Angela Rayner - 3 homes now

Lathyrus3

Doodledog

The lower paid, just like the higher paid, can vote for people who have policies of which they approve.

Renters' rights, higher CT for second homes, increased minimum wage, workers' rights, that sort of thing. Not everyone votes out of self-interest and bases their views on outdated notions of 'class'.

Hmm. Fewer houses for rent, higher rents as a consequence, redundancies due to increased costs for businesses, fewer job vacancies, benefits exceeding workers wages….

There’s been another side to that coin I’m afraid.

Time will tell.

I dislike the situation where working people need benefits to live. Anyone working a full week should earn enough to have a decent standard of living, and not depend on handouts, particularly when their employers are making huge profits. Workers are paying tax which goes straight into benefits that make recipients into dependents, and remove their autonomy when it comes to earning extra, getting financial gifts and so on.

The private rental market makes a lot of money for the few at the hands of the many, and the only reason the 'market rate' is so high is because there are so few council houses available at a fair rent.

I'm not sure what to think about the increased NI costs. I do feel that we need to recalibrate the system so 'working people' aren't expected to pay for everything, but I don't know how to make the system fairer, other than to expect everyone to make a financial contribution if they are capable of working. If they don't work, they should still have to pay, either via someone else paying a fair rate in their name or out of whatever money they are living on, with exceptions for children, the old (who have already paid in), the sick and carers for those groups and children under 5. That seems fair to me (although I am not a politician!) but it doesn't seem a popular point of view. IMO nobody is entitled to a free ride, and the benefits of living in the UK cost money, so the costs should be shared fairly.

I think benefits should only be available to those who have contributed a certain amount (with exceptions as above) and there should be a rethink about which conditions qualify for sick pay and protection from being fired. It is ridiculous that employers have to pay people who don't turn up when their jobs are stressful, and it's equally wrong that someone who has paid into a pension for decades can be worse off than someone who hasn't and gets pension credit.

I'm going off topic, but basically I'm saying that we (as a society) need to have a contract that is fair to everyone - employers as well as workers. As it is, too few people are paying for too many, and something has to give. Having so many people unable to afford a home, struggling to make ends meet and seeing no way out of it is why Reform is gaining traction, and why civil unrest is never far from the surface.

Unfortunately, when the government has tried to level things out they have been pounced on, and every attempt has been stalled. They got in on a promise not to raise tax, but when they try to cut benefits instead they are not allowed to do so, and they are stymied. It has to be one or the other, surely?

I’m not cross wuth Angela. I am pleased we made the decision we did
Well done, Iam64

on balance we agreed buying a second home was morally wrong for all of us
It is morally wrong, too, for a Government Minister whose Government is against second home owning to buy a second home.

M0nica Wed 27-Aug-25 17:19:21

M0nica says it all.

20th Jan

Not sure if it fresh on the bones exactly.

Hansard 29 th Han this year

Angela Rayner

“The government recognises that excessive concentrations of second homes impact on the availability and affordability of homes for local residents to buy and rent…
councils will be able to charge a Council Tax premium but we do not think that is enough..”

In answer to a question
“I understand that pressures are particularly acute because of second homes….”

I’m not disagreeing Lathyrus. We are living in rapidly changing times,
I’m in a friendship group where twenty years ago, we discussed buying a holiday home together, in my favourite county, Shropshire. As a group we could fairly easily put a deposit together and got a mortgage on a good property we could all have used, including with our children
I don’t claim we are a righteous group but on balance we agreed buying a second home was morally wrong for all of us and we would continue to book a big holiday let, twice a year for our jollies.
An investment would have meant holidays for us and our adult children, grand children were possible and our property value increased
I’m not cross wuth Angela. I am pleased we made the decision we did

Doodledog

The lower paid, just like the higher paid, can vote for people who have policies of which they approve.

Renters' rights, higher CT for second homes, increased minimum wage, workers' rights, that sort of thing. Not everyone votes out of self-interest and bases their views on outdated notions of 'class'.

Hmm. Fewer houses for rent, higher rents as a consequence, redundancies due to increased costs for businesses, fewer job vacancies, benefits exceeding workers wages….

There’s been another side to that coin I’m afraid.

Casdon

ronib

Casdon in a nutshell there’s a thread on this site about finding it practically impossible to exist due to rising prices etc. £1.16p left to last til the end of the month. So being told that AR is worth £4.7 million and checking out donations of clothing given by Lord Ali have left me feeling somewhat confused. Seems to be a common theme in the Labour Party! Anyway am unexpectedly busy at the moment…..

That isn’t it in a nutshell ronib, you can’t have meant just the clothes. I think you’re trying to avoid answering a direct question about what exactly you were insinuating. It’s a serious issue. Perhaps you will return to put some flesh on your post tomorrow.

I really wish someone, anyone - would put flesh on the bones of their accusations against AR. What exactly has she said that she has since acted against?

The lower paid, just like the higher paid, can vote for people who have policies of which they approve.

Renters' rights, higher CT for second homes, increased minimum wage, workers' rights, that sort of thing. Not everyone votes out of self-interest and bases their views on outdated notions of 'class'.

It seems very odd to have a Labour Government whose ministers espouse a belief in many homes for the rich even if that means no homes for the poor.

Who can the lower paid vote for now?

I listened to a phone in earlier. Yes the bbc attempts to reflect fairly. I was pleased at the number of callers saying this really is a non story. Look at Farrage, Hunt, Cleverley and more, they have property portfolios
It’s a British/English thing to get on the housing ladder, buy a second home if you can afford it because here, property usually pays dividends in the long term
Angela is acting outside the whippet owning expectations some have for “girls like her”. How very dare she

Mollygo

Maremia

Angela Raynor has 3 homes? So what, Farage, that 'man of the people' has 4.

So he’s greedy too, but, in his position as leader of a political party
is he telling people that second homes are contributing to the lack of available housing and he’s going to do something about it?

I wish he would do just that, & lay-off the "man of the people" demonising of outsiders.

If Rayner had any sense she’d own this as one of the things on which she doesn’t agree with Labour Party thinking. It’s a broad church and allowances can be made - circumstances alter cases etc

ronib

Casdon in a nutshell there’s a thread on this site about finding it practically impossible to exist due to rising prices etc. £1.16p left to last til the end of the month. So being told that AR is worth £4.7 million and checking out donations of clothing given by Lord Ali have left me feeling somewhat confused. Seems to be a common theme in the Labour Party! Anyway am unexpectedly busy at the moment…..

That isn’t it in a nutshell ronib, you can’t have meant just the clothes. I think you’re trying to avoid answering a direct question about what exactly you were insinuating. It’s a serious issue. Perhaps you will return to put some flesh on your post tomorrow.

ronib

Have a look at the Register of Interests MaizieD

That doesn't answer my question.

Are you implying that she has used political donations for personal gain?

Spot on comment on the nub of the matter Monica

Mollygo

Thanks M0nica
An excellent post.

Escaped

I've said before I have no real axe to grind with Angela Rayner here. Except that in her position as Deputy PM she appears to say one thing, then goes off and does the complete opposite.
Precisely.
And reading GN, that action appears to be supported as OK, with weird attempts to divert the issue by references to a ^ Green trouser suit,^ or ^more expensive properties.^

What has AR actually said, Molly. I am obviously missing something as so many people have made reference to it. I've been away for a while and haven't seen much news, so I accept that I may have missed it, but even a detailed search hasn't thrown up anything AR has said about second home ownership.

Thanks M0nica
An excellent post.

Escaped

I've said before I have no real axe to grind with Angela Rayner here. Except that in her position as Deputy PM she appears to say one thing, then goes off and does the complete opposite.
Precisely.
And reading GN, that action appears to be supported as OK, with weird attempts to divert the issue by references to a ^ Green trouser suit,^ or more expensive properties.

Can anyone point to what AR has said about second homes, please? I can't find anything. The only thing I can find that is even connected to AR is when Lisa Nandy stood in for her on Sky News and said that the Labour Party's housing policy was concerned with tilting the balance of power back towards first-time buyers and people who own their own homes to live in.

They have increased council tax on second homes, which is a big step in this direction, and the Renters' Rights Bill will make life much more secure for those at the mercy of private landlords.

I may well have missed comments from AR about second homes, and given that I disapprove of them in most circumstances I am in no way making a case for anything that makes it easier for some people to have several homes when others have none; but I am unable to find anything that points to hypocrisy on her part, and would be interested to see any quotes that show otherwise.

^It doesn't matter whether the Labour minister is male or female, black or white, from the north , south, east or west was publicly educated or privately or never educated at all.;

I was just writing what I've said below before I quickly read your post * M0nica*.
Don't care is a good comment.

I don't care
- whether a politician has a rags to riches story
- whether they have a degree in a useful subject
- what class they are, or came from
- where they went to school
- what accent they have
- what colour they are

The list is endless, and irrelevant.

I do, however, care that they hide behind false words and actions when it comes to their own lives. How do they reconcile the two when they are full of inconsistencies?

I've said before I have no real axe to grind with Angela Rayner here. Except that in her position as Deputy PM she appears to say one thing, then goes off and does the complete opposite.

The reason this house purchase causes offence has nothing to do with snobbery or any of the other nonsense posted on this thread.

The Labour party has made a big 'thing' about second homes. Second hand home owners have been demonised for making it impossible for local people to get on the housing ladder, undermining local economies.

It has been made very clear by Labour that secondhand homes are a BAD thing and those who owned them should be castigated and taxed until they have to sell their second home at a loss. The worst second house owners are those who buy second homes in seaside areas.

So what has happened? A labour government minister has gone out and bought themselves a second home by the sea.

It doesn't matter whether the Labour minister is male or female, black or white, from the north , south, east or west was publicly educated or privately or never educated at all.

The only thing that matters is that a Labour government minister is saying. 'Do as I say, not as I do' and, essentially, that there is one rule for the rest of us oiks, but government ministers operate is some mystical sphere where ordinary rules do not apply to them.

Her main home seems to be in her constituency, and she has a government supplied home in London. In the same way that other MPs, who do not have grace and favour residents have homes in their constituencies and own/rent in London for their work.

But holiday homes by the seaside when you condemn everyone else who dares to do such things. Sorry, that is unacceptble.

Latter was 2024.

whywhywhy

Who cares?
What about people who have lots of houses and rent them out to students at ridiculous prices? Some of these properties are unsafe and downright dangerous!
She has done well for herself so why can’t she have three houses? Some people are just blooming JEALOUS!

Are these people Labour MPs?
Surely not!

Oh, wait a minute ....

www.independent.co.uk/politics/labour-landlords-renters-rights-mps-b2804457.html
2025
www.landlordzone.co.uk/news/new-labour-now-has-more-landlord-mps-than-tories

Maremia

Angela Raynor has 3 homes? So what, Farage, that 'man of the people' has 4.

So he’s greedy too, but, in his position as leader of a political party
is he telling people that second homes are contributing to the lack of available housing and he’s going to do something about it?

Angela Raynor has 3 homes? So what, Farage, that 'man of the people' has 4.