Angela Rayner - 3 homes now

Cossy

Storm in a teacup! Personally I don’t really care how many houses MPs have, so long as everyone else who needs housing has access to suitable housing

There you have it!!

I don't care if people, MPs, have second homes (unless they're left empty to rot of course) as long as they don't tell others it's wrong to do so.

Love that escaped.

We should all buy a second home to chill out and unwind from the daily grind.

Just not if we’re a government minister for housing,spouting a policy that is against that and saying that having second homes is depriving others of first homes.

I don’t see it as anything to get worked up about. She has a grace & favour home in London,which is a requirement for long days and nights working, a constituency home and a seaside getaway.
Ask to see the property portfolios of other MP’s past & present!

How many people have a second home or holiday home, some rent a house out for AirB&B. Why would one complain that she has a rented flat which she needs for her work in London. Get a life.

Storm in a teacup! Personally I don’t really care how many houses MPs have, so long as everyone else who needs housing has access to suitable housing

There's often misconceptions as to why people buy a holiday home. It isn't always to secure a financial asset that will greatly increase in value over time. My guess, though I haven't spoken to Angela Rayner, is that she didn't do it for those reasons.

I think that she bought the Hove property as a retreat to unwind a bit from the daily grind, and to chill out by the sea in Brighton's bars. Is that selfish? I don't think it is. Good on her!

So, the only reason I can see why there are so many objections must be precisely because of what she should stand for as Labour Deputy Prime Minister. That's the problem.

Hippo critical! 🦛 (Sorry!)

That paywall is a deterrent to reading the complete article. She is being targeted by the largely right wing press for an arrangement common to many Mp’s, especially Cabinet members with an official role. She has an official residence, her own home and a second home. No news here - just stirring the pot! Good luck to her! She has not forgotten those in need in spite of her personal success.

Just a thought but Angela Rayner does have a lot of backing from the unions and I did wonder if she was the preferred candidate as replacement PM? Therefore any adverse publicity makes a possible takeover bid less likely?? Just musing ….

Well considering her role I find it hippo critical. She has allocated her London grace and favour government home as her second home. This means the tax payer pays the council tax on it. Her home in her constituency is considerably lower down the scale for council tax and she pays that as it is her second home. Given that she has now bought an apartment in Brighton, I think it ridiculous to suggest her constituency home is her primary residence. She is in London most of the time. John Prescott did the same years ago when he had the same grace and favour property and he was quickly shamed for it and did the right thing by swapping the allocation. No I don't like Angela Rayner much, but I'm hard pressed to find a politician of any persuasion that I do like nowadays.

It's how you tell 'em, Lathyrus! 😀

Ha ha. I knew it would happen.

i newspaper quotes a “backbencher” ( no name given)

“I’m not sure our message is that people shouldn’t buy second homes, just that those who do should pay back their fair share to the list cal community.”

So second homes depriving local people of housing and destroying communities no longer the problem raised by Housing Ministers in Parliament a short while ago.

Gosh, the Government solved that one quickly didn’t they? Impressive 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

Mollygo

^hypocrisy' of which AR is accused - how does that compare^. . .

I think a better example of hypocrisy . . .

Grading hypocrisy could be the new thing.

I don't think it's new. Cognitive dissonance isn't new either.

I don't see how anyone can claim that hypocrisy is all the same, any more than honesty is. Is it hypocritical to tell a host that their dinner is delicious if you tell your children not to tell lies? Is it ok to tell children that Santa brings presents at Christmas but complain when they say they didn't eat the chocolate cake that's all over their face? Is killing the enemy ok in war, but not killing someone who stand between you and an inheritance? Is stealing bread to feed your children the same as stealing a car.or would you 'grade' those things differently?

We differentiate between transgressions all the time, unless we are unable to understand human nature, distinguish between motives and recognise that life is mostly shades of grey.

Was it hypocritical to follow the advice at the time to invest in property, if possible, because pensions schemes were failing?

Friends did this, the house is rented out to a family now, having been trashed previously by a single man, costing them a lot in renovations.

hypocrisy' of which AR is accused - how does that compare. . .

I think a better example of hypocrisy . . .

Grading hypocrisy could be the new thing.

just as it is not hypocritical for people like Diane Abbot to send her son to private school because at present it will disadvantage him to use the state system.

Of course it was hypocritical for Dianne Abbott, Shirley Williams and the Rev. David Shepherd to send their children to selective schools, because the Labour party was in the process of attempting removing selective education (as they are now) and depriving other pupils of a choice.

Rosie51

I do think those in positions of power to make rulings, guidance, whatever, that 'ordinary people' are expected to comply with should be voluntarily compliant themselves.

This massive hypocrite as an example. In her resignation letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, Rushanara maintained that she "at all times" acted in compliance with legal obligations. Legal but certainly not moral.

I agree.

There is a certain amount of expectation that politicians should be like Caesar's wife, particularly if they are in a position to know about imminent changes to things like taxation or other financial legislation of which others can't be aware.

The difference is when the law is not particularly moral, as (IMO) is the fact that people can own more than one house. As long as that is the case, it is neither hypocritical or illegal to do so, just as it is not hypocritical for people like Diane Abbot to send her son to private school because at present it will disadvantage him to use the state system.

Simultaneously working towards a system that removes two-tier educational opportunities (or the right to buy, or the right to buy second homes for holiday use) is no different from wanting the NHS to improve so that everyone can get timely operations, but paying to jump the queue.

It's morally questionable, maybe, but not (IMO) immoral, and certainly not illegal. I don't think it's hypocritical either, if the person doing it is genuinely doing it as an interim measure until the system changes.

And I do think there are degrees of hypocrisy, just as there are types of lie, or grades of crime. Life is not black or white unless you have a very simplistic or fundamentalist world view.

eazybee

Oh, I have no doubt Rayner would employ someone to search for and view suitable properties,' on behalf of my clients', then she and 'companion' would view out of hours.

Yes, I remember tearing 200 miles down the m4/m5 and back every weekend to view what had come on to buy, some of which had offers on them before I even got there. Crazy times! When THE ONE came on the market, luckily, it was in the school holidays, so I had more time to be on the spot. DH, however, flew in from London City the next evening, checked the property out, and was back at his desk in London, all within 36 hours.
Employing someone to view 'on behalf of my clients' would have helped a lot!
Actually I quite like the sound of that job!

I do think those in positions of power to make rulings, guidance, whatever, that 'ordinary people' are expected to comply with should be voluntarily compliant themselves.

This massive hypocrite as an example. In her resignation letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, Rushanara maintained that she "at all times" acted in compliance with legal obligations. Legal but certainly not moral.

Whitewavemark2

27% of MPs own more than 1 property. 40% of MPs have registered an interest in more than 1 property.

Some MPs have interest in multiple properties.

MPs generally are three times more likely to own more than one home than the general public.

Of course, because generally, members of the public in ordinary jobs do not get their homes paid for by their company or by the taxpayer.

The most we ever had was moving expenses paid by DH's firm after they requested him to relocate.

Mollygo

Sorry, that’s funny. Are we now grading hypocrisy?
It is or it isn’t.

What is funny?

escaped

^I didn't say it was 'incessant', incidentally, just that it happens^
😆 okie dokie
But you said, the number of times people gloat which means continually, doesn't it?

Anyway, people I know don't do that in conversation. Not a good way to make friends with the locals.

No, not continually. 'A number of times' is pretty vague, but okie dokie, you interpret it to suit yourself.

It does happen though, even if not in your experience, and I agree, it's not a great way to integrate.

As for the WFP, there were 'continuous' posts made more than 'a number of times' about it. It was beyond tedious, particularly when many of the complainers had posted when the Tories were in power to point out that they didn't need the payment and would like to see it scrapped.

I posted a link to a previous thread where this had happened, and it was very clear that political point scoring was going on. Either that, or confirmation bias got in the way of interpretation of events. If Labour are doing it it must be because they are 'coming for' pensioners, but when the Tories were doing it it was an example of how universal benefits give money to the undeserving and should be cut.

Or it's yet another Communications failure for the government. I can't believe how badly they are doing with getting their messaging across. It would be laughable if not so serious.

Oh, I have no doubt Rayner would employ someone to search for and view suitable properties,' on behalf of my clients', then she and 'companion' would view out of hours.

So judgemental on this thread. I don't think AR is any different from other politicians. Not a fan of hers but she does seem to get picked on more than others.

As for the 'hypocrisy' of which AR is accused - how does that compare to people who used to say they didn't need the WFA but still took it and then complained endlessly when it was withdrawn?

No comparison whatsoever. The Winter Fuel Allowance was unsolicited; it was withdrawn without prior notice and came as a shock, but most people on here and those I know did not complain endlessly They accepted it, then Labour did one of its many u-turns; I doubt very much that we will receive it beyond this Christmas.
The hypocrisy lies in AR lecturing the electorate about the detrimental effect second homes have on the availability of property for those living in that area, then as a politician responsible for implementing that policy doing exactly what she condemns.

Just wondering, does Angela Rayner employ someone like Kirstie or Phil to find her a home? Otherwise she must have taken quite some time away from her job viewing prospective properties, plus travelling time, around the area.