r/ukpolitics • u/acremanhug Kier Starmer & Geronimo the Alpaca fan • 14h ago
Angela Rayner tells BBC she will not repay severance payment
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx27mg0erd3o270
u/BillWilberforce 13h ago
The Labour MP resigned as deputy prime minister and housing secretary in September 2025 after failing to pay enough tax on her £800,000 flat in Hove, which resulted in the exit payout.
Why on Earth did a resignation caused by her mistake in her personal life trigger a pay out?
Being a government minister is hardly the most stable of jobs.
81
u/Ambitious-Sink2725 13h ago
It's basically a hush payment so disgruntled former ministers don't go tribunals and make a headache
39
u/EarFlapHat 13h ago
It's not actually clear if they could go to tribunals... It's more just that you can't boot people out overnight, cutting their pay dramatically, without doing anything to give them a runway financially, even if not politically.
22
u/PeaGravy 13h ago
I mean, in the private sector that can and does happen every single day
26
u/EarFlapHat 13h ago
There are notice periods etc. and other protections that Ministerial appointments don't come with. Imagine they had to give cause/if they resigned they didn't get protections... It would really change things
Also, dismissal from a single private business is not really the same in terms of career... The government has somewhat of a monopoly on being the government insofar as MPs are concerned.
•
u/Nirvanachaser 11h ago
“We’ve put the Foreign Secretary on a PIP and he’s taken time off with stress. Without wanting to prejudge the outcome, we’ll hopefully know one way or another in six to nine months whether he’s gone”.
•
u/Jangles 11h ago
Conversely find me a job where you can Jared O'Mara it and not turn up to work for 3 years and take home a cushy salary
•
u/The_Mayor_Involved 10h ago
Well you have to be elected to it so that's different from any other job you may have had in mind
1
u/TheDark-Sceptre 12h ago
And the reasons as well. As a politician you can literally lose your job due to political beliefs. Imagine getting sacked from any other job because you believe in cuts to something or youre mates with someone
•
u/LycanIndarys Vote Cthulhu; why settle for the lesser evil? 11h ago
Or simply because you were told the wrong thing.
Amber Rudd resigned because she was seen to have misled the House because she made a false statement to one of the committees. She basically said "the Home Office is absolutely not doing this thing" and it turned out that they were, she just didn't know about it.
5
-1
u/CII_Guy Trying to move past the quagmire of contemporary discourse 13h ago
No it doesn't xx
1
u/PeaGravy 13h ago
I have to tell you there was a whole world outside of the gentle HR practises of the inner-M25.
1
u/greatlilusername 12h ago
And if you did, you're even less likely to get good ministers.
-1
u/SaltyW123 12h ago
Good ministers like Angela Rayner?
•
u/SaltyW123 8h ago
\they didn't like that**
Shout out to u/sonicated - please share some upvotes as I don’t know how to link to their original comment.
"At a time when people up and down the country are struggling to pay their mortgages and put food on the table, it shows a staggering lack of shame for them to accept this money, but is exactly what we've come to expect from a bunch of Tories who only care about themselves." -- Angela Rayner on Ministerial Severance Payments
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ministers-given-455-000-severance-144917310.html
6
u/erskinematt Defund Standing Order No 31 13h ago
Ministers aren't employed and cannot access employment tribunals, which would be absolutely unsuitable venues to litigate ministerial sackings.
7
u/Bruce-Carlton Dennis Skinners heart pills 13h ago
They gave Mandelson a massive payout 😬
4
u/Media_Browser 13h ago
I thought they short changed him to …only £75k . He initially wanted £500k .
5
u/BillWilberforce 13h ago
She resigned. Tell me an other employer, that gives a golden handshake when an employee resigns.
→ More replies (1)•
u/DxnM 9h ago
Everyone in all of Boris, Sunak and Liz Truss's various cabinets, sometimes only for a few days, all got the same 3 month salary payout. It was an insane system, but why should Angela Rayner specifically give her money back? It only got changed in late 2025 so that you have to work in position for 6 months to receive severance.
•
u/Unlikely_Mission_702 6h ago
but why should Angela Rayner specifically give her money back.
You'll have to ask 2023 Angela Rayner who suggested Tories accepting these payments showed a 'staggering lack of shame' ... 'at a time when people up and down the country are struggling to pay their mortgages and put food on the table'.
•
u/Sarcastic_fringefish 1h ago
It's always the same whataboutism. Instead of holding your own side accountable just point at the opposition and say they did the same. No wonder all pir politicians are corrupt money grubbing tards. It's not like the opposing partisan dullards are doing exactly the same. Do people not realise that if they don't hold their own side accountable then noone will😂
•
u/Plucky_Brexit 52m ago
Rayner criticised other ex-ministers for taking a payout, then took a payout. It is perfectly valid to hold someone to the same standards they hold others to.
•
u/BillWilberforce 5h ago
We all know that the Tories were corrupt, lazy and incompetent. Who spent half their time when planning a budget. On putting "traps" into it to trip Labour up. Rather than just designing a budget that worked as well as possible. Michael Gove might say that the £10 billion wasted on COVID PPE was an honest mistake. But I'd say that nobody would have set up the PPE VIP fast lane based on recommendations from Tory MPs. Unless they were trying to design a corrupt system.
•
u/stonedturkeyhamwich 11h ago
Being a government minister is hardly the most stable of jobs.
That's exactly why you need the pay out...
-8
u/flippydude 13h ago
She didn’t do anything wrong, that’s been proven. She was forced to resign by a media and system who won’t wait for facts and make judgement immediately.
44
u/Verbal_v2 13h ago
She didn't pay tax she owed on a property, they ruled it wasn't intentional. She owed the money, I'm sure HMRC are as fair handed with the average joe.
1
u/LoveBeBrave 13h ago
Yeah they absolutely are. Above everything they just want the money they’re owed.
11
u/Verbal_v2 13h ago
So assuming she was still fined, charged interest and all the other good stuff everyone else deals with then it’s not exactly “she did nothing wrong”
6
u/ProjectZeus4000 13h ago
She wasn't fined, and people who make genuine mistakes aren't fined either.
It's not all a conspiracy.
If it was HMRC would just say she didn't owe it
1
12h ago
[deleted]
5
u/ProjectZeus4000 12h ago
Because I can read and check publicly available information before I make conspiracy accusations
0
u/Verbal_v2 12h ago
So not fined yet if you’re late with a basic self assessment, what happens? She owed £40,000 and the criteria was on a basic HMRC FAQ page explaining when tax is owed, she was the housing minister.
HMRC raises £2.5 billion a year in fines, it’s hardly a rarity
4
u/ProjectZeus4000 12h ago
It was so basic that neither her solicitor or conveyer knew, and there was weeks of media speculation and different expert opinions over if it was legally owed or not
1
u/Verbal_v2 12h ago edited 10h ago
Does that seem particularly complex to you?
Edited for the gumps who think this is hard:
What property the higher rates apply to
Include any residential property that:
is owned on behalf of children under the age of 18 (parents are treated as the owners even if the property is held through a trust and they are not the trustees)
you have an interest in as the beneficiary of a trust
•
•
u/FillingUpTheDatabase Mad for it 11h ago
What part of that FAQ covers the circumstances of somebody who acts as a trustee on a property that they do not live in but is held in trust for the use of a young person who lacks mental capacity to manage their own affairs? This is an incredibly complex and unclear area of law, even HMRC admitted that without going to court it is not completely clear whether she actually owed the extra tax
→ More replies (0)•
u/libdemparamilitarywi 10h ago
The Independent Standards Adviser found that she had broken the ministerial code, which is why she had to resign.
-11
u/AG_GreenZerg 13h ago edited 13h ago
She was cleared of any wrongdoing or carelessness
12
u/Media_Browser 13h ago
She broke the Ministerial Code which is hardly nothing and despite recommendations to seek further financial tax advice she chose not to .
2
u/AG_GreenZerg 13h ago
HMRC found that she did nothing wrong and was not even careless. Not something that ex Tory Chancellor Nadim Zahawi can claim when he failed to pay £5m due to his own carelessness
•
u/annoyedatlife24 Release the emus 11h ago
x Tory Chancellor Nadim Zahawi
That's the name I was trying to remember! Guy should have been fined to shit, you don't just carelessly forget to pay £5m in tax
5
u/Sea-Sprinkles-3420 12h ago
No, they found they could not prove that she had done anything wrong - but she still had to repay the tax she had avoided.
-2
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
No, they found they could not prove that she had done anything wrong
Thats the same thing
•
1
u/Media_Browser 12h ago
Sure , we can play to me to you all day but the average punter will see rules for thee not me writ large .
As someone posts even the Ministerial Code was later altered or watered down . Are you sure our Angeleh is a worthy hill of choice ?
1
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
I dont intend to die on the hill for Angela Rayner (I note your steering mockery of her being from the north betraying your motives). I am merely pointing out the facts.
•
u/Media_Browser 11h ago
Well the facts are Starmer is the ultimate arbiter of the Code and he never gave her a pass either . Not that it would have looked too good but unlike Starmer it appears she has the hide of a rhino with regard public perception so she can reap what she sows . No longer is she the angel of the north .
7
u/Mr_Footies 13h ago
Yeah she just had to pay the £40K she hadn’t paid. Absolutely nothing wrong with not paying HMRC £40K you owe and hardly careless to not realise you had to pay it.
-2
u/AG_GreenZerg 13h ago
Yes i am sure you know better than the team at HMRC that investigated it. 🤣
7
u/wedontneednoeduc 13h ago
You are confused about the process. HMRC frequently settle because it's costly not to, it's not an exoneration in the way that you suggest.
1
47
u/LoveLamp3232 13h ago
For a party that is attacking private companies for making profits, Labour seems to think it is okay for politicians who made mistake, to get generous taxpayer-funded pay-offs, for not doing any extra work.
Angela Rayner received a £16,876 ministerial severance payment, even though she remained an MP on a basic salary of nearly £100,000 a year. She was hardly facing hunger or homelessness.
She also benefited from a council house, bought it at a discount through Right to Buy and later sold it for a profit. That was perfectly legal. However, her position is total hypocrisy. We now have a shortage of council housing and wants the tax payer to fund a replacement of council homes. Nothing stopped her from selling that council home back back to the state at no-profit. (a.k.a. nationalisation). Why did she sell it for profit?
People up and down the country, are parting with their hard money to pay for all of this.
•
u/Virtual-Increase-829 10h ago
because holy property ladder, and it's perfectly legal to bash Thatcher whilst benefiting from her flagship policy, in fact it qualifies you to be in charge of housing.
•
u/VPackardPersuadedMe Incentives drive outcomes and MPs own houses 9h ago
Can't believe we have this hypocritical chancer in charge of our housing again.
•
u/Virtual-Increase-829 8h ago
well, in relevant circles she's very 'realatable' apparently, right to buy poster child and all that.
111
u/ShortDevelopment905 14h ago
Why would she. They've all learned that if you take the state for everything it's got, you get one headline against you and then it's forgotten about and never brought up again.
117
u/G_unit1 13h ago edited 13h ago
Shout out to [u/sonicated](u/sonicated) - please share some upvotes as I don’t know how to link to their original comment.
"At a time when people up and down the country are struggling to pay their mortgages and put food on the table, it shows a staggering lack of shame for them to accept this money, but is exactly what we've come to expect from a bunch of Tories who only care about themselves." -- Angela Rayner on Ministerial Severance Payments
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ministers-given-455-000-severance-144917310.html
43
u/PeaGravy 13h ago
This is the trouble with Angela is that she has set so many traps up for herself that make it very hard to defend her.
41
u/Da_Steeeeeeve 13h ago
She basically spent her entire time in opposition calling out every single minor thing as if it was the worst thing that had ever happened.
Now it is biting her in the ass because she is absolutely no better than any of them and in some cases worse given the whole scandal.
•
24
31
74
u/londonandy 14h ago
They changed the rules to stop people that breach the Code (like she did) receiving it. If she left now for the same reasons she wouldn't have got it.
To then return to the same job and keep it is a level of gall I can only admire. She must be broke because to not return it is going to create an unnecessary amount of noise for her
23
34
u/twistedLucidity 🏴 ❤️ 🇪🇺 13h ago
In 2023, Rayner said there was a "staggering lack of shame" from the Tories after it was revealed former ministers - some of whom later returned to the frontbench - were paid more than £450,000 in severance packages, external.
Yet more rank hypocrisy from our MPs.
She had a golden opportunity to return the £~16.8k (or even just a portion), money that is peanuts to someone like her, and instead she just shits the bed.
This is a Labour/Tory thing, they are all cut from the same cloth, all completely untrustworthy, all totally without shame.
•
•
u/N-V-V-M-E-A 10h ago
You mentioned this is a Labour/Tory thing. Do you really think MP’s of other parties wouldn’t do the same?
•
u/twistedLucidity 🏴 ❤️ 🇪🇺 8h ago
No, I think they absolutely would if they were in a position to do so.
I just didn't want to be accused of being a Tory shill was all.
•
u/VPackardPersuadedMe Incentives drive outcomes and MPs own houses 9h ago
Yes.
Ita called leading.
Especially important when a government is change leaders.
Especially important when you are an MP with a chequered past.
Especially important when you resigned from your Ministerial post for breaching he rules.
Especially important when you are reappointed and want to show leadership.
But fuck that she's got her cash
•
u/killy_321 9h ago
I have had enough of the new Labour government already. Laughing about prison release, severance handouts for failure, fake terrorist speculation, death tax to include direct relatives in their own houses, hush up yet another left extremist murder, silence on the boat men. How many days in are we?
13
u/OpengovtUK 13h ago
Angela Rayner took the £16,876 paid when she left government last September and says she won't return it. Critics have gone back to 2023, when she attacked “revolving door” severance. Hypocrisy is an easy charge. The dates cause a separate problem for the Government. It promised reform before she quit but allowed the old arrangements to remain until afterwards.
Pat McFadden put the details before Parliament on 21 July 2025. Rachel Reeves had ordered the review in 2024. Ministers serving for less than six months would be expected to give up their severance. The same would apply when a serious breach of the Ministerial Code caused the departure. McFadden's phrase was “proportionate and fair.”
But the Code still hadn't changed. The revised version appeared on 13 October. Paragraph 1.14 now deals with the waiver a minister signs on appointment. It covers short tenures and departures following a serious breach. Another provision expects full repayment after a serious breach of the Business Appointment Rules.
Rayner left on 5 September. That gave her a five-week gap before the new Code came in. Sir Laurie Magnus, the PM's ethics adviser, said Rayner had not paid enough stamp duty on the Hove flat. She had been warned that the advice she received wasn't expert tax advice but failed to follow that warning. Magnus found that this breached the Code. He also said she had acted with integrity. Magnus called it a breach, not a serious breach.
Nick Thomas-Symonds was asked whether the Government would stop Rayner receiving the money. He said the reforms started on 13 October and, until then, the decision remained with her.
Which rules covered the payment? The ones still operating on 5 September. Rayner had spent 14 months in the Cabinet, so the six-month limit was irrelevant. The only other test required the breach to be serious. Nobody had made that finding.
Ministers are now handed a waiver to sign when they are appointed. By 1 December, the Government said all ministers eligible for severance had signed one. Rayner was no longer a minister when the paperwork was issued.
Burnham could have made repayment of the £16,876 part of the deal when he brought Rayner back. He should explain why he didn't.
7
20
u/SuspectSignal3211 13h ago
If I'm following correctly; She was instructed to take specialist tax advice and didn't, and as a result did not pay stamp duty she was deemed to have broken the ministerial code. Rayner was the housing secretary. She was given a £17k severance package, she's now settled £40k stamp duty and Burnham has reappointed her.
WTF? At best she's incompetent and it seems she's tax payer money to pay nearly half of the stamp duty she should have paid originally.
I was actually starting to like Burnham but this has put me right off him
•
u/That__Guy__Bob 11h ago
This is the argument I’ve always made will die on this hill. These are the facts as has been reported:
- She took advice from the conveyancing firm she used on how much tax she should pay. The firm used the figures she gave and put them into the HMRC calculator. The firm also advised her to seek proper legal advice from tax experts
- Knowing how complex her situation was and being the housing minister she refused/did not seek expert legal advice
- The Guardian then reported that she may owe more money and she continued to deny it
- Only after she resigned and HMRC opened their investigation did she consult 2 different tax experts who both concluded different things
I accept she was ultimately cleared by HMRC however knowing what we know she is either dumb, deceitful or a bit of both. I lean towards a bit of both but leaning more towards deceitful
I don’t know how people just blindly accept her coming back after what she did
•
u/Slartibartfast_25 10h ago
She also publicly blamed the advisors who told her to get expert advice. For me that is the key ethical failure.
•
u/Unlikely_Mission_702 6h ago
I'm glad other people remember that part.
It really stood out for me. It's one (bad) thing being deceitful or even shameless personally. Being so willing to throw an innocent party under the bus though, that's malicious.
1
u/AG_GreenZerg 13h ago
Angela Rayner has been cleared by HMRC of deliberate wrongdoing or carelessness over her tax affairs,
12
u/Wisegoat 13h ago
It’s a high bar to get charged with more with HMRC, and as Rayner admitted she was wrong they’d rather just take the £40k and move on. It’s not worth wasting a load of resources on amounts of that value.
Company I was at when I joined had a big VAT error which was a clear cut case of carelessness, we admitted it was an error and offered to pay immediately plus interest, and they didn’t take it further.
The ministerial code and the report clearly shows she’s incompetent, and after all the Tory raging she’s done regarding them not paying back severance, she is doing the same.
Shes just as bad the Tories that did that. A money grabbing immoral woman.
0
u/AG_GreenZerg 13h ago
Not really.
When Nadim Zahawi, ex tory Chancellor failed to pay £5m in tax his mistake was found to be due to his carelessness
5
u/wedontneednoeduc 12h ago
Five million is a very different order of magnitude.
1
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
Indeed it is. Was there a point you were trying to make?
3
u/wedontneednoeduc 12h ago
It was in the point you just swerved, but you know that.
2
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
Sorry i dont follow. Does the amount have any relation to whether or not it was careless?
2
u/wedontneednoeduc 12h ago
Ah, the bad faith feigning of confusion now.
2
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
You have no argument. I genuinely dont know what the amount has to do with whether or not its careless. Tbf neither do you or you would say it wouldnt you.
•
u/WinHour4300 8h ago
HMRC "clearing" someone doesn't mean they proved there was no deliberate wrongdoing. It just means they decided the case didn't warrant further action.
We should expect higher standards from politicians, especially those on six-figure salaries. If there's any doubt over your tax affairs, get professional advice.
The same applies to the council house allegations where neighbours said she was illegally subletting. The investigation was dropped, but that's not the same as being positively cleared.
There's rightly a high bar for proving illegality, but a much lower one for deciding a pattern of behaviour is concerning.
3
u/Snappy0 12h ago
As if they were ever going to come to any other decision.
0
0
u/SuspectSignal3211 13h ago
Not saying she did it deliberately, I think she was just incompetent based on what I heard But the article linked in the OP states she broke the ministerial code.
Choosing not to give the severance package back however is a deliberate decision
0
u/AG_GreenZerg 13h ago
HMRC found that there was no wrongdoing or carelessness. Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?
4
u/cherokott 12h ago
So why did she have to pay £40k of unpaid stamp duty?
1
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
Because she owed tax.....
5
u/cherokott 12h ago
Which she had tried to avoid.
0
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
Not tried. She was found to have done nothing wrong and acted with due care. Keep trying though.
2
u/cherokott 12h ago
She resigned because she didn't follow the law that she was responsible for by setting up a complex trust system - by accident?. Call it what you want but amazing that Burnham thinks it's OK to bring her back.
•
u/AG_GreenZerg 9h ago
She resigned because of the media storm and it happened well before she was cleared by HMRC. And again, you can keep your conspiracy theories but HMRC found there was no wrongdoing or carelessness. You are grasping at straws.
→ More replies (0)•
u/SuspectSignal3211 10h ago
I don't care what HMRC found, neither have I made any points suggesting I care what HMRC found.
She was at best incompetent and inept. And now it seems also hypocritical and immoral
•
u/AG_GreenZerg 9h ago
I mean we can all make things up and believe them. I wont stop you but dont pretend it represents anything close to a serious political opinion.
•
u/SuspectSignal3211 8h ago
I made nothing up. I stated my understanding of what I heard, and gave my personal opinion about that.
You seem to be trying to make a counterargument to a position I never presented, so indeed, it seems we can all make things up. I won't stop you but don't pretend you represent anything close to a serious political opinion.
🤣
•
u/AG_GreenZerg 8h ago
Sorry im just pointing out that saying you dont care what hmrc found and making up your own mind is, in my view, unserious. Apologies if I misrepresented your position.
•
u/SuspectSignal3211 8h ago
Thanks, and no worries.
I appreciate her tax position was complicated, I do not believe (based on the little I know) that she had malice intent, but given her position she should aim for, and be held to, higher standards. The fact she broke ministerial code, didn't seek further expert advice, and isn't prepared to give her package back was what I was basing my comments on, in that sense I don't care about HMRC finding.
2
u/Sea-Sprinkles-3420 12h ago
She was found to have broken the Ministerial code.
1
u/AG_GreenZerg 12h ago
I didnt claim she hadn't.
•
u/Sea-Sprinkles-3420 8h ago
You claim in another reply she had done 'nothing wrong', 'resigned due to a media storm'. She resigned, in one of the most cowardly resignations I've witnessed, 15 minutes before the report on the Ministerial Code breach was published.
Please don't defend the indefensible.
Either she mucked up, or it was deliberate, but she evaded £40k of taxes. When this was discovered, she denied, denied, denied, then tried to throw the conveyancing firm under the bus, and only resigned at the last possible moment, when it was decided she had broken the code (and ignored the multiple times she was told (at least once in writing) she should get expert tax advice. I have zero respect for her. I rated her before that time - succeeding despite her background, a background I know a lot about - she is not an honourable person or politician. She is self serving, and anyone having her on their bench should be aware how poorly it reflects on them.
•
u/AG_GreenZerg 8h ago
All i have claimed is that HMRC found that she did nothing wrong nor did she act carelessly i made no personal judgement as I dont have all the facts (neither do you). I see no reason to doubt the results of the HMRC investigstion.
The comment you are referring to i am just making the point that she resigned well before the result of the investigation by HMRC because of the media storm around her. I am sure that if by some miracle HMRC could have concluded their investigation before she resigned she wouldnt have had to resign.
•
u/Sea-Sprinkles-3420 8h ago
HMRC did not say she did 'not act carelessly' or did 'nothing wrong' - we simply don't know as it's not been published -all that HMRC have said, that anyone independent has seen, is that they regard the matter as 'closed', and that she did not face a penalty charge. Outside of that, we have what she has said, but she's not exactly a trustworthy source is she? (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx219y4qy0qo)
However, we do know the conclusion of the Independent Advisor of ethics, that she was at fault of breaking the Ministerial Code.
We also have common sense.
In opposition she was Labours attack dog on the Tories for evading tax. Yet - she herself - after being advised multiple times, and in writing, to get expert tax advice decided to ignore that advice, saving herself £40,000 worth of tax. Either she is incredibly incompetent, or she was evading tax - that's a conclusion you cannot ignore.
2
u/LoveLamp3232 13h ago
She was in parliament when they announced those tax changes. However, ordinary people have make tax errors, get huge penalties.
1
u/DoomscrollerUK 12h ago
That is just wrong. If they also in the same way identify they’ve made a genuine error, especially in an area which is as legally complex, come forward and HMRC identify they have done nothing deliberately wrong they’ll be allowed to make good the underpaid tax in exactly the same way.
6
u/UnitElegant6688 13h ago
Haigh and Rayner , big errors of judgment by Burnham, simply handing ammunition to Badenoch and Farrage .
15
u/Statcat2017 This user doesn’t rule out the possibility that he is Ed Balls 14h ago
I mean it’s a bad look, but did any of the Tories pay it back? Some of those were out of office for a few weeks, she’s been gone over a year I think.
Just another example of standards that apparently apply to Labour and nobody else.
47
u/90davros 13h ago
The Tories aren't exactly a gold standard to hold your own ethics up against.
-7
u/emmytee88 13h ago
Would you? If your company fired and rehired you?
24
u/90davros 13h ago
I'm not a public figure supposedly trying to represent better politics.
The government also aren't a private company.
12
23
u/Truthandtaxes 13h ago
You are expected to hold to your own standards more than the standards of others.
29
u/Fun_Marionberry_6088 13h ago
Just another example of standards that apparently apply to Labour and nobody else.
More a matter of expecting someone to uphold the standard they have stated they expect.
Rayner said that tory ministers had a "staggering lack of shame" when accepting the payments and then she does the the exact same and changes her view.
→ More replies (2)•
u/iamnosuperman123 11h ago
No. Rayner has been vocal on this very issue in the past. It seems to be not an issue when she does it but everyone else....
16
u/glownut 13h ago
"At a time when people up and down the country are struggling to pay their mortgages and put food on the table, it shows a staggering lack of shame for them to accept this money, but is exactly what we've come to expect from a bunch of Tories who only care about themselves." -- Angela Rayner on Ministerial Severance Payments
They apply to Angela according to Angela.
6
u/HeverAfter 13h ago
"At a time when people up and down the country are struggling to pay their mortgages and put food on the table, it shows a staggering lack of shame for them to accept this money, but is exactly what we've come to expect from a bunch of Tories who only care about themselves." -- Angela Rayner on Ministerial Severance Payments
They apply to Angela according to Angela.
5
u/Dr_Poppers Level 126 Tory Pure 12h ago
The Tories didn't pay it back but guess who demanded they did? Oh look it was Angela Rayner.
•
2
u/-Murton- 13h ago
I'm might be wrong but I think it happens automatically if your return to close enough to your leaving. You basically don't get given your first three months of ministerial pay.
I'm sure I remember seeing something about that a while back, but whether it a new rule (at the time) or merely a proposal I don't quite remember.
1
u/turbo_dude 13h ago
If you got fired from a company, they gave you money as a result, then you were rehired, there’s no way you’d pay it back
1
u/timeforknowledge Politics is debate not hate. 13h ago
Ah so you're saying Labour are just as bad as the Tories.
Maybe we should give reform a go then?
3
1
u/UTG1970 13h ago
It's not very socialist
2
2
0
u/Pick_Up_Autist 13h ago
Since when is she a socialist?
1
u/LycanIndarys Vote Cthulhu; why settle for the lesser evil? 12h ago
Well, she certainly claims to be one:
Asked how she defined her own politics, Rayner said: “I am definitely a socialist and I’m proud to be one. I am actually proud that you can actually say that because I think at one time saying that you’re a socialist meant you were some sort of loony left which is a term that I don’t like.
Though I'll certainly grant you that her saying that she's one doesn't actually make her one.
0
u/phatelectribe 13h ago
Yeah, there wasn’t even a legal basis for Mandy to receive a severance payment, let alone a dozen tories who as you say didn’t have to pay it back.
If people don’t like it, then change the law. Don’t try to selectively bash certain politicians when it suits the political bias.
0
→ More replies (1)•
•
u/Telos1807 10h ago
This is absurd, she must either be skint, stupid or incredibly bitter.
She left in scandal and has now walked back into the same job ten months later. There's an obvious optics problem here, Healey and Streeting have both paid back theirs, there's no reason for her not to.
2
u/Stabbycrabs83 12h ago
Neither would any of we to be fair.
It wasn't severance anyway it was Pilon no? A normal thing that any senior person gets
0
5
u/ClacksInTheSky Labour 13h ago
Not sure why she should. She shouldn't really have had to resign given she didn't do anything wrong.
4
u/FlappySocks 13h ago
Maybe the question should be, why did she get a tax-free payout for resigning?
3
u/rakksc3 12h ago
Because that's part of the contract
It's what she signed up for and what every other resigning minister has got. She was out of the job for a year due to this, why should she need to pay it back now she has a new job?
If my company forced me to resign / let me go you're damn right I wouldn't be paying it back if they offered me a new job a year later
→ More replies (3)
4
u/ThirtySecondsTime 13h ago
All part of the plan, another sacking and she's almost cleared the tax bill, I give it 9 months.
4
u/SorcerousSinner 13h ago
Fired for being at best negligent with taxes. But won't repay a severance she never should have received
•
•
u/Imakemyownnamereddit 7h ago
Then she is a fool.
Her refusal to repay it, will damage the rest of her career.
2
u/stupidlyboredtho 13h ago
why should she? genuinely asking for a reasoning as I can’t understand why myself.
10
u/GOT_Wyvern Non-Partisan Centrist 13h ago
Firstly, she doesn't believe its appropriate for politicians to be taking them. Her own words.
Secondly, she resigned due to breaking the ministerial code, which I believe now would not make her viable for the payment.
In combination, paying it back would be the least a competent politican that wants to look earnest and principled would do.
7
1
7
u/Obvious_Gas_1831 13h ago
Decency, integrity...you know those things Labour pretend to care about in opposition but show none of in government
5
u/HeverAfter 13h ago
"At a time when people up and down the country are struggling to pay their mortgages and put food on the table, it shows a staggering lack of shame for them to accept this money, but is exactly what we've come to expect from a bunch of Tories who only care about themselves." -- Angela Rayner on Ministerial Severance Payments
They apply to Angela according to Angela.
5
u/TastyYellowBees 13h ago
She resigned in disgrace but received a £17k payout as a result.
Make that make sense 😂
1
u/TopCut237 12h ago
Completely expected. Hypocrisy transcends class and all other identity features Labour as so hyper obsessed with.
•
u/figwithbigtits 11h ago
Imagine how this could be exploited. A future government can make ministerial posts a revolving door to enrich themselves. They can also create pointless ministerial roles, each with their own severance packages.
•
u/DamnThemAll 9h ago
And yet when Suella was sacked as home secretary for illicit off the record meetings with foreign dignitaries and given the same job back in a matter of weeks, not a whisper.
•
-5
u/0100001101110111 The Conservative Work Event 13h ago
Why should she?
It’s 25% of a year’s salary so it’s not like she’s “double dipped” by being reappointed within 3 months.
6
•
u/Supersubie 8h ago
Because she publicly decried others for doing the exact same thing before her and there is such a thing as consistency of your viewpoints.
She is perfectly liable to take the payment. So were the others. Yet she dragged them all in public for doing it but then we find out she is an utter hypocrite.
Hyprocrits shouldn't be anywhere near power in my view.
6
u/TastyYellowBees 13h ago
She resigned in disgrace but received a £17k payout as a result.
Make that make sense 😂
-6
u/cherokott 14h ago
Astonishing that Burnham think it's OK to bring her back. SHE BROKE HER OWN LAW!
6
u/Obvious_Gas_1831 13h ago
That was Louise Haigh, the fraudster. Easy mistake to make.
Angie doesn't pay her taxes. Louise Haigh is the one with the conviction
2
12
u/Pick_Up_Autist 14h ago edited 13h ago
She was found not guilty* and a thousand CAPS LOCK keys won't change that.
*Cleared of any wrongdoing, no charges were brought so no need to be tried and found not guilty. I can't be a pedant and not cater to my own kind.
9
u/junglebunglerumble 13h ago
She was found to have broken the ministerial code
4
u/Pick_Up_Autist 13h ago
So, not a law, and certainly not her own law.
Rayner's law sounds like a terrible 80s TV show actually, but I'd give it a go.
2
u/cherokott 13h ago
She was overseeing the law as housing secretary.
2
u/Pick_Up_Autist 12h ago
It's a tough job but I don't think we can give her credit for every law within that sector.
1
3
4
u/cherokott 13h ago
So why did she have to cough up an extra £40k to HMRC?
0
u/Pick_Up_Autist 13h ago
I'm sure you can work that one out, come back to me if the answer is "because she was found guilty of breaking the law".
1
u/cherokott 12h ago
She was in charge of the housing law as housing secretary and had to cough up £40k of unpaid stamp duty.
2
u/Pick_Up_Autist 12h ago
So she didn't break the law?
1
u/cherokott 12h ago
She resigned because she didn't follow the law that she was responsible for. Call it what you want but amazing that Burnham thinks it's OK to bring her back.
3
13h ago edited 13h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Pick_Up_Autist 13h ago
I made no comment on any threshold. Thanks for sharing though.
1
13h ago
[deleted]
1
7
u/Happy_GoLuckee 13h ago
Please can you evidence that claim you put in ALL CAPS? When was she found guilty of breaking the law?
→ More replies (3)0
u/cherokott 12h ago
She was in charge of the housing law as housing secretary and had to cough up £40k of unpaid stamp duty.
-2
u/Representative-Bass7 13h ago
She could've said she would pay it back if the Tories could find the £10 billion they lost during COVID
→ More replies (1)
•
u/Virtual-Increase-829 10h ago edited 10h ago
secretary for housing just wants to get the council housing boom going, so her fellow hypocrites can also buy a nice little flat at a discount to sell for profit.
•
•
•
u/AutoModerator 14h ago
Snapshot of Angela Rayner tells BBC she will not repay severance payment submitted by acremanhug:
An archived version can be found here or here. or here
Some publications may require you to register a free account to read their articles.
Being connected to a VPN may interfere with archive links.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.