To think that surely Rayner has to go.

[Blankscreen]

Well well well.

So now it emerges that Rayner rearranged her property affairs and declared to HMRC that her new flat in Brighton is her main residence and saved £40k on the SDLT bill as a result.

She has then apparently declared to the local councils the complete opposite.

I'm sure slimeball Kier will defend and say it was perfectly legal blah blah blah.

Not to mention she has a grace and favour house funded by tax payers in London as her constituency office is so far away. Yet she 'lives' in Brighton - surely she could just commute that distance like may others do every day.

Surely she has to go.

She’s a bloody idiot - even if this was “legal”, to do something so questionable in her position is so dumb. She is the modern Prescott in so many ways.

Why does she live in Brighton when her constituency is in Tameside?

Exactly. She lives there to dodge the SDLT

Starmer hates Rayner

Tried to oust her a while back and failed while she entrenched her position

She won't go anywhere and he'll be forced to defend her, he is that weak

She needs to go and so does Starmer.

he colleague defended her because she followed the letter of the law. Shame she didn’t follow the spirit

however, I understand she’s in the process of divorcing so I imagine the family home has been given to her husband and she got a payout which she used to buy the flat. So I don’t think the stamp duty is the issue. It’s the claim that her stbxh house is her primary residence for council tax and it’s the fact she doesn’t actually have a home in her constituency

Prezza was really popular including in the media though
saying that apparently she’s very nice in person and liked in her department

She’s awful, thick and grasping.

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

I didn’t know she was divorcing and am sorry to hear that. Let’s give her a break she’s probably in a right state: And she’s not broken the law it sounds like. Hopefully she sorts out a base in the constituency.

That just sums the stupidity of the woman up
she’s been there before with this main residence scam scandal so common sense would tell her this would be under the spotlight and she’s done it again

She’s been separated for years and has had a long term relationship in the meantime (not sure if she’s still with him - he’s another Labour mp) so I’m not sure the divorce is anything other than paperwork at this stage

I'm not sure she should resign or be forced or over this, and I'd love to see her given a political foot up the arse and sent well into touch.

However, when will politicians ever think about optics? It isn't about legal/illegal or even moral/immoral at any kind of intellectual level, it's about how the public will see it at a glance. Because a glance is all most voters give these things, and politicians know it.

My understanding is that she’s got divorced - so the house is going to be her primary residence.

And her husband has been given the other house.

So - not so dramatic.

What she has done may be all above board. But the optics of it don't look great.

If Boris Johnson had done something like this image the outrage from the shills and flag wavers on here.

VI in property is a problem across parliament I think that needs to be resolved, especially since successive governments have failed to manage housing in the countries best interest.

The current Labour government policy seems to be the latest in a long line of failings to deliver the housing solutions that the country desperately needs.

I think it’s the council tax that is raising eyebrows tbh - and the lack of home in her constituency

are there any rules on how much time an MP has to spend in their constituency

It’s all about the optics. It might be legally ok but it’s obvious the papers are going to run the story and people will draw their own conclusions.

I’m guessing Starmer would like to be rid of her but his socialist MPs would probably revolt. He appears to be a very weak ‘yes man’ so he’ll probably pledge his full support (again).

@92andyou except she is still claiming the house in Tameside to be her main residence for council tax purposes, whilst getting the government to pay council tax on the London grace and favour home

cross post with @Bruisername

Awful woman. Awful behaviour.

None of them are very bright at all. This looks terrible and any common sense would tell you it's not a wise move. But no they just plough ahead anyway.

So does she not have a house in her constituency anymore? Thought they had to. 🤷🏻‍♀️. I do hear she’s never seen and her constituents are fed up with her

I don't agree with what she has done but I wonder if the same people saying she needs to go are the same who would advise high earners on how to get more out of the state. I've seen so many comments to high earners about paying extra pension, reducing hours etc to get just below the 100,000 salary so they can claim benefits from the state (childcare and child benefit). That's no different to what Raynor has done. I find people are very selective in which tax dodging and claiming from the state is acceptable.

No MPs don’t have to live in their constituencies. There are many who don’t. I’m pretty sure Braverman doesn’t live in mine but we have to endure her!

I feel sorry for her

At the last election all but 1, maybe 2, candidates for my local area had addresses outside the constituency. Some quite a way outside.

So that seems the norm

It's her hypocracy that is the issue here. She's very vocally anti establishment, anti middle class, anti "tax dodgers", etc., and yet she does the same herself. THAT's the problem.

Same with Diane Abbot being against private schools but sending her child to one. (and lots of other similar examples!).

It really is Animal Farm! Everyone's equal but some are more equal than others!