And as Johnson became the Uxbridge MP whilst he was still Mayor, so can anybody else.Well he is only 53, i guess he feels he has plenty of time.
And as Johnson became the Uxbridge MP whilst he was still Mayor, so can anybody else.Well he is only 53, i guess he feels he has plenty of time.
The Tories and Street are using the unknown argument as well as Birmingham City Council’s woesI think it will be closer than people think, at least Labour have finally chosen a candidate for WM mayor who doesn't look like he's just spent a night in the cells like the last two did.
That’s the idea.Sure its the Tories, they don't seem to be mentioned, is that for the Green party candidate?
The Conservatives have a history of putting out pseudo newspapers in the colours of other parties.
Having said all that, standard party colours is a fairly recent thing. I remember watching the 1970s election programmes they used to show on BBC Parliament and it was interesting that the same parties in different constituencies would have their own colours.
Indeed it was just something i found interesting.But these days, colour is one of the prime ways that people visually distinguish literature/advertising/etc. from the different parties, so I think there's a good argument that parties should respect each others' colours, and not seek to mislead people with the 'wrong' colours.
Well he is only 53, i guess he feels he has plenty of time.
What do people make of this Angela Rayner controversy, something to do with her selling her council house?
All over the Mail front page.
Is there something in it? Should Starmer suspend her while the investigation is taking place?
Is there a risk that this is a big enough deal that it could let the Tories in again? God help us if so, the UK is basically finished if Sunak gets in again and we are subject to 4-5 more years of crumbling public services, xenophobic nationalism and anti "woke" politics.
This does currently have the look of "Beergate 2", a potential wrongdoing by a senior Labour MP, who was investigated by the police, cleared, then a local election campaign comes around, the Mail et al. ram it down everyone's throats, then presumably after purdah it's announced they're being investigated again.
As I understood it, the police had previously decided not to investigate, so from that point of view she hasn't been cleared. It's been announced they're reconsidering that decision, but haven't said they definitely will.This does currently have the look of "Beergate 2", a potential wrongdoing by a senior Labour MP, who was investigated by the police, cleared, then a local election campaign comes around, the Mail et al. ram it down everyone's throats, then presumably after purdah it's announced they're being investigated again.
Rayner could easily kill the story by statingWhat do people make of this Angela Rayner controversy, something to do with her selling her council house?
All over the Mail front page.
Is there something in it? Should Starmer suspend her while the investigation is taking place?
Is there a risk that this is a big enough deal that it risks letting the Tories in again? God help us if so, the UK is basically finished if Sunak gets in again and we are subject to 4-5 more years of crumbling public services, xenophobic nationalism and anti-"woke" politics.
As it's a tax issue, surely it is for HMRC to investigate and decide whether tax was due? I'm not sure why the police would get involved before HMRC have investigated.As I understood it, the police had previously decided not to investigate, so from that point of view she hasn't been cleared. It's been announced they're reconsidering that decision, but haven't said they definitely will.
It smells very much like the expenses scandal, where MPs flipped which house was their primary for personal gain.
I doubt it will change the overall result of the election, but it's not a good look when Labour are going after the Tories for corruption to have someone apparently fiddling their taxes. Though as Deputy Leader is elected by the members, I don't think there's anything Kier can do directly.
As well as the tax, which a previous story in the Mail suggested is being investigated by HMRC, there’s relatedly an allegation that she put down the wrong address on the electoral roll. Though whether tax was due isn’t really the issue, it’s potentially fraud through making misleading statements. Though that may still be a matter for HMRC as it relates to tax,As it's a tax issue, surely it is for HMRC to investigate and decide whether tax was due? I'm not sure why the police would get involved before HMRC have investigated.
Depends on your interpretation of "dishonest", I suppose.I don’t think that she is dishonest in any way, but there is always a possibility that the she has misunderstood some of the rules,...
I doubt a prosecution for registering at 'the wrong' address would pass the cps test of being in the public interest. I wonder how accurate any electoral roll is.As well as the tax, which a previous story in the Mail suggested is being investigated by HMRC, there’s relatedly an allegation that she put down the wrong address on the electoral roll. Though whether tax was due isn’t really the issue, it’s potentially fraud through making misleading statements. Though that may still be a matter for HMRC as it relates to tax,
What makes you say that? Prospective deputy prime minister lies about where she was living.I doubt a prosecution for registering at 'the wrong' address would pass the cps test of being in the public interest. I wonder how accurate any electoral roll is.
Of course, not for any of the good reasons to be against voter ID, but because of an easily fixable administrative error.Explains why she was against voter ID though......
How does it explain why she was against voter id?. She could just attend the polling station she was registered at with a passport.What makes you say that? Prospective deputy prime minister lies about where she was living.
Explains why she was against voter ID though......
Yes I realise that. Sorry my attempt to point out the irony of her position was lost on you.How does it explain why she was against voter id?. She could just attend the polling station she was registered at with a passport.
If this happened before she became a MP then it's not going to see her sacked by Keir Starmer. My guess is that she'll pay any taxed owed and the matter will be forgotten about.Depends on your interpretation of "dishonest", I suppose.
As I understand it (and this is information gained from sources other than the Daily Mail) she bought her former council house in 2007 under the "Right to Buy" scheme. She got married in 2010 and, again as far as I can see, she lived at her husband's address thereafter. She sold the house in 2015 making a profit of some £48k. Married couples are only granted Capital Gains Tax exemption on one property (termed their "only or main residence"). Any other that either or both of them owns is subject to CGT if sold. It is hard to see, therefore, how CGT should not have been due on the sale but she says she received tax advice on the matter, so her misunderstanding the rules should not be an issue .
There is also the allegation that she registered to vote at her address whilst living at her husband's (against electoral law). As well as that there is the added complication that she is alleged to have claimed "single person's allowance" for the Council Tax on her house (where she was said to be living after her marriage) when her brother was living there as well.
Of course these are only allegations and I have no objection to anybody seeking to reduce their tax liabilities to the absolute minimum (in fact I believe everybody has a duty to do so). But it is difficult to understand somebody who would call for the summary beheading on Tower Green of any "Tory Scum" who were subject to such allegations, allowing herself to be dragged into a similar situation for the sake of a few grand in tax.
"Flipping" properties for various reasons is not the sole preserve of Tories, it seems.
We don't want torries or Labour, all a bunch of liars out for self and party and F the people, like they say, both cheeks of the same arse, nothing will change. you will see. But who to govern is the difficult question, neither are capable.