Angela Rayner is a scrounger, grifter and shameless hypocrite.

Well Nadine wasn't entitled to it and AR is entitled to it so completely different.

You are reallyposting over an entitled £17.000 when Farage is in trouble for 5 million and much, much more?

The £17,000 pay out to Rayner was paid by the tax payer different I think and she's back in the same job, she should have paid it back. Voters would have thought better of her if she had I think and although she was let off about the house tax a cloud of doubt still hangs over her rightly or wrongly.

And so say all of us

No time for her, she is an embarrassment and a scrounger.

She's none of those. She was entitled to the pay, it's in MP's contracts. She's probably spent some of it by now, she has an important job do & do we really want her worrying about her household budget.

The only Tory who paid theirs back was Nadine for the simple reason that it was paid in error & could have been taken back out of her salary at any time when the error was realised.

She was in the cabinet for a year, different from some who were only in Truss's cabinet for 6 weeks & still got the same pay-off.

Rayner as Housing Secretary underpaid 40,000 stamp duty doesn't give you much confidence in Burnham's choices. We have Louise Haigh Convicted Fraudster and Jonathan Reynolds who falsely said he was a solicitor wonder how many more secrets, indiscretions, lies if any will come out in the future. I forgot Mrs Dogwhistle and the grooming gang scandal.

Not "all of us" Leelaylo

No-one takes Dorries seriously anyway.

The wording of the Ministerial Code is:

Ministers are expected to waive, on appointment, entitlement to a ministerial severance payment upon leaving office if they have served less than six months, or where they have committed a serious breach of the Ministerial Code, resulting in their departure.

Sir Laurie Magnus did not consider her breach of the ministerial code serious. That word does not appear in his letter to the Prime Minister and that’s why she was entitled to the severance pay.

Whether Laurie Magnus’s was correct in concluding she had breached the code is disputed.

Tax expert Dan Neidle: Rayner’s lawyer Graham Aaronson KC says the publicly stated facts were incomplete and (although he is not that blunt) Sir Laurie Magnus got it wrong. Mr Aaronson says that, properly understood, the legal advice Ms Rayner received was sufficient to show she had taken reasonable care.

Importantly, HMRC did not find her careless regarding her Stamp Duty Land Tax; they have cleared her of carelessness and deliberate wrongdoing.

This was a complex case involving a trust for her disabled son. Had she postponed buying a property for a year until he turned 18, which he now has, the matter would not have arisen.

She has not been in a cabinet position for over 10 months.

A cabinet minister receives additional pay about that of a backbench MP of between of £67,505 and £72,454.

If Magnus was wrong then she had lost far more income than the £16,876 severance pay she received.

There was never any guarantee she would return to a cabinet position and arguably may not have done had we not had a change of Prime Minister.

She’s right to keep the severance pay.

According to a DT articke she made £180,000 in the year after she stepped down over the unpaid tax ussue. See www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/ddf14c403965a9fd

I recall she spoke against second jobs for MPs.

Nadine Dorries was my MP for a while. She made full use of the “main residence” allowance,and switching, more than once, to make as much money as possible.She rarely came to the constituency and did nothing for us because she was occupied in making money elsewhere.

I also despise Angela Rayner as a someone who is only out for herself and who is skilled in bending the rules. Morally bankrupt.

Pot and kettle - in other words just your typical MPs regardless of Party.

To my mind, it is not Angela Rayners who is the scrounger, grifter and hypocrite of British politics. Nadine Dorries needs to look much closer to home. I do understand her choice of words though, as she’s employing the dead cat technique, much like this thread is attempting to do.

Grantanow

According to a DT articke she made £180,000 in the year after she stepped down over the unpaid tax ussue. See www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/ddf14c403965a9fd

I recall she spoke against second jobs for MPs.

Small change compared to some.

The provisions that members over the age of 65 can receive severance pay is in the Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act 1991:

4 Grants to persons ceasing to hold ministerial and other offices.

(1)Where a person who has not attained the age of sixty-five—

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1991/5/section/4

So Dorries is wrong when she says it was Rayner who insisted I repay mine because I was over 65? It’s law that existed long before either came into Parliament so she should not have been paid it in the first place.

I agree with Graphites facts. Except the last paragraph. She was very much involved in the plotting of getting KS out. She and AB are as thick as thieves. I don't think she minded at all at having to leave her cabinet post. It was cannily good timing as thereafter the plotting commenced.

Correcting typo: The provisions that members over the age of 65 cannot receive severance pay is in the Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act 1991.