Angela Rayner is a scrounger, grifter and shameless hypocrite.

AGAA4

Sunshinegirls

07:08Maremia

What's your excuse you've been on this thread quite a few times 😀

I've been on this thread a few times too. It's not enjoyable but seeing someone being vilified for something they haven't done has to be addressed however horrible the thread is.

I’ve just read through this thread. I’m quoting AGAA4 because it sums up how I feel. There’s something grubby about seeing AR vilified by women, especially those of us old enough to be her mother.
AR had a tough childhood. Her mum had mh problems, dad often absent, leaving AR in a carer role. Like many others from similar backgrounds, school attendance wasn’t prioritised by parents. An early baby, then she took advantage of Sure Start and began to build a better life for herself. She’s more representative of many in her constituency than many, Nadine Norris for example. She represents grifting, shamelessness and hypocracy

AR received her due severance payment in line with the Ministerial code. She was out of government office for 10.5 months before returning to cabinet.

Those that say her actions were not moral are in fact saying the Ministerial Code is immoral which and AR is not responsible for the Ministerial Code. Better that posters and Nadine Norris contact their MP/ Parliament to complain that the Ministerial Code is immoral

Suella Braverman was sacked from her government role received the same severance payment and returned to government just role 6 days later. To those that are complaining about Angela Rayner did Suella Braverman act immorally, is she a grifter, scrounger and a shameless hypocrite? If not why not?

Are all the cabinet minsters that received the same severance payment grifters, scroungers and shameless hypocrites? If not why not?

What makes AR any different than SB?

Or is it just that AR is a working class female, Labour Party politician that gets up some posters and Nadine Norris's nose? If those criticising AR are not similarly criticising Suella Braverman and all the other MPs that have received the same service payment that is hypocritical

Yes Suella Braverman did act immorally in my view as do/did anyone who’s back as a Minister in less than a year.True that it’s legally theirs and I wish it would be set out that no severance will be given at all ( they’re still MP’s with a salary) and certainly not under a year out of office.
How wonderful it would be to see a Labour Minister such as AR making a gesture by waiving the severance.
There’s nothing remotely grubby about wishing to see it.
Most people know about AR and her background and I can think of other MP’s who had poor or ghastly childhoods, it doesn’t make anyone a saint tho or even good at their jobs.

I'm not sure the Suella Braverman argument is relevant.

Under the Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act 1991, where a Minister of eligible age ceases to hold office and is not reappointed to a ministerial office within three weeks, they will be entitled to a severance payment of a quarter of their ministerial annual salary.

Those are the rules that were in force when SB was in government.

SB would no longer have been entitled to severance pay for her first departure on 19 October 2022 but would have been entitled for the second on 13 November 2023.

According to the i newpaper, official records show that she repaid the severance she had been given for the first.

tinyurl.com/5erer8ec

I think Dorries has recovered from her hissy fit. She's in the DM today writing about her Mounjaro bikini body.

Columnists have to write about something don’t they? Doesn’t always mean they’re wrong.

That’s interesting tho about SB handing back her first severance pay.

Good that you have acknowledged Suella's behaviour Oreo. I agree SB keeping her full service payment after being sacked for a serious breach of the Code and then returning to cabinet just 6 days later is immoral. I'm hoping that posters who have denigrated AR will also respond regarding Suella Braverman's actions.

AR resigned 5 September 2025, she wasn't sacked like SB and did not seriously breach the MC as did SB. Rayner returned to office 20 July 2026, i.e. 321 days later, so just under your preferred one year threshold for repayment. Pro rata repayment?

Personally I would set the threshold at the three month amount that the severance payment covers- for pro rata repayment if return to office within 3 months. Some might set a 6 month threshold which I wouldn't argue with depending on circumstances of leaving, but I think a year is too long. In reality- once AR fully takes up her new AB cabinet role after the summer recess she will meet your preferred 1 year threshold.

Having said all that the Ministerial Code was changed and tightened up by Starmer, on 13 October last year. Ie ministers leaving office having served fewer than 6 months or following a serious breach of the Ministerial code will no longer get payment. That would knock out Liz Truss's PM severance payment for her 7 week stint and also knock out Suella's severance payment as she did commit a serious breach of the MC.

AR referred herself to the government's ethics advisor Sir Laurie Magnus, once she was advised she had paid the wrong amount of stamp duty. Magnus concluded that Rayner "cannot be considered to have reached the highest possible standards of proper conduct as envisaged by the code" but was not found to have seriously breached the MC and she was not required to resign- but AR chose to resign herself as she wanted to be seen to be holding herself to the highest standards- which is to her credit in my book.

Excuse? How rude.
I don't need an excuse to come onto a Thread looking for insightful and interesting discussion.

The tightening up of the severance pay rules are good but don’t go as far as I would wish, but unfortunately I’m not in any position to change things.
It’s time that politicians as servants of the people became less enamoured of their perks, maybe AB will want to set a good example, I hope so.

Thanks to the informed Posters willing to share their knowledge, it is clear that ND was out of order in her comment about AR.

I think Nadine Norris was definitely out of order seeking to denigrate AR in all the circumstances. In my book she would be better directing her attention to behaviours closer to home in her own party.

Primrose53

So says Nadine Dorries who did hand back her severance pay of approx £17,000 whilst AR is refusing to give hers back. ND was given hers by mistake as those over 65 are not entitled to it but she did give it back.

This has been covered in all the papers and TV channels and I have yet to hear anybody say AR deserves to keep it.

Now that you have read all the comparative comments that have been posted on this thread e.g.
1) Nadine Norris being absent from her MP post for months on end but still felt entitled to her full MP salary before she decided to resign
2) her party colleague, Suella Braverman being sacked from government for a Serious breach of the Code, getting her severance pay yet keeping it after returning to office just 6 days later
3) compared to AR who did not commit a serious breach of the code but decided to resign anyway-

What are your views now Primrose53 regarding the comments of Nadine Norris you originally posted?

I wonder if Dorries wants to be the ‘ girl from a poor background who has done well in politics’ and is peeved that Rayner is the ultimate success story in that sphere?

Thing is though, ND didn't actually do that well as a politician.
She made a big fuss about planning to defund Channel 4, because she didn't approve of something they had broadcast. This was when she was Minister for Culture.

Maremia

Thing is though, ND didn't actually do that well as a politician.
She made a big fuss about planning to defund Channel 4, because she didn't approve of something they had broadcast. This was when she was Minister for Culture.

Her threats to defund just demonstrate what a pathetic Culture Secretary she was because C4 was actually self- funding so she could hardly defund them of their own ( not public) money.

Thats just about sums up NN- she has every case to be jealous of AR's success.

Primrose53

So says Nadine Dorries who did hand back her severance pay of approx £17,000 whilst AR is refusing to give hers back. ND was given hers by mistake as those over 65 are not entitled to it but she did give it back.

This has been covered in all the papers and TV channels and I have yet to hear anybody say AR deserves to keep it.

Yes, Rayner is all those things. But the view of Dorries won’t change that. 🤷‍♀️

Frankly, who really gives a silent fart about Dorries' opinion.
Not me.

🤣 😂

She should pay back what she's not entitled to She made money on her council house anyway and then changed the discount available for tennants so they got less She didn't think like a labour rep low wages less chance of buying a house She just changed it

Someone above said jealous of Angela Raynor's success what success ??

More success than anyone on this site, I'd think.

She is legally entitled, as are all under 65 to a severence pay equivalent to a percentage of the wage they earned.

Well, attaining the posts of Deputy PM and Minister for Housing*TakeThat7*. I think most people would consider that successful.

Very successful I would say and more than Nadine Norris ever has and ever could achieve for sure.

Nadine Dorries that is...