The Labour Government

[meltonblue]

Slight correction, if I may.

She received £162,500 for her 25% share of the property, implying a gain in house price of around £130,000 over and above the typical increase that could be attributed to house price inflation.

Anything over £162,500 would obviously have led to a IHT liability.

Pure coincidence, of course.

That doesn’t make sense to be fair, think you’re confusing the initial gift to the trust with the subsequent sale of the rest of her stake.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

If you want to look for it, you can read the post I did the day after Johnson was found to have mislead parliament by the Privileges Committee. June 2023. I actually read the report and pointed out the areas I agreed with, and why I believed Johnson had in fact misled Parliament.

When you say misled Parliament, do you mean lied to?

 

[johnny crossan]

I talk in here like I talk in real life. I’m highly articulate but I routinely use coarse, industrial language, that am not afraid to use in ‘refined’ company. It’s not an act, and nor is it calculated - it’s how I express myself and have done for many years, and to great effect I’d say.

I’m generally viewed an an exceptional communicator with highly developed people skills by those that know me in the real world, as well as being true to myself, and a genuine person by those I interact with. Nothing fake or calculated about me.

It all helps, of course if, like Rayner, you have huge reserves of self-confidence, in terms of being true to yourself.

Which is why I guess I found your reasoning in relation to Rayner to be poor, because I don’t personally see anything calculated. She expresses herself in a way that I view as natural to her, which for reasons of the foregoing I view as genuine.

I think your judgement of her is wholly wrong.

Fair enough, totally accept you are genuine as I like to think I am in refraining from foul language (written and oral) unless in extremis. Having encountered Rayner in previous formal and informal conversations as a senior union official I think her current persona has been refined to fit her political ambitions. In short she's a fake.

 

[Blue and true]

Seriously? When I was young I used to go to Rhyl, it was lovely. Now, it's an absolute dump because all the rich people have moved away (blackpool going the same way). Last week, I was in very wealthy Torquay and it was still lovely. Money matters.

Do you think if the rich hadn't left en masse then the poor people of Rhyl would be quantifiably better off? By way of either of material capital or emotional capital? Trickle down economics is a complete nothing for the very poorest in our societies. Also, do you reckon your childhood memories are idealising what Rhyl was and still is?

I went to Blackpool when I was kid. It was the best place on earth. Went back a few years ago and it was a shithole...in reality, it's probably always been a shithole.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Fair enough, totally accept you are genuine as I like to think I am in refraining from foul language (written and oral) unless in extremis. Having known Rayner in conversations formal and informal I think her current persona has been acquired and refined to fit her political ambitions. In short she's a fake.

Well you have met her in person and I have not, but that does not mean my view in her isn’t valid or that yours trumps mine as a consequence of that.

 

[Vic]

She should stay in Ashton and spend her £150,000 salary in Ashton rather than spend her £150,000 salary in Brighton and London. Is that so hard to understand?

Is this just a Rayner-specific thing or does it apply to every MP with a second home abroad?

 

[Vic]

I’ve lived in areas where wealthy people like cheek by jowl with poor people. Certain areas of Nottingham are notable for that. The Park, which is an idiosyncratic estate for the wealthy near the city centre, is next to Lenton for example. And I don’t see very much trickle down benefits from that arrangement.

Furthermore, whilst Sussex is a wealthy county certain parts of Brighton are far from affluent.

There are rich and poor people pretty much everywhere in the UK, with a few exceptions, so your argument falls down at the first hurdle I’m afraid.

Every MP should buy a house in a deprived area in their constituency - and deprive a poor person of the chance to get on the housing ladder.

 

[69FACUPfinal]

Rayners biggest mistake was getting caught and then denying it.
She's not the only one who's at it, they've all got their noses in the trough, all parties are as guilty as each other.
There's not a single MP I trust or believe, honesty and integrity is out of the window, it doesn't matter who's in power coz they all piss in the same pot, I don't know how or when we allowed this to happen, but it's an absolute stain on the country.

I agree wholeheartedly about as for me about 99% of those politicians are in it for themselves. You see the state of some of them when they are in the House, some are imo barely literate. I'm talking the 2 main parties here. I despair, I really do.

 

[Vic]

Her disabled son lives in Ashton .....

Oh, so that's the game. If she didn't have a disabled son, she wouldn't have needed to keep an interest in the hosue in Ashton so wouldn't have been caught by an obscure rule designed for other purposes.

I know one ex-MP who never lived in the constituency - kept his family home 30 miles away, came back from London on the Friday morning, stayed Friday night in a local hotel, did surgeries in his office on Saturday, went home, back to London on Monday. It was never an issue. Listening to some of the posters on this thread, if if were your MP, I wouldn't want you knowing where I live.

 

[blueinsa]

That may be the spinniest thread on a thread full of spinny things.

It’s hard Vic when you spend a few days telling us we are all wrong and she has done nothing wrong, I get it.

She has made you see your arse but that’s politics mate.

You will get over it.

 

[Blue and true]

When you say misled Parliament, do you mean lied to?

The power of language is a wonderful thing.

 

[Vic]

I agree wholeheartedly about as for me about 99% of those politicians are in it for themselves. You see the state of some of them when they are in the House, some are imo barely literate. I'm talking the 2 main parties here. I despair, I really do.

No-one gets to be an MP by being barely literate.

 

[69FACUPfinal]

No-one gets to be an MP by being barely literate.

Really? Have you watched Parliament on TV?!

 

[Palerider]

Do you think if the rich hadn't left en masse then the poor people of Rhyl would be quantifiably better off? By way of either of material capital or emotional capital? Trickle down economics is a complete nothing for the very poorest in our societies. Also, do you reckon your childhood memories are idealising what Rhyl was and still is?

I went to Blackpool when I was kid. It was the best place on earth. Went back a few years ago and it was a shithole...in reality, it's probably always been a shithole.

Trickle down works perfectly well IF there is something to tickle down. If all the rich people leave an area to 'better' themselves (their choice, their right, capitalism in action but not, in my view, the "socialist" option) then clearly there is nothing to trickle down and a 'drought/ghetto' begins to emerge.

Yep, Blackpool was heaven (now a dump) but we much prefer the dog friendly beach (and rather upmarket and richer!!!) Lytham and St Annes area now.

I just do not get how any poor area gets equality if all the richer people just move out. I get how someone who calls the place they live a dump would move out but someone who pretends to be fighting for social justice who then moves to a very rich area (£800,000 for a flat?) is venturing into complete hypocricy for me.

 

[johnny crossan]

No-one gets to be an MP by being barely literate.

Sadly she has cultivated that impression to benefit her career. The reality is Angela is a very smart and literate woman.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I talk in here like I talk in real life. I’m highly articulate but I routinely use coarse, industrial language, that am not afraid to use in ‘refined’ company. It’s not an act, and nor is it calculated - it’s how I express myself and have done for many years, and to great effect I’d say.

I’m generally viewed an an exceptional communicator with highly developed people skills by those that know me in the real world, as well as being true to myself, and a genuine person by those I interact with. Nothing fake or calculated about me.

It all helps, of course if, like Rayner, you have huge reserves of self-confidence, in terms of being true to yourself.

Which is why I guess I found your reasoning in relation to Rayner to be poor, because I don’t personally see anything calculated. She expresses herself in a way that I view as natural to her, which for reasons of the foregoing I view as genuine.

I think your judgement of her is wholly wrong.

Being true to yourself does not mean that you bring "your whole self to work". That modern day fetish is already running out of steam. For those who still posses at least a faltering grasp on reality, there is still a thing called a professional self, you know the lumberjack who turns up for work and leaves his suspenders and a bra at home.

her current persona has been refined to fit her political ambitions. In short she's a fake.

No, in short she's a politician.

 

[Palerider]

Is this just a Rayner-specific thing or does it apply to every MP with a second home abroad?

A socialist with a second home abroad or in this country? Why do we need to build 1.5 million homes again?

And no, not just Rayner. Anyone who behaves hypocritically. No one would expect Trump to behave selflessly so he can get away with dodgy behaviour. But Socialists and the left in general set themselves up as 'better' people so leave themselves with farer to fall. She may be totally innocent (and naive) or she may have knowingly played the margins, nothing that I myself would not have tried! The difference is I have not sold myself as "Honest Palerider" the working mans friend. The point is she is supposed to be BETTER than Trump, Farage, Johnson not exactly the same!

 

[threespires]

On the contrary, I think strong journalism has brought many an MP to task over the years.

I wasn't suggesting there were no instances of strong journalism. I was saying we have significant structural issues if you believe independence and plurality in media are important for democracy.

90% of conventional media in the UK is owned by 3 corporations and 2 tech corporations who account for 80% of online advertising revenue own the majority of the top news platforms and in effect act as gatekeepers of public discourse. The BBC has been transformed from a source of national pride to a political football. To name but three disturbing trends.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

A socialist with a second home abroad or in this country? Why do we need to build 1.5 million homes again?

Because of unfettered capitalism

 

[Vic]

It’s hard Vic when you spend a few days telling us we are all wrong and she has done nothing wrong, I get it.

She has made you see your arse but that’s politics mate.

You will get over it.

Well, that's bunkum too.

I was the first to quote the bit she got wrong

I'll hold my hands up about Rayner's "advice". I really couldn't see any problem if she had divested herself of her share in the Ashton house (even if she still resided there part of the time). You don't pay the higher rate if you only own one residence - except it seems for this small print in the rules: you still have another residence if it " - is owned on behalf of children under the age of 18 (parents are treated as the owners even if the property is held through a trust and they are not the trustees)".

Since then all I've done is try and sift through the hatred, the misogyny and the class warfare to get to a bit of understanding. Unlike those rushing headlong to judgment (and making stuff up), I've tried to read the HMRC guidance - and the legalese of section 4ZA behind it.

I'm open to correction on this, but from what I can see the actual HMRC declaration doesn't mention the "trust" in the question about ownership. So you could ignore this box if you didn't realise that ownership can mean something other than ownership - i.e. you're treated as an owner when you're not an owner. (Some might say the law is an ass.)

"Residential — additional properties":
Is where the purchase of a residential property results in you owning more than one residential property
If the new property is a replacement for your main residence which has not yet been sold, you must still use this code but you may be able to claim a refund when your main residence is sold