Angela Rayner to face investigation?
Discussion
Yes.
Electoral Commission said:
Some people split their time between two addresses. For example, you might be a student living away from home, or split your time between two parents’ homes. If this is you, you may be able to register to vote at two addresses, as long as your addresses are in different council areas
This is moot anyway as I don't think her brother was on the electoral register at her house, just the husband's.Deesee said:
captain_cynic said:
Still desperately trying to make something out of nothing?
Just another wrong'un MP regardless of tie colour im afraid. Numerous Tory MPs caught with their hand in the cookie jar. And worse.
But they’re all the same?
Really, they aren’t
You fell for it. The vast majority don’t.
turbobloke said:
Randy Winkman said:
Amateurish said:
119 said:
Amateurish said:
Deesee said:
Her dad has now confirmed she did not live there 
& her brother did..
You didn't provide a source, so I found an interview in the Sun with her Dad. Is that it? & her brother did..This one:
"Mr Bowen also revealed his daughter let her brother Darren, 46, live at the property.
He added: “She said, ‘You can stay at mine if you want’.
“She wasn’t a landlady.
“He was her brother, for goodness sake, and he didn’t pay anything to stay there.”
Mr Bowen also disclosed her son, Ryan, moved into Mark’s home after she gave birth prematurely to a son who spent eight months in hospital.
He said: “Ryan, her eldest, moved in as he and Mark get on very well.
“Angela used to visit but she was living at Vicarage.
“There was work going on so she needed to be there.”"
Just checking what your source is...
For the hard of reading
James6112 said:
Deesee said:
captain_cynic said:
Still desperately trying to make something out of nothing?
Just another wrong'un MP regardless of tie colour im afraid. Numerous Tory MPs caught with their hand in the cookie jar. And worse.
But they’re all the same?
Really, they aren’t
You fell for it. The vast majority don’t.
I think it’s a pincer move by Burnham to remove them both.
There’s a lot more due on this.
Deesee said:
Keir has not, watch him squirm on Good Morning Britain yesterday…
I think it’s a pincer move by Burnham to remove them both.
There’s a lot more due on this.
He looked fI think it’s a pincer move by Burnham to remove them both.
There’s a lot more due on this.
king terrified.And he fumbled his way though the whole interview.
I’d hate to think what he would be like when he gets grilled if they get into power.
At the moment they are merely practice runs and will bear no resemblance if he gets any actual responsibility. He will get ripped to shreds.
119 said:
Deesee said:
Keir has not, watch him squirm on Good Morning Britain yesterday…
I think it’s a pincer move by Burnham to remove them both.
There’s a lot more due on this.
He looked fI think it’s a pincer move by Burnham to remove them both.
There’s a lot more due on this.
king terrified.And he fumbled his way though the whole interview.
I’d hate to think what he would be like when he gets grilled if they get into power.
At the moment they are merely practice runs and will bear no resemblance if he gets any actual responsibility. He will get ripped to shreds.
Deesee said:
Considering his background, to include the prosecution of a serving cabinet minister and his own ex wife, the NI job and the CPS, where he had made examples of successfully prosecuting several high ranking and serving home office officials, let alone the David and Goliath takedowns of corporations in his earlier career, you would have thought he could certainly hold his own vs Richard (of Richard and Judy fame).
I’ve always thought that about him. He doesn’t come across at all like you’d expect from a KC. He seems vacant on occasion. You’d expect a KC to be quick witted, able to engage robustly in debate, capable of responding quickly and coherently when things take an unexpected turn, and to do so whilst seemingly entirely unflustered. A real match in any debate and a true verbal street-fighter in other words. However he comes across as entirely the opposite, which seems at odds with his previous career and achievements. Deesee said:
There’s a lot more due on this.
I have to say I agree that, in my opinion, there’s more to this than is clear at the moment (or may ever by clear). I don’t believe that AR even realised that CGT was a potential issue at the time (does anyone really think AR at the time understood even the basics of the CGT rules and designed a subterfuge to evade liability?) . There was (and is) however some clear and most likely deliberate obfuscation going on concerning who lived where. Discounting the possibility that this was designed to evade CGT it’s unclear what the intent actually was. It could be some fairly benign reason, alternatively it may not be. I do wonder whether her brother was in receipt of housing or other benefit to which he wouldn’t have been entitled had it been clear that he lived with her / in her house. Or that pretending still to live there ensured she qualified for the full purchase discount when in fact she’d moved out before this had been accrued (and possibly earlier than has been assumed thus far). I might be wrong, we might never know, however I don’t believe we yet understand why this odd structure of residences etc was set up and hence I think there’s more to this. djohnson said:
I don’t believe that AR even realised that CGT was a potential issue at the time (does anyone really think AR at the time understood even the basics of the CGT rules and designed a subterfuge to evade liability?) .
I suspect there was a reason to keep two nearby properties between them without selling one. I also suspect if it were anything else we would have heard it by now.I mean, you've literally come up with a motive;
Didn't want to be penalised on her Right to Buy discount
Rented her house out to her brother and didn't declare income
The question of whether he was entitled to benefits by saying he lived with the husband (she says her brother was unemployed so...)
The question of whether she was entitled to single persons reduced council tax claiming she lived alone at her house
Her not paying CGT
Husband not paying CGT
Didn't want to be penalised on her Right to Buy discount
Rented her house out to her brother and didn't declare income
The question of whether he was entitled to benefits by saying he lived with the husband (she says her brother was unemployed so...)
The question of whether she was entitled to single persons reduced council tax claiming she lived alone at her house
Her not paying CGT
Husband not paying CGT
James6112 said:
Deesee said:
captain_cynic said:
Still desperately trying to make something out of nothing?
Just another wrong'un MP regardless of tie colour im afraid. Numerous Tory MPs caught with their hand in the cookie jar. And worse.
But they’re all the same?
Really, they aren’t
You fell for it. The vast majority don’t.
djohnson said:
Deesee said:
Considering his background, to include the prosecution of a serving cabinet minister and his own ex wife, the NI job and the CPS, where he had made examples of successfully prosecuting several high ranking and serving home office officials, let alone the David and Goliath takedowns of corporations in his earlier career, you would have thought he could certainly hold his own vs Richard (of Richard and Judy fame).
I’ve always thought that about him. He doesn’t come across at all like you’d expect from a KC. He seems vacant on occasion. You’d expect a KC to be quick witted, able to engage robustly in debate, capable of responding quickly and coherently when things take an unexpected turn, and to do so whilst seemingly entirely unflustered. A real match in any debate and a true verbal street-fighter in other words. However he comes across as entirely the opposite, which seems at odds with his previous career and achievements. Gecko1978 said:
James6112 said:
Deesee said:
captain_cynic said:
Still desperately trying to make something out of nothing?
Just another wrong'un MP regardless of tie colour im afraid. Numerous Tory MPs caught with their hand in the cookie jar. And worse.
But they’re all the same?
Really, they aren’t
You fell for it. The vast majority don’t.
George and Dave have some answers to prepare in advance.. creation of a special scheme just for KS? As head of the CPS..
Deesee said:
This one created his own case law.. one rule for them.. and all that, I’m sure he was a Marxist at Uni.
George and Dave have some answers to prepare in advance.. creation of a special scheme just for KS? As head of the CPS..
This really is barrel scraping stupidity. One, check the date, two check the intention, three check whether Starmer takes advantage of it & what he has said publicly he would do with it, In a thread reeking of right wing desperation, your funk really is standing out.George and Dave have some answers to prepare in advance.. creation of a special scheme just for KS? As head of the CPS..
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff