affordable-in-his-first-year/

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/14/americans-struggle-affordability-despite-trump-claims

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c04vqyl13rlo

Look at this: https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker/economy

GDP grew at 2.0% per year in Q1. Inflation is at 3.0%. The unemployment rate is 4.3%. The S&P 500 is up 22.3% since he took office.

Before Donald Trump’s tariffs, America had come tantalisingly close to vanquishing inflation. In April of last year annual inflation was 2.3%, just above the Federal Reserve’s target of 2%. After that it shot up, reaching 3% in September, then dipped to 2.7%. The annual rate fell to 2.4% in January. The conflict in Iran is expected to push up prices again.

Confident but incorrect assumptions is something of a pattern on here lately.

Could I politely suggest that you read up a bit more on topics before you make such confident but incorrect assertions? You’ve done it several times now. And if you want to quote something I’ve said you can put an asterisk directly at the beginning and end of the text you are quoting to make it bold.

She’s had issues with not paying the correct stamp duty in her flat in Hove and a capital gains tax issue on her properties in Stockport. Despite having access to the best tax advice there is. We have to ask if it is deliberate fraud or unbelievable incompetence?

She also visited a school and was filmed lying about Reform policies to children which breaks the law in political impartiality and non partisan requirements in schools.

spectator.com/article/the-angela-rayner-tax-row-deepens/