Is Angela 'Two Homes' Rayner paying the council tax surcharge on her grace-and-favour second residence?
'Two Homes' Rayner moved into her four-bedroom, grace-and-favour residence in Admiralty House in December – four months before her Local Government Department started levying an extra 100 per cent council tax charge on second homes.
Official records of MPs' expenses show that when she entered the Government, Ms Rayner designated her Ashton-under-Lyne constituency home as her 'primary residence', and her pre-Admiralty home – a rented London flat – as her second home.
That allowed her to claim back the £1,621 council tax bill on the London flat from the taxpayer as one of the housing costs reimbursed by Commons authorities.
But if she is still designating Ashton as her primary residence now, the £2,034 council tax bill for Admiralty House doubles to a whopping £4,068 if classed as a second home.
And, as a minister living in an official residence, she would have to pay both that and the £3,338 bill for the Ashton house herself – a total of £7,406.
Ashton does not attract a second-home premium because she has family members living there permanently, but questions have been raised as to whether or not she is paying the full £7,406.
Tory Shadow Minister Richard Holden asked the PM and the Chancellor if they were paying council tax on their Downing St flats as primary residences, and was informed that they were.
If she is still designating Ashton as her primary residence now, the £2,034 council tax bill for Admiralty House (pictured) doubles to a whopping £4,068 if classed as a second home
But on asking the same of Ms Rayner, he was stonewalled with: 'The Deputy Prime Minister's council tax responsibility is properly discharged.'
In a letter to Ms Rayner, Kevin Hollinrake, Shadow Secretary for Housing and Communities, asked if she had evaded the surcharge by 'flipping' her primary residence designation.
He said: 'If the minister in charge of council tax has dodged the super-tax by 'flipping', this raises serious concerns about the ethics and integrity of Labour ministers.'
She became known as 'Two Homes' Rayner after this newspaper revealed she shuttled between two council properties early in her marriage.
When her office was asked if she was paying a bill of £4,068 in London and £3,338 in her constituency, a source said: 'The administration of council tax for Admiralty House is for the Cabinet Office and Westminster Council, as has been the case for successive Secretaries of State.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
16 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Labour rebels offered 11th-hour concession over welfare reform
Changes to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) could be delayed until after a review of the key disability benefit instead of coming into force in November 2026 as planned. The latest concession follows a partial U-turn last week in the face of a possible defeat over the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. The legislation faces its first Commons vote on Tuesday night and the 11th-hour concession on timing for the changes suggests the Labour hierarchy is still concerned about the scale of the revolt, which is set to be the largest of Sir Keir Starmer's premiership. Disability minister Sir Stephen Timms told MPs that the Government had listened to the concerns raised about the timing of the changes. The climbdown will cause a major headache for Chancellor Rachel Reeves as the welfare squeeze was originally meant to save £4.8 billion a year, which was subsequently reduced to £2.3 billion when the Bill was first watered down. Tuesday's changes leave any future savings uncertain as the scale of the squeeze on Pip is unclear. Sir Stephen's intervention, which came in the middle of debate on the legislation, followed frantic behind-the-scenes negotiations involving Cabinet ministers, Sir Keir himself and wavering Labour MPs. Some 39 Labour MPs have signed an amendment which would see the Bill fall at its first hurdle in the Commons. A previous effort to kill the Bill had attracted more than 120 Labour supporters, but was shelved after the first partial U-turn on the legislation last week, which restricted the Pip changes to new claimants from November 2026. That date has now been abandoned in the latest climbdown, with any changes now only coming after Sir Stephen's review of the Pip assessment process. Sir Stephen acknowledged 'concerns that the changes to Pip are coming ahead of the conclusions of the review of the assessment that I will be leading'. He said the Government would now 'only make changes to Pip eligibility activities and descriptors following that review', which is due to conclude in the autumn of 2026. The concession appeared to have won round some Labour doubters. Josh Fenton-Glynn, who was one of the 126 Labour MPs who signed the original rebel amendment to the welfare reform Bill last week, described the move as 'really good news'. He said he wanted to support the Government at 'every opportunity' and was glad changes to personal independence payment eligibility would be delayed until after the Timms review. But other Labour MPs appeared exasperated, with one telling the PA news agency that no-one 'knew what they were voting on anymore'. And rebel ringleader Rachael Maskell said she was determined to press for a vote on her 'reasoned amendment' which would halt the legislation in its tracks. 'The whole Bill is now unravelling and is a complete farce,' she said. This is an utter capitulation. Labour's welfare bill is now a TOTAL waste of time. It effectively saves £0, helps no one into work, and does NOT control spending. It's pointless. They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern. — Kemi Badenoch (@KemiBadenoch) July 1, 2025 'What it won't do is stop the suffering of disabled people which is why we are determined to go ahead with the reasoned amendment and attempt to vote down the Bill at second reading.' Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch accused ministers of 'utter capitulation' and said the legislation was now 'pointless'. She said: 'They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern.'
North Wales Chronicle
16 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Labour rebels offered 11th-hour concession over welfare reform
Changes to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) could be delayed until after a review of the key disability benefit instead of coming into force in November 2026 as planned. The latest concession follows a partial U-turn last week in the face of a possible defeat over the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. The legislation faces its first Commons vote on Tuesday night and the 11th-hour concession on timing for the changes suggests the Labour hierarchy is still concerned about the scale of the revolt, which is set to be the largest of Sir Keir Starmer's premiership. Disability minister Sir Stephen Timms told MPs that the Government had listened to the concerns raised about the timing of the changes. The climbdown will cause a major headache for Chancellor Rachel Reeves as the welfare squeeze was originally meant to save £4.8 billion a year, which was subsequently reduced to £2.3 billion when the Bill was first watered down. Tuesday's changes leave any future savings uncertain as the scale of the squeeze on Pip is unclear. Sir Stephen's intervention, which came in the middle of debate on the legislation, followed frantic behind-the-scenes negotiations involving Cabinet ministers, Sir Keir himself and wavering Labour MPs. Some 39 Labour MPs have signed an amendment which would see the Bill fall at its first hurdle in the Commons. A previous effort to kill the Bill had attracted more than 120 Labour supporters, but was shelved after the first partial U-turn on the legislation last week, which restricted the Pip changes to new claimants from November 2026. That date has now been abandoned in the latest climbdown, with any changes now only coming after Sir Stephen's review of the Pip assessment process. Sir Stephen acknowledged 'concerns that the changes to Pip are coming ahead of the conclusions of the review of the assessment that I will be leading'. He said the Government would now 'only make changes to Pip eligibility activities and descriptors following that review', which is due to conclude in the autumn of 2026. The concession appeared to have won round some Labour doubters. Josh Fenton-Glynn, who was one of the 126 Labour MPs who signed the original rebel amendment to the welfare reform Bill last week, described the move as 'really good news'. He said he wanted to support the Government at 'every opportunity' and was glad changes to personal independence payment eligibility would be delayed until after the Timms review. But other Labour MPs appeared exasperated, with one telling the PA news agency that no-one 'knew what they were voting on anymore'. And rebel ringleader Rachael Maskell said she was determined to press for a vote on her 'reasoned amendment' which would halt the legislation in its tracks. 'The whole Bill is now unravelling and is a complete farce,' she said. This is an utter capitulation. Labour's welfare bill is now a TOTAL waste of time. It effectively saves £0, helps no one into work, and does NOT control spending. It's pointless. They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern. — Kemi Badenoch (@KemiBadenoch) July 1, 2025 'What it won't do is stop the suffering of disabled people which is why we are determined to go ahead with the reasoned amendment and attempt to vote down the Bill at second reading.' Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch accused ministers of 'utter capitulation' and said the legislation was now 'pointless'. She said: 'They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern.'
The Guardian
21 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Pressure grows on Yvette Cooper to abandon plans to ban Palestine Action
The home secretary is coming under increasing pressure to abandon plans to ban Palestine Action, as UN experts and hundreds of lawyers warned that proscribing the group would conflate protest and terrorism. In two separate letters to Yvette Cooper, the Network for Police Monitoring (Netpol) lawyers' group and the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers said that proscribing the group would set a dangerous precedent. Additionally, several UN special rapporteurs, including those for protecting human rights while countering terrorism and for promoting freedom of expression, said they had contacted the UK government to say that 'acts of protest that damage property, but are not intended to kill or injure people, should not be treated as terrorism'. On Tuesday two people were arrested after Palestine Action claimed to have blockaded the entrance of an Israeli defence company's UK headquarters. Avon and Somerset police said a 30-year-old woman and a 36-year-old man, both from London, were arrested on suspicion of criminal damage, unauthorised entry to a prohibited place and locking on to a person, object or land to cause serious disruption. Earlier, a Palestine Action spokesperson said activists had blocked the entrance to Elbit Systems in Bristol and covered it in red paint 'to symbolise Palestinian bloodshed'. The Netpol lawyers' group letter, shared exclusively with the Guardian, was signed by 266 solicitors, barristers and legal academics, including 11 KCs and 11 law professors. 'Proscription of a direct-action protest group is an unprecedented and extremely regressive step for civil liberties,' they write. 'The conflation of protest and terrorism is the hallmark of authoritarian regimes. Our government has stated that it is committed to respecting the rule of law: this must include the right to protest. 'To use the Terrorism Act to ban Palestine Action from direct action would be an abuse of this legislation and an interference with the right to protest. Misusing terrorism legislation in this way against a protest group sets a dangerous precedent, threatens our democratic freedoms, and would be a terrifying blow to our civil liberties.' Signatories of the Haldane Society letter, which will be handed to Cooper before MPs vote on Wednesday, include Michael Mansfield KC and Imran Khan KC – who represented the family of Stephen Lawrence and victims of the Grenfell Tower fire – and the Labour peer John Hendy KC. It has been signed by thousands of people including the politicians Caroline Lucas, Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, the actors Adeel Akhtar and Juliet Stevenson, teachers and vicars. The letter says: 'It [a ban] would leave many ordinary members of the public vulnerable – for example, simply wearing a T-shirt saying 'I support Palestine Action' would be seen as violating the proscription and action would need to be taken. 'There are many dangers to proscribing peaceful direct action groups, even if their objectives are those some of us may disagree with. Current and future governments may misuse this precedent to attack other interest groups in future, offering no avenues for peacefully venting dissent.' The prime minister, Keir Starmer, was a member of the Haldane Society but left when he became director of public prosecutions in 2008. The UN experts said: 'Mere property damage, without endangering life, is not sufficiently serious to qualify as terrorism … Protest actions that are not genuinely 'terrorist', but which involve alleged property damage, should be properly investigated as ordinary crimes or other security offences.' The Home Office referred the Guardian to Cooper's statement last week announcing the proposed ban, and comments in a press release issued on Monday in which she said that Palestine Action's acts 'do not represent legitimate acts of protest and the level of seriousness of Palestine Action's activity has met the test for proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000'.
