Syd Lloyd was a Conservative councillor in Stockport from 2006 to 2010 and from 2011 to 2019.
It’s been a month since the Mail on Sunday first drew attention to Angela Rayner’s unusual housing arrangements. But the story hasn’t faded away – and as the Times stated in its leading article on Saturday, it won’t do until she stops being so evasive.
This affair is no longer just about the various claims that Rayner has made on public documents. It’s not only about the testimonies of her neighbours. Neither is it solely about a potential capital gains tax bill.
Each of these things is important, but if, as some believe likely, she becomes the deputy prime minister later this year, this row matters more than some parts of the media seem prepared to admit. It is now also about two other things: Rayner’s willingness to be open and accountable, and Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.
This is a brief summary of what we know. In January 2007, Rayner bought for £79,000 a two-bedroom council house in Vicarage Road, Stockport, under the right-to-buy scheme. She received a publicly-funded discount of £26,000.
She was registered on the electoral roll as living there until March 2015, when the house was sold for £127,500. The profit on the sale was £48,500. Seven weeks later, Rayner was voted in for the first time as the Labour MP for Ashton-under-Lyne. All well and good.
Yet what the Mail on Sunday pointed out (courtesy of Red Queen?, Michael Ashcroft’s new biography of Rayner) is that she had married a man called Mark Rayner in September 2010.
Somewhat oddly, according to the electoral roll, Angela and Mark supposedly lived at separate addresses in Stockport for the first five years of their marriage. Even more curiously, again according to the electoral roll, Mark shared his three-bedroom house in Lowndes Lane with Angela’s brother, Darren Bowen.
The Rayners had had two children together in 2008 and 2009. The children’s birth certificates were re-registered by Angela Rayner in October 2010 to reflect that they were living at the Lowndes Lane address.
Multiple neighbours in Lowndes Lane have told the press that – contrary to what the electoral roll states – Angela Rayner in fact lived with her husband at his house in Lowndes Lane after their marriage. Darren, they say, did not live there.
Residents of Vicarage Road have said that (again, contrary to what is on the electoral roll) he lived in Vicarage Road during the same time period – and that she, allegedly, did not. One neighbour has even said Darren referred to his sister as his “landlady”.
Meanwhile, over at Lowndes Lane, the council provided a DFG grant to carry out work on the property in order to make it accessible for the Rayners’ son, who is registered blind.
Rayner has denied that Lowndes Lane was her principal property. But the question persists: did she claim to live at one address when in fact she lived at another?
This is the sort of thing the Electoral Commission, which regards the electoral roll as a cornerstone of our democracy, takes seriously. You would expect MPs (and aspiring MPs) to take it equally seriously. Those who breach the law can be fined or even imprisoned.
(By the way, the electoral roll shows that Rayner used her maiden name, Angela Bowen, until 2012 and from 2013 she was listed as Angela Rayner. This active name change shows that somebody took the trouble to update the roll).
Another question that’s been troubling people for the past four weeks concerns capital gains tax. It’s been calculated by the tax expert Dan Neidle, among others, that Rayner may owe a four-figure sum to HMRC on the sale of her house in Vicarage Road.
Last Thursday she gave an interview to Nick Watt of the BBC’s Newsnight programme. Watt asked her about this but she failed to answer him. She told him she has taken legal advice in recent weeks and has been assured that no tax is due.
But who gave her this advice? And why won’t she publish it? Let’s not forget, Rayner is in charge of Labour’s housing policy. These questions relate to that brief. Anyone would have thought she’d be keen to draw a line under this story.
On the same night, Starmer was interviewed by the Sun. He said he believes her account of where she lived and when – but he then admitted that he hasn’t seen the legal advice which she says she has received.
This won’t do, and Starmer must know that. If he can’t even ask a close colleague whether he can inspect the legal advice which she says settles the tax questions, he looks extremely weak. Doesn’t he want to know the facts? Is he scared of upsetting his deputy?
The problem for Starmer is that he now looks like he’s prevaricating. The Rayner affair is, therefore, beginning to affect him as well. Voters are entitled to ask: what kind of a prime minister would he be if he cannot deal adequately with a situation like this?
I know that James Daly MP has written to Greater Manchester Police about Rayner’s electoral roll claims, and that Jonathan Gullis MP has written to HMRC about her potential tax liabilities.
Two weeks ago I wrote, on public interest grounds, to Vicki Bates, a senior legal officer at Stockport Council, asking a series of questions about the entire affair from the council’s perspective.
Bates has acknowledged receipt of my letter. My questions are below – when I get a reply, I will share it with readers of ConservativeHome.
- Did Angela Rayner notify the council that she had moved out of 80 Vicarage Road at any time before 2015? Can SMBC provide details of when Mrs Rayner said she no longer lived at 80 Vicarage Road as her primary address? If she did not, then she is in dispute with the evidence from her former neighbours who claim she did not live there after 2009/10.
- Did Angela Rayner notify the council that she had installed a tenant at 80 Vicarage Road at any time before 2015? Her mortgage lender for the Council House purchase would have needed to give permission to rent the house out. Letting the property out within the first 5 years also appears to be a failure of the of the Right to Buy terms without obtaining approval from the Council.
- Does the council think it is owed money under the five-year ‘clawback’ rule as set out in the Right to Buy legislation in view of the many reports that Angela Rayner was not living there from 2009/10 and she had a tenant in the property? Has SMBC considered if the five year “clawback” provision of the Right to Buy Scheme has been activated? If so when was this investigation carried out and what was the outcome of these investigations, if one was ever done?
- Did Angela Rayner offer to sell 80 Vicarage Road back to the council in keeping with the 10 year buy-back rule, as set out in the Right to Buy legislation? Under the Right to Buy Scheme a 10 year Buy back Rule is in place. Can SMBC confirm when it was contacted by Mrs Rayner informing them of her intention to sell her property on the open market? Can you also say when SMBC confirmed it would or would not be purchasing back 80 Vicarage Road.
- Did 80 Vicarage Road enjoy the single person’s council tax allowance between 2007 and 2015? If Angela Rayner was recorded on the council’s records as being the sole adult occupant of 80 Vicarage Road from 2007 to 2015 when in fact her brother Darren Bowen was living there for most of that time as her tenant, (evidenced by the neighbours) does the council think this situation was acceptable? It would have been fraudulent to claim the discount in her name if she was not living there. Her brother could have claimed it – as long as he lived alone and as long as he was registered there as the tenant.
- In whose name and on what date was the DFG grant applied for and then issued at 126 Lowndes Lane? Can you please set out how much was received and what the works covered?
- Will the council investigate whether electoral fraud has been committed by either Angela Rayner or Mark Rayner? It should be noted that Angela Rayner was listed at 80 Vicarage Road under her maiden name, Angela Bowen, until 2012 but from 2013 changed her name on the roll to Angela Rayner. Considering the considerable Public interest in the possibility of Electoral Fraud being committed, has the Council investigated these claims and if so what were the outcomes of the investigation. If they have not been investigated, are there plans to do so bearing in mind the considerable interest being generated today?
- Angela Rayner has stated that she paid no capital gains tax when she sold 80 Vicarage Road in 2015. Should Mark Rayner have paid capital gains tax on 126 Lowndes Lane – which he bought under the Right to Buy scheme in February 1991 – when he sold that property in April 2016? While appreciating that this may not be a direct matter for the Council to deal with, has SMBC referred the sale of both 80 Vicarage Road and 126 Lowndes Lane to HMRC to ensure all the relevant Capital Gains Tax has been accounted for and collected?
The post Syd Lloyd: Rayner’s continued evasions over her taxes are now making Starmer look weak appeared first on Conservative Home.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Syd Lloyd
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, http://www.conservativehome.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.