Rayner Has Resigned

[usernamealreadytaken]

AIBU to say it isn't unexpected, or a surprise?

Now this does read like AI.

I imagine “we’ve” been paying the utility bills and associated expenses at Admiralty House. Obviously “we” will now be paying more as Rayner is no longer entitled to that flat and will have to find somewhere else to rent just as she did before July last year.

It sounds like a blurb from a CV

That's not a bad thing! I aim to write precisely without having to put it through ChatGPT.

As for what I wrote: these are all features I've heard about Rayner, from multiple sources. She's extremely capable.

If she does that - and it’s only supposition - it’ll be because it’s within the rules. You think Farage’s tax situation is fine because it’s within 5he rules, so why would this be any different?

We’ll still be paying the bills at AH, just for somebody else.

I’m not aggressively doing anything. I’m not minimising. I’m asking for accuracy.

Maybe. We pay the bills for all MPs with constituencies outside London. Lammy lives in London so he probably won’t move.

So you don’t like my assertion that the ruling classes are thick and corrupt. Prove me wrong. That’s a discussion. What you tried to show your upset at what I think by trying to be condescending. What a way to win people over to an argument.

I don’t think she would have survived

Playing on the I made an honest mistake couldn’t be excused given was the housing minister

And certainly not as the so called mistake was made twice

I think if she had resigned earlier with an apology for an oversight, her career would not be as damaged and certainly better for Starmer I guess she wasn’t going until forced to

it’s the hypocrisy that will follow her

Starmer really needs to sort out his PR it’s shockingly bad

Farage’s situation has nothing to do with Parliamentary rules; it’s the tax law of the land and you, I, or anyone could do the same. Perhaps somebody should suggest to Farage he should just rent a place and charge the max to the taxpayer. Do you think that would be better, as it falls under allowable MP expenses?

Just checked, and Rayner wont be able to flip the properties as it only applies to renting outside of your constituency. At least she won’t have to worry about bills at her new house, other than the mortgage.

Well, I wouldn’t categorise politicians as ‘the ruling classes’ but that aside - many/most of them have an excellent educational record so calling them thick is wrong. You could say they don’t have much common sense, or much knowledge of the life of ordinary people, and in many cases you would be right on at least one count.
I haven’t ‘tried’ to be condescending or, in fact, been condescending. That’s your reading of tone.

Oh, sorry, I missed ‘corrupt’ @KhakiTiger
Some have been caught doing corrupt things, it’s true. I don’t believe the majority are corrupt, no, and you can’t prove they are unless they get caught doing something corrupt - it’s your opinion, and one you’ve decided on through emotion as there aren’t any facts to have used. You can’t argue and disprove a belief someone developed without argument and proof. There’s literally no evidence I could present that would convince you. It’s impossible to prove a negative anyway.

I don’t imagine for a moment she’ll commute from Hove. I suspect the flat’s with letting agents already.

It takes an hour on the train from Hove to central London. Not an impossible commute.

Agreed. Not one you’d want if you didn’t have to do it though.

Not sure how she’ll wangle that; she’ll need to convert the mortgage to BTL, then she’ll have to pay tax on the income, and she’ll become a hated landlord 🤣

No, because Shoosmiths name was already on land registry records in the public domain and linked with her and property. So they did the right thing by distancing themselves quickly and clearly, to avoid speculation that they had been involved. The conveyancers details were uncovered by the media, presumably because they are on the SDLT1, and so for the same reason I expect they, rightly, acted quickly to clarify their role. In the process, Rayner achieved the opposite of what she’d hoped by mentioning lawyers in the first place :)

Are we going to ignore the fact that the 25% share of the house she sold to her son's trust values the house at £650000, which people the know the area regard as more than a tad optimistic? If it's worth less than this, her son's trust has been deliberately disadvantaged.

First she sells her council house for a big fat profit. Then she dodges tax on one of her three homes. Then she becomes a landlord.

Typical leftie socialist. You couldn’t make this shit up.

No house, within a mile has sold for the amount she valued it at ... which was, incidentally?, the inheritance tax level for two single people.

That’s honestly disgusting.

And these lefties teach morals to the rest of us, pretending to be all virtuous and superior.

…..it just gets worse.

Well she clearly said in the interview she sold her quarter share for 162,500 to her son's trust. No way is that house worth 650k ... no house on rightmove, within 1 mile, has sold for anywhere near that.

Typical leftie socialist. You couldn’t make this shit up.

And these lefties teach morals to the rest of us, pretending to be all virtuous and superior.

@KhakiTiger Why do you talk like this?