Angela Rayner to face investigation?
Discussion
Wings said:
Don't they say, "It pays to to be nice to the people you meet on the way up, for they are the same people you meet on the way down". Hence why Angela (two homes) Rayner does not want her full personal details made public, and open to scrutiny by her former neighbours she upset.
To think this person could be the next deputy prime minister, with Lammy foreign secretary, how low British politics has sunk .
Liz Truss, Johnson, 30p lee, Gullis, Rees-Mogg absolute titans of politics in comparison right?To think this person could be the next deputy prime minister, with Lammy foreign secretary, how low British politics has sunk .
Wings said:
Don't they say, "It pays to to be nice to the people you meet on the way up, for they are the same people you meet on the way down". Hence why Angela (two homes) Rayner does not want her full personal details made public, and open to scrutiny by her former neighbours she upset.
To think this person could be the next deputy prime minister, with Lammy foreign secretary, how low British politics has sunk .
Like the current deputy PMwho failed to sack Paula Venells? Or choose pretty much any Tory minister for examples of fTo think this person could be the next deputy prime minister, with Lammy foreign secretary, how low British politics has sunk .
kwittery. The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
sugerbear said:
Wings said:
Don't they say, "It pays to to be nice to the people you meet on the way up, for they are the same people you meet on the way down". Hence why Angela (two homes) Rayner does not want her full personal details made public, and open to scrutiny by her former neighbours she upset.
To think this person could be the next deputy prime minister, with Lammy foreign secretary, how low British politics has sunk .
Liz Truss, Johnson, 30p lee, Gullis, Rees-Mogg absolute titans of politics in comparison right?To think this person could be the next deputy prime minister, with Lammy foreign secretary, how low British politics has sunk .
blueg33 said:
....
The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
Why would anyone with genuine ability bother to stand? Low pay, ungrateful electorate, whilst being subjected to a level of invasive scrutiny, not just from the point they get elected, but going back almost to the day they were born. Most sensible people would give it a wide berth. And I realise from your posts, you think that applies only to Conservatives (whilst you pretend to be 'neutral'). I think you will find, Labour suffer from the same problem too.The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
blueg33 said:
The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
I thought the Upper House was supposed to be full of experts?The Lower House is full of elected representatives. There is an issue that of this pool we're then expected to have Ministers, so called experts or at the very least leaders in their assigned departments.
For whatever reason we rarely have people of any experience in the practical implementations of those departments in those ministerial positions
Evanivitch said:
blueg33 said:
The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
I thought the Upper House was supposed to be full of experts?The Lower House is full of elected representatives. There is an issue that of this pool we're then expected to have Ministers, so called experts or at the very least leaders in their assigned departments.
For whatever reason we rarely have people of any experience in the practical implementations of those departments in those ministerial positions
After the election close to half the government's MPs are likely to be entirely new to parliament with no idea how anything works.
EddieSteadyGo said:
blueg33 said:
....
The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
Why would anyone with genuine ability bother to stand? Low pay, ungrateful electorate, whilst being subjected to a level of invasive scrutiny, not just from the point they get elected, but going back almost to the day they were born. Most sensible people would give it a wide berth. And I realise from your posts, you think that applies only to Conservatives (whilst you pretend to be 'neutral'). I think you will find, Labour suffer from the same problem too.The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
I meant Labour too.
Until BJ became leader I have voted conservative all my life. I didn’t do so with him as leader because is was the most obvious slow motion car crash ever.
So I would lean towards conservative if it wasn’t such a s
t show. The only way to get back a Conservative Party could vote for is to get them out of government and reset. They always had people I thought were more competent than Labour particularly around the economy and taxation. Now they haven’t and they are demonstrably corrupt. Wombat3 said:
Evanivitch said:
blueg33 said:
The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
I thought the Upper House was supposed to be full of experts?The Lower House is full of elected representatives. There is an issue that of this pool we're then expected to have Ministers, so called experts or at the very least leaders in their assigned departments.
For whatever reason we rarely have people of any experience in the practical implementations of those departments in those ministerial positions
After the election close to half the government's MPs are likely to be entirely new to parliament with no idea how anything works.
Evanivitch said:
Wombat3 said:
Evanivitch said:
blueg33 said:
The competence standard in politics is very low at the moment. 10 years ago I met and briefed some total halfwits who were mp’s or ministers. Back then I thought at least these people won’t rise to the top. I was wrong.
I thought the Upper House was supposed to be full of experts?The Lower House is full of elected representatives. There is an issue that of this pool we're then expected to have Ministers, so called experts or at the very least leaders in their assigned departments.
For whatever reason we rarely have people of any experience in the practical implementations of those departments in those ministerial positions
After the election close to half the government's MPs are likely to be entirely new to parliament with no idea how anything works.
In fact if you ever watch the debates & speeches in the Lords, they are generally much more thoughtful, considered and far less partisan than the HoC. There is a vast amount of parliamentary, governmental, legislative and other experience in there.
As a second chamber I think it actually functions pretty well. That seems to get ignored when people have a bee in their bonnets about how it is constructed.
The plot thickens with Stockport Council reviewing a claim for a single person's council tax discount at Angela's property.
It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
Wombat3 said:
People often suggest we should have a second elected chamber, my answer to that is always "Have you seen the state of the first one???".
In fact if you ever watch the debates & speeches in the Lords, they are generally much more thoughtful, considered and far less partisan than the HoC. There is a vast amount of parliamentary, governmental, legislative and other experience in there.
As a second chamber I think it actually functions pretty well. That seems to get ignored when people have a bee in their bonnets about how it is constructed.
I think the upper house works, in theory. But the application is widely abused.In fact if you ever watch the debates & speeches in the Lords, they are generally much more thoughtful, considered and far less partisan than the HoC. There is a vast amount of parliamentary, governmental, legislative and other experience in there.
As a second chamber I think it actually functions pretty well. That seems to get ignored when people have a bee in their bonnets about how it is constructed.
Why are there hereditary peers?
Prime Ministers appointing their mates and other suspicious acquaintances?
Minority parties putting in people of little expertise?
Lords Spiritual?
It needs massive reform. That's not to say it needs to be a public election, but it's definitely rotten in the 21st century.
Evanivitch said:
Wombat3 said:
People often suggest we should have a second elected chamber, my answer to that is always "Have you seen the state of the first one???".
In fact if you ever watch the debates & speeches in the Lords, they are generally much more thoughtful, considered and far less partisan than the HoC. There is a vast amount of parliamentary, governmental, legislative and other experience in there.
As a second chamber I think it actually functions pretty well. That seems to get ignored when people have a bee in their bonnets about how it is constructed.
I think the upper house works, in theory. But the application is widely abused.In fact if you ever watch the debates & speeches in the Lords, they are generally much more thoughtful, considered and far less partisan than the HoC. There is a vast amount of parliamentary, governmental, legislative and other experience in there.
As a second chamber I think it actually functions pretty well. That seems to get ignored when people have a bee in their bonnets about how it is constructed.
Why are there hereditary peers?
Prime Ministers appointing their mates and other suspicious acquaintances?
Minority parties putting in people of little expertise?
Lords Spiritual?
It needs massive reform. That's not to say it needs to be a public election, but it's definitely rotten in the 21st century.
The main problem with reforming it is who will do it? If its led by government then that's run by politicians so its not a good place to start! It maybe needs some kind of public enquiry type mechanism followed by a referendum.
But as with all such things, the law of unintended consequences is always hovering close at hand. We could easily end up with something no more or even less effective.
Wombat3 said:
Well that's kind of the point, it works pretty well in spite of all that. It's something we need to be very careful with...law of unintended consequences and all that.
That's like saying a dictatorship works well provided everything runs smoothly...And yes, I agree that would have to be a large independent body that puts a proposal forward for a referendum.
Evanivitch said:
Wombat3 said:
Well that's kind of the point, it works pretty well in spite of all that. It's something we need to be very careful with...law of unintended consequences and all that.
That's like saying a dictatorship works well provided everything runs smoothly...And yes, I agree that would have to be a large independent body that puts a proposal forward for a referendum.
As above we'd have to be very certain anything we did would not just take us sideways or backwards.
Vanden Saab said:
The plot thickens with Stockport Council reviewing a claim for a single person's council tax discount at Angela's property.
It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
Link? It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
Legacywr said:
Vanden Saab said:
The plot thickens with Stockport Council reviewing a claim for a single person's council tax discount at Angela's property.
It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
Link? It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
I've probably said enough about AR already, but on the principle of MPs disclosing tax returns etc why the heck not.
There was another MP on the radio the other day refusing to talk about whether they would accept the latest MP payrise "it's private".
It's not. Its my money. There's an (inadequate) register of members interests.
If an MP (yes probably on average applies to more Tories than labour) has irregular / contrived tax arrangements we should be told.
There was another MP on the radio the other day refusing to talk about whether they would accept the latest MP payrise "it's private".
It's not. Its my money. There's an (inadequate) register of members interests.
If an MP (yes probably on average applies to more Tories than labour) has irregular / contrived tax arrangements we should be told.
Hammersia said:
I've probably said enough about AR already, but on the principle of MPs disclosing tax returns etc why the heck not.
There was another MP on the radio the other day refusing to talk about whether they would accept the latest MP payrise "it's private".
It's not. Its my money. There's an (inadequate) register of members interests.
If an MP (yes probably on average applies to more Tories than labour) has irregular / contrived tax arrangements we should be told.
I'd suggest starting with the problem are you trying to fix. You think MPs are evading tax? We already have dedicated experts in HMRC looking for that. You think the quality of MPs is poor? In which case, offering a below market pay job, and insisting they also then need to expose everything about their tax affairs to be picked over by journalists looking for their next click-bait headline - sounds like another way to discourage more good candidates from standing.There was another MP on the radio the other day refusing to talk about whether they would accept the latest MP payrise "it's private".
It's not. Its my money. There's an (inadequate) register of members interests.
If an MP (yes probably on average applies to more Tories than labour) has irregular / contrived tax arrangements we should be told.
I'd argue this whole debate/thread is a symptom of the real problem. I know it's good sport to go after Rayner, particularly as she is clearly a hypocrite when she has demanded a higher standard from others which she isn't prepared to do herself.
However, the fundamental problem is that our political system has became a soap opera, fuelled by the need to feed the 24-hour news cycle. Where is the (genuine) discussion about the best long term policies, evaluating the inevitable trade-offs, which will make our society more healthy, more happy and more wealthy over the coming decades? Instead the focus is on trivial tit-bits like this thread. And not just this thread, there are plenty of people more interested in clutching their pearls over total irrelevances in the Rishi Sunak (etc etc) threads too.
Vanden Saab said:
The plot thickens with Stockport Council reviewing a claim for a single person's council tax discount at Angela's property.
It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
Traitor! Wash your mouth out!It may be that in her haste to avoid claims of a CGT liability she has forgotten all about the electrol roll and council tax laws. It is always the cover up that catches you out.
Of course it might all be completely above board and is just a witchhunt stirred up by the Tories and the right wing media.
I don’t think they need to disclose tax returns, just answer questions honestly. The fact she won’t do so is a strong indication that she is not being truthful.
Question 1: did you rent your house to your brother?
Qu2: what years did he live at your house?
Qu3: what dates did you live at the house?
Qu4: did you claim single person discount for the years you lived at the house?
Etc
She will never answer
Question 1: did you rent your house to your brother?
Qu2: what years did he live at your house?
Qu3: what dates did you live at the house?
Qu4: did you claim single person discount for the years you lived at the house?
Etc
She will never answer
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff