I assume that she owns the trust, which is why she believed the Hove property was her only property.
The fact she's had to resign suggests that she was wrong about this.
General UK politics
- Thread starter dee
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
I assume that she owns the trust, which is why she believed the Hove property was her only property.
The fact she's had to resign suggests that she was wrong about this.
It was because her son is a minor and she’s deemed to be the responsible owner as a trustee as a minor cannot own a house.
Yep and also the conveyancing firm involved offering tax advice with disclaimers didn’t help either.
She was wrong not to get proper tax advice but when you get Reform bringing in a convicted Racist onboard as probably a MP soon after she was released, it’s not like any party is in a better moral ground.
Reform has morals?
I see where I went wrong there…
Just on this tax advice thing. I used to work for a Big Four accountancy firm, with a tax advisory practice of around 2,500 nationwide.
Within that practice there were about 4 or 5 people who specialised in stamp duty land tax.
There were maybe a dozen or so people who specialised in trusts.
The Venn diagram of those groups of people is two circles next to each other.
It would have been extremely difficult for Rayner to have found someone who could advise her on her precise circumstances, that's why she had to go to tax counsel (to be clear, tax counsel is often who the advisers consult when they don't know, although normally we'd speak to Counsel if we thought a matter might go to court).
It's also why the small conveyancing firm wouldn't advise on it - they would not have the expertise.
On the other side of the equation, it's also why she should have been extra careful around the trust arrangements in the first place - what she put in place was incredibly complex and fraught with danger.
She was right to resign for not seeking the correct advice, but I'm fucked if I know anyone who could have given her that advice.
Descending to Earth for a while...
UK, France, Germany et al have no leadership and massive debts run up over decades by ideologues in uni-parties who believe they can legislate and spend their way to, erm, whatever their aims actually are.
There has to be a reckoning and it will be painful. As peterhague wrote earlier:
Currently the UK is borrowing massive amounts and attempting to silence it's critics (wherever they come from) with no discernible plan.
Some MP bint fiddling her taxes and others into featherbedding before the shite hits the fan is a distraction.
Who in their right mind is going to continue to vote for more of the same?
Next election most people are going to vote for A.N.Other because they aren't Labour or Conservative in my opinion of course.
UK, France, Germany et al have no leadership and massive debts run up over decades by ideologues in uni-parties who believe they can legislate and spend their way to, erm, whatever their aims actually are.
There has to be a reckoning and it will be painful. As peterhague wrote earlier:
Currently the UK is borrowing massive amounts and attempting to silence it's critics (wherever they come from) with no discernible plan.
Some MP bint fiddling her taxes and others into featherbedding before the shite hits the fan is a distraction.
Who in their right mind is going to continue to vote for more of the same?
Next election most people are going to vote for A.N.Other because they aren't Labour or Conservative in my opinion of course.
Unfortunately the one thing that I think could actually help, namely letting in about 5 million immigrants a year (including a healthy proportion of builders) to expand the tax base, is the one thing the Reform idiots will never ever countenance.
So you're saying vote Green. I agree.
Is that what they say? I don't vote so I never bother looking into them.
I'd expect them to be very left across the board, which I like on stuff like immigration, foreign affairs, Palestine, crime etc, but I hate on the economy and tax. Unless they change on that stuff then I'll probably just not vote again.
There's a scenario where a lot of people will take the non-voting option next time.
If Reform fall apart (we live in hope), Labour continue being pretty dire and the Tories continue doing very little at all then a lot of people may well wonder what the point is voting for anyone.
If Reform fall apart (we live in hope), Labour continue being pretty dire and the Tories continue doing very little at all then a lot of people may well wonder what the point is voting for anyone.
Not sure I get not voting. Is there not always a least worst option, someone that you'd rather slightly more than others. Even if you know they won't get the numbers, at least you've tried.
There's always a least bad option but personally I only ever vote on principle because I think voting pragmatically is absurd.
Some people have no interest at all, and some of those don't even register to vote. There's only a best option or a least worst option if you look into it at least a tiny bit. It's probably not that difficult these days to be completely cut off from the news.
I guess for many others it is either very low priority or they simply can't find anyone that they wish to vote for.
With all the options on the ballot paper, you'd think there would be at least one who wouldn't be completely offensive, but you'd have to be fairly committed to using your vote to vote for someone who has no chance at all of winning.
Say the next election was realistically a two horse race between Reform and Labour. I would never in a million years vote for Reform. Would my hatred of Reform be enough to vote Labour and essentially endorse a government that (as things stand) isn't very good? I'd struggle.
Personally I would almost certainly find someone else to vote for, because I have always voted, but I can see why others in that scenario wouldn't bother.
I guess for many others it is either very low priority or they simply can't find anyone that they wish to vote for.
With all the options on the ballot paper, you'd think there would be at least one who wouldn't be completely offensive, but you'd have to be fairly committed to using your vote to vote for someone who has no chance at all of winning.
Say the next election was realistically a two horse race between Reform and Labour. I would never in a million years vote for Reform. Would my hatred of Reform be enough to vote Labour and essentially endorse a government that (as things stand) isn't very good? I'd struggle.
Personally I would almost certainly find someone else to vote for, because I have always voted, but I can see why others in that scenario wouldn't bother.
If you aren’t voting for someone in your own interest, would you vote for the one who would most protect/support those in society who need protecting/supporting?
Well, I'd like to think that I do that to a degree anyway.
If we take Reform at their word (and yes I know we shouldn't - no need to debate that), their so-called policies probably wouldn't negatively impact me.
The reason I hate them is because I think they will at worst make communities nasty and at best (!) achieve absolutely nothing and the country will just be run by Civil Servants while the government just swan around telling everyone how great they are (which is what Reform councils are currently doing, by the way).
If we return to my previous scenario, I don't doubt for a minute that Labour's intentions are better than Reform's, but then you need to consider if they are capable of following through on them. The people who need support and protection won't be very supported and protected if the economy is trashed.
If we take Reform at their word (and yes I know we shouldn't - no need to debate that), their so-called policies probably wouldn't negatively impact me.
The reason I hate them is because I think they will at worst make communities nasty and at best (!) achieve absolutely nothing and the country will just be run by Civil Servants while the government just swan around telling everyone how great they are (which is what Reform councils are currently doing, by the way).
If we return to my previous scenario, I don't doubt for a minute that Labour's intentions are better than Reform's, but then you need to consider if they are capable of following through on them. The people who need support and protection won't be very supported and protected if the economy is trashed.
What are Labour's intentions?
You'd have to ask them what their ideal version of society is, but I do believe that they want to ultimately improve people's lives. Whether I with their ideal version of society or how they wish to achieve it is another matter.
Personally I don't think Reform could care less.
Interesting points, you're making those assumptions based on?
Personally I just look at the type of people their MPs seem to be. I don't really see many Labour MPs who look like nasty people. Same for the Tories, more or less. That's not everything but it's a good start. With Reform they all seem to be either actively unpleasant like Lee Anderson or Rupert Lowe (I know he's gone now but still...) or totally amoral like Farage.
Probably not much. As I said, I will 100% never vote Reform and it's extremely unlikely I'd ever vote Labour so judging their intentions beyond just my instinct isn't really worthwhile anyway.
I guess I just have slightly more trust in Labour (not difficult) than I do in Reform.
They're more open to immigration and more open to axing the 1%, on assets as well as income.
At the very least there's an idea, rather than "disabled people and foreigners are bad"
Boils down to instinct then. Given the number of recent Labour sackings/resignations it seems optimistic to view them as more trustworthy. Maybe I'm judging them too harshly.
In footy parlance you give them the eye test?
First impressions, that kind of thing.
More trustworthy than Reform.
Since the May local elections (4 months) we have seen Reform Councillors racially abusing neighbours, charged with threatening to kill their wives, arrested for assault, arrested for stalking and harassment, arrested for malicious communications and going on marches with Nazis.
Even among their handful of MPs, in the past year, 2 have resigned the whip or were kicked out, one of which it emerged previously did time for kicking the shit out of a woman.
I'm not especially confident that if we ended up with 350 of them after the next election that they would be of much better quality.
Yep. I don't like Reform policies either but even if I did I wouldn't vote for people I feel are immoral. Sooner or later that will out.
If push came to shove I'd rather have them than Reform, but I'd be seriously fucking worried about what they'd do to the economy. Like, really worried. I wouldn't be surprised if we had a debt crisis the day they were elected tbh.
There's going to be a debt crisis regardless who gets in. Everything has been built on sand for years and we're just waiting for something to set if off. It just depends whether you want the loaned money to go back in to develop things, or pockets of the people and mates of power
Maybe so but that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and positively vote for it. I don't like the way the hard left talk about taxing people's wealth like they own it. They seem to think they're entitled to steal as much of it as they possibly can. I think that's very immoral. Maybe not as immoral as the way Reform talk about immigrants, but still very bad. I couldn't vote for people like that.
