The Labour Government

[Pingu the Penguin]

She’ll be gone by the end of the week, if not today.

Starmer briefing the press that he’s doing everything he can to save her is the biggest giveaway.

The bloke is so disingenuous that he’ll know she’s toast, and he’ll be going through some embarrassing charade in the hope of boosting his working class credentials within the party.

Absolutely this!

 

[Chippy_boy]

It obviously wouldn’t be a lie to be fair. NHS compensation claims often have court orders, her sons absolutely would have done.

No, I meant it was arguably a lie - and certainly untrue - that she was prevented from divulging the details. I am sure there was a court order, but it has no jurisdiction over what Rayner says in parliament, and she absolutely would know this.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

where was this feeding frenzy when Hunt bought 7 flats because bulk purchases of 6 or more meant you were able to avoid £95k in stamp duty and then when asked about it he claimed to have "forgotten" the purchase of 7 flats at £450k each

Or when Zahawi avoided £3m tax and when the journalist Dan Niedle began investigating the case he got his lawyer to threaten him ( actions that got the lawyers firm fined £50k with £300k costs and him being struck off ) and when it all came out Zahawi denied all knowledge of it all and agreed to pay HMRC the tax he had avoided, no sanction, no court case nothing.

All that was entirely wrong and properly reported in the media. They had the brass neck to ride it out which is also wrong, damages confidence in politics, and no doubt contributed to the shambolic state their party is currently in.

 

[meltonblue]

No, I meant it was arguably a lie - and certainly untrue - that she was prevented from divulging the details. I am sure there was a court order, but it has no jurisdiction over what Rayner says in parliament, and she absolutely would know this.

Lifting the court order is much better than using parliamentary privilege, I don’t think this warranted doing that at all.

 

[hilts]

He did say if to be fair!

I know but

Because that’s what she’s stated, niw if it’s bullshit then she’s fucked and rightly so.

What I'm saying guys is if it is a two way conversation how will.it be proved? Like someone else said they never seem to make a mistake that's costs them..

Ignorance is not an excuse and as a politician they really should be very vigilant. Over checking.

Got caught double down with an excuse,this is nothing new. Seriously leading politician doesn't know that saving 40k isn't perfectly legit.

 

[BobKowalski]

Lifting the court order is much better than using parliamentary privilege, I don’t think this warranted doing that at all.

Agreed. Far better to do this by lifting a legal restriction rather than circumventing it via privilege.

 

[BobKowalski]

I know but

What I'm saying guys is if it is a two way conversation how will.it be proved? Like someone else said they never seem to make a mistake that's costs them..

Ignorance is not an excuse and as a politician they really should be very vigilant. Over checking.

Got caught double down with an excuse,this is nothing new. Seriously leading politician doesn't know that saving 40k isn't perfectly legit.

At the very least, some degree of political instinct has to kick it. There is political credibility in paying the full whack and using your actions as an example when criticising others and it insulates you from future political attack.

It is weird how politicians do not game these things through.

 

[waspish]

At the very least, some degree of political instinct has to kick it. There is political credibility in paying the full whack and using your actions as an example when criticising others and it insulates you from future political attack.

It is weird how politicians do not game these things through.

Power they think they are above the law

 

[Blue Maverick]

I know but

What I'm saying guys is if it is a two way conversation how will.it be proved? Like someone else said they never seem to make a mistake that's costs them..

Ignorance is not an excuse and as a politician they really should be very vigilant. Over checking.

Got caught double down with an excuse,this is nothing new. Seriously leading politician doesn't know that saving 40k isn't perfectly legit.

So you go to an expert which allegedly she did, they say it’s nit your second house because of your circumstances, if they have paperwork to prove this how far do you go, do you ask 20 different experts how vigilant do you need to be? When I ask a professional accountant, solicitor etc I expect them to-give me the correct advice, if it’s wrong is that my fault or theirs?
Like I said if she’s done wrong and she knew then she’s should be sacked, however just look at the other story making the rounds on the footballers who have lost millions, they were using experts seemed they got fucked over. Let me ask you all those people who bought flats with the dodgy cladding (Grenfell) is it their fault I mean according you ignorance is not an excuse, or do you trust the supposed experts who built it to keep you safe.
Can I just add from the stories I’ve heard about her locally I thinks she’s a bit of an arsehole, however political witch-hunts etc are just getting on my tits these days.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

I’m really confused with all this housing stuff. My house in Ashton, I allow my son and family to reside in it and have signed it over to him for voting/council tax purposes. Then I have my residence at work address in the midlands which I actually live in and pay all the bills for. Then we have our holiday home on the south coast, again where I pay all the bills for. I’m now not sure if I’m liable for any tax on these properties or whether I’m owed any tax relief from the tax man!

There was me thinking that I was just getting on with life, now I’m going to have to do some digging to confirm I’m doing it right!

 

[metalblue]

So you go to an expert which allegedly she did, they say it’s nit your second house because of your circumstances, if they have paperwork to prove this how far do you go, do you ask 20 different experts how vigilant do you need to be? When I ask a professional accountant, solicitor etc I expect them to-give me the correct advice, if it’s wrong is that my fault or theirs?
Like I said if she’s done wrong and she knew then she’s should be sacked, however just look at the other story making the rounds on the footballers who have lost millions, they were using experts seemed they got fucked over. Let me ask you all those people who bought flats with the dodgy cladding (Grenfell) is it their fault I mean according you ignorance is not an excuse, or do you trust the supposed experts who built it to keep you safe.
Can I just add from the stories I’ve heard about her locally I thinks she’s a bit of an arsehole, however political witch-hunts etc are just getting on my tits these days.

To be fair a quick google of “who owns assets in a trust” tells you the trustees own them. She was a trustee. I hope she didn’t pay a lot for the advice that told her otherwise.

 

[Ohrodneyrodney]

I'm hearing this morning that last year the NHS paid a significant sum into her son's trust, and that Ange has just sold her remaining share in the house to the trust, effectively using the NHS compensation money, to buy her Brighton flat.

Really not a good look at all if true.

For me this is a big question. What benefit is there to the trust in shelling out for her share in a house, so she could buy another one?

 

[Vic]

I'm hearing this morning that last year the NHS paid a significant sum into her son's trust, and that Ange has just sold her remaining share in the house to the trust, effectively using the NHS compensation money, to buy her Brighton flat.

Really not a good look at all if true.

Effectively meaning the house is in trust for him for life?

 

[Chippy_boy]

Lifting the court order is much better than using parliamentary privilege, I don’t think this warranted doing that at all.

For someone who is allegedly not a supporter of hers you seem to be working very hard to try to deflect or justify.

Do you accept that she could have answered questions in parliament about her financial affairs, even though a court order was in place? I hope you can bring yourself to say yes, because that is the truth of the matter.

So when Rayner claimed she could not divulge the details, we have to ask, was that a lie, or she simply did not know that she was protected under parliamentary privilege? It is totally inconceivable that such a senior and experience MP, now government minister, would not know that parliamentary privilege allowed her to say whatever she liked in parliament, irrespective of any court order.

The inescapable conclusion is that she hid behind the court order excuse to try to hide details whilst scrambling around in the background to work out how she was going to get out of this mess.

 

[Hertzblue]

 

[stonerblue]

There's IMO a pretty good summary here from Lord Snooty, if people would care to watch it. (I appreciate that might be difficult for the left leaning members here.) He's very balanced and unemotional - as he always is - but along the way mentions a very significant point:

There was no legal requirement for Rayner to not be open and honest about the tax situation from the outset. The idea that she was prevented from doing so because of a court order is nonsense - I would even venture so far as to say a lie. She will know full well that she is totally protected under parliamentary privilege to divulge anything she chose to, and she chose not to.

comedy fucking gold

 

[meltonblue]

For someone who is allegedly not a supporter of hers you seem to be working very hard to try to deflect or justify.

Do you accept that she could have answered questions in parliament about her financial affairs, even though a court order was in place? I hope you can bring yourself to say yes, because that is the truth of the matter.

So when Rayner claimed she could not divulge the details, we have to ask, was that a lie, or she simply did not know that she was protected under parliamentary privilege? It is totally inconceivable that such a senior and experience MP, now government minister, would not know that parliamentary privilege allowed her to say whatever she liked in parliament, irrespective of any court order.

The inescapable conclusion is that she hid behind the court order excuse to try to hide details whilst scrambling around in the background to work out how she was going to get out of this mess.

And you seem to be going out of your way to make her indiscretions worse than they are, I’ve already said she should resign for the actual action.

Yes she can, but parliamentary privilege is not something to be used lightly and using it to breach a court order is seen as an abuse of the privilege, particularly if it’s the individual involved doing it - it is not what it is supposed to be there for and undermines the rule of law.

Like I said, lifting the court order is always the way to go. The idea that she would use parliamentary privilege to breach a court order about her own son and the NHS was just never going to happen and rightly so.

You’re essentially having a go at her for not abusing her power.

 

[Vic]

For someone who is allegedly not a supporter of hers you seem to be working very hard to try to deflect or justify.

Do you accept that she could have answered questions in parliament about her financial affairs, even though a court order was in place? I hope you can bring yourself to say yes, because that is the truth of the matter.

So when Rayner claimed she could not divulge the details, we have to ask, was that a lie, or she simply did not know that she was protected under parliamentary privilege? It is totally inconceivable that such a senior and experience MP, now government minister, would not know that parliamentary privilege allowed her to say whatever she liked in parliament, irrespective of any court order.

The inescapable conclusion is that she hid behind the court order excuse to try to hide details whilst scrambling around in the background to work out how she was going to get out of this mess.

Parliamentary committee 2012:

"This privilege places a significant responsibility on parliamentarians to exercise it in the public interest. The presumption should be that court orders are respected in Parliament."

 

[BossHog]

All Rayner has done was ask her cabinet colleagues for advice. She started with the ex transport minister but then realised she was a fraudster, she tried the chancellor for economic advice, however she lied on her CV, so she turned to the Business secretary who after all was a solicitor, but it turns out he also liar and was never a solicitor

Perhaps the minister for corruption could help, but no, she was ousted for corruption. Her last hope was the minister for homelessness, who herself resigned due to making people homeless

So Ange the housing minister, who could afford the best information available, thought, let's try and get away with a few quid, £40k to be precise!!

This government is rotten to the core, and it starts with Lord Alli's mate, Starmer. The organisation works as a shadow of the leader.

 

[Gray]

I though the Tory party was the one that did sleaze?

That wishy washy bugger Starmer standing by her must mean he has something to hide as well.