Angela rayner tax dodger again...

[blup]

Eh?

What?!?

Are you trolling?

Eh?

What?

 

[Murdochcat]

I suppose Her resignation was inevitable

Big mistake on her part !!!

But it was a mistake

Not a deliberate act of tax avoidance imo

Being generous I’d say it’s a lack of attention to detail on her part

 

[blup]

A lawyer can only give opinions, unless they have been instructed to give advice.

Is there a difference in practical terms.

where did you see that ?

I am making the point that advice is advice and it’s no excuse to say it might be wrong. She received advice and she was entitled rely on it. The investigation seized on the fact that she did not uphold the highest possible standards of a minister I.e go for further advice. And take it where? The Supreme Court, the ECJ?. It’s an impossible standard. Every member of Kieth’s cabinet is a dead politician walking on that hurdle height. Her advisers and therefore she may have got the law wrong but that’s not misconduct on her part.

 

[blup]

Worrying - a government minister that doesn’t check the small print. Never mind, she won’t make that 'mistake' again.

Tell the brexxers

Day two of Brexit talks – and the UK looks as underprepared as ever | Jennifer Rankin

David Davis’s grin masked grim reality of ‘taking back control’ – the complexity of even basic issues. This is just the start

www.theguardian.com

 

[MNW67]

Is there a difference in practical terms.

I am making the point that advice is advice and it’s no excuse to say it might be wrong. She received advice and she was entitled rely on it. The investigation seized on the fact that she did not uphold the highest possible standards of a minister I.e go for further advice. And take it where? The Supreme Court, the ECJ?. It’s an impossible standard. Every member of Kieth’s cabinet is a dead politician walking on that hurdle height. Her advisers and therefore she may have got the law wrong but that’s not misconduct on her part.

I thought the letter said that whoever advised her said she should get some proper tax advice. But she didn't.

 

[Highway Man]

Thank god she has gone, next snake under the door please

 

[blup]

I thought the letter said that whoever advised her said she should get some proper tax advice. But she didn't.

One suggested she did, one recommended she did, but it was still advice. Why is she still an MP if it was a sackable offence?

 

[MNW67]

One suggested she did, one recommended she did, but it was still advice. Why is she still an MP if it was a sackable offence?

Apples and oranges. The Ministerial Code has very high standards. Lots of ministers of all parties have been sacked for transgressions over the years, without being suspended from their party.

 

[blup]

Apples and oranges. The Ministerial Code has very high standards. Lots of ministers of all parties have been sacked for transgressions over the years, without being suspended from their party.

Why should lower standards apply to MPs?

 

[motorbiking]

I suppose Her resignation was inevitable

Big mistake on her part !!!

But it was a mistake

Not a deliberate act of tax avoidance imo

just like the last time

 

[MNW67]

Why should lower standards apply to MPs?

That's just the way it is. Ministers have massively more power and responsibility than MPs. Hence they are held to higher standards.

 

[motorbiking]

Is there a difference in practical terms.

Yes, "In my opinion you are probably ok, but I am not a specialist tax lawyer and you should seek advice from a qualified person". I don't know any lawyer who advises outside their speciality. They wouldn't last very long if they did. You can also only offer legal advice if you are instructed/retained to do so. The code of conduct is super clear for legal professionals.

I am making the point that advice is advice and it’s no excuse to say it might be wrong. She received advice and she was entitled rely on it.

She didn't receive advice, she received opinion the investigation is clear on that.

The investigation seized on the fact that she did not uphold the highest possible standards of a minister I.e go for further advice. And take it where? The Supreme Court, the ECJ?. It’s an impossible standard. Every member of Kieth’s cabinet is a dead politician walking on that hurdle height. Her advisers and therefore she may have got the law wrong but that’s not misconduct on her part.

It sated that she sought opinion, and ignored the disclaimer.

 

[blup]

That's just the way it is. Ministers have massively more power and responsibility than MPs. Hence they are held to higher standards.

I’m not sure a tax dodging MP ( which she now seems to be categorised as) is any less accountable than a Minister

 

[motorbiking]

 

[Murdochcat]