𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

How terribly convenient that Angela Rayner was cleared by HMRC this week. In fact, it felt like an almost unbelievable coincidence we were told she was free and clear at almost exactly the same time we were told Wes Streeting was throwing his hat in the ring to be PM. I mean blow me down, who’d have believed HMRC would have come to their decision this very week – a decision that allows her to run for PM?

But then it emerged it wasn’t such a coincidence because it turns out Rayner’s fancy lawyer (pity she hadn’t had a fancy lawyer last year to advise her on what stamp duty she owed) had written a stern missive to HMRC on Monday demanding a decision. And hey presto, on Tuesday she got one saying no further action would be taken against her.

But we need to get the wording right about her exoneration here. SHE says she’s been cleared of “deliberate wrongdoing or carelessness of her affairs”. But we’ve still not had confirmation of this from HMRC because, as yet, all it’s said is that the matter is now closed. So maybe Ange could show us all proof of this glowing exoneration?

And surely making an “unintentional mistake” – as Ange has described it – has to be at least carelessness, doesn’t it ? But even that wording is stupid as all mistakes are, by their very nature, unintentional. But no, Ange says, and we must believe her, that she was entirely blameless in all this. Others were to blame.

Remember at the time this story broke, she tried to heap blame onto the conveyancing firm, Verrico & Associates, who came straight back saying they’d not provided her with any tax advice and her stamp duty was calculated using HMRC’s online calculator based on information she provided. But of course, Ange’s is not to blame for anything that’s happened. In fact, she could be the one entirely blameless person in HMRC’s history of investigating people who’ve made mistakes.

Of course, on social media people are less willing to believe the best of her: “Left Wing stitch-up,” screamed one. “No one anywhere could have had a quiet word with HMRC could they – Oh Dear Me No,” said another sarcastically. Others were more succinct: “It stinks.”

Yes, it IS hard for many people to believe that a woman who was Housing Minister and had the best lawyers and advisors at her disposal still managed to cock up her stamp duty. But the problem for many voters now isn’t just her being cleared, it’s that she’s not even going to have to pay a penalty.

Tax experts have already said a mistake of the kind she made – inadvertent or not – would normally come with a fine of around £8,000. And the fact is people who make tax mistakes almost always do it inadvertently but, as we’re constantly being told, ignorance of the law is no defence if you get it wrong.

Now Tory MPs are accusing HMRC of offering Rayner a “sweetheart deal” timed to give her a shot at running for PM. And Joe Public isn’t just furious about that – he’s aggrieved as well. He feels that, had he done what Rayner had done, he’d have been slapped with a big fat penalty. And what we’d all like to know is when Ange actually repaid the £40,000 she owed. Her team are refusing to say but the Daily Telegraph understands it was just at the start of this week.

So has this decision by HMRC set a precedent? Does it mean that, in future, if people mistakenly pay less than they’re supposed to, they can just pay back what they owe and there’ll be no penalties? Because people know from bitter past experience this isn’t always the case.

Rayner of course has been racing to the airwaves doing an Oscar-winning performance of playing the victim whining how “bruised” she’s been by the whole experience and by the intrusion into her disabled son’s personal life. Sorry, but is she seriously suggesting people in public life who have disabled children shouldn’t be investigated over their tax affairs? Her son HAD to be brought into this precisely because of complicated rules linked to a trust SHE set up in his name which owns the family home in Ashton-under-Lyme. And when she was buying her £800,000 flat in Hove, she said the flat was her sole property – when it wasn’t .

She also added she was upset because it had appeared as though “I was in it for myself’ rather than on the side of ordinary people.” Well, funny she should say that because that’s exactly how it looked to a lot of people when this story first broke. And if she cares to peruse social media this week, she’ll see it’s exactly how many still feel despite the fact she’s been cleared. Because what it looks like is that she’s had special treatment – whether she has or not.

But it’s the “I’m a victim” act that sticks in the craw with this duplicitous woman. She spends half her life telling us all how strong she is (and has had to be) because she was brought up on a tough council estate, left school at 15, pregnant at 16, blah blah blah…! But then she uses the same argument when she’s under the cosh for something and uses her background to play the victim.

At the time of writing, she still hasn’t said if she’s running for PM but the fact is this investigation will dog the rest of her time in politics. She’s spent years screaming at various politicians to “resign” when they’d made mistakes, some over their tax affairs. She never wanted to wait for them to be investigated; she just screamed that they should go.

And the fact is, whatever HMRC says, she will still, in the eyes of many, be forever compromised and many will find it hard to believe that what she did was a mistake – even if it was. But ever again will she get away harassing and screaming at politicians who have been accused of tax avoidance because they’ll hit her between the eyes with the argument: “Well YOU broke the rules too. YOU were investigated.”

This woman shouldn’t be in Government at all let alone be PM. She’s always surrounded by controversy (reportedly drunk in the House of Commons bar just a few weeks ago). She’s crass, she calls political opponents scum, racists and homophobes. She takes freebies, she’s not very bright. This former housing minister even made a speech this week about housing reform saying how fantastic it was that ”freehold was being ended for good”. should have said leasehold. Does she not know the difference?

But the most important fact in all this is, if Angela Rayner can’t run her own tax affairs, how the hell can she run a country?