UK Politics

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The prime minister has complete confidence in you and I say that in complete confidence

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7xYI3M2098w

parent

[–] Patch@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Makes sense from an internal party management point of view. Rayner remains a popular figure with the membership and the left of the party. Starmer might have known that he was going to end up needing to sack her, but it's useful for him (not always the most popular figure with that crowd) to show some support for her and avoid sticking the knife in. Ultimately the independent ethics report was going to come back with what it came back with, and Starmer and Rayner would both agree that she couldn't remain in role at that point- but at least it doesn't look like Starmer was itching for an excuse.

From the voting public's point of view, I'm not sure it makes much difference in this case. Starmer said he'd wait for the full facts, and then sacked her when he had the full facts. Anyone upset with him for not going a couple of days earlier would probably have been upset with him whatever he did anyway.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

Rayner remains a popular figure with the membership and the left of the party.

Yeah sure, the union busting, nature destroying, Starmer supporting, tax dodger is popular with the left...

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] knowone@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 year ago*

Was gunna say, is "the left" just anything that could be considered left of (or even including) Starmer now, even if only a little bit? It's painful where most people's overton window is in the UK. Very clearly overt capitalists being called "left" all the time because they're part of the historically left wing party that obviously hasn't been left wing since the 90s?

parent

[–] biscuit@lemdro.id [S] 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Kinda had to end this way, really.

You'd think someone of her status would absolutely ensure that her situation was checked over regarding tax payments. Honest mistake or not, her position became untenable.

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] G4Z@feddit.uk 12 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

I think she knew tbh, the shit with her right to buy council house stinks as well.

It's a shame because I used to like her, but we shouldn't be surprised, given how she sold out to become deputy in the first place.

https://www.unitetheunion.org/news-events/news/2025/july/unite-conference-votes-overwhelmingly-to-re-examine-relationship-with-labour-and-suspend-angela-rayner-from-unite-membership-over-birmingham-bins-dispute

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 7 points 1 year ago

She talked the talk but didn't walk the walk.

parent

[–] tankplanker@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago

She employed multiple firms to manage something that a specialist, which she had already employed for the more complicated parts could have handled in its entirety. Its very unusual to do that unless you are either very dumb or are trying to hide what you are doing.

parent

[–] sirico@feddit.uk 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

No MP particularly one that was voted in to fix tax loopholes should be using them.