Rayner hits back at ‘hypocrisy’ claims over Right-to-Buy

Rayner hits back at ‘hypocrisy’ claims over Right-to-Buy

10:48 AM, 26th February 2024, About 3 months ago 17

Text Size

Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner has dismissed Tory accusations of hypocrisy over her use of the Right-to-Buy scheme, saying she is proud of owning her former council house.

Ms Rayner said she bought her home in Stockport, Greater Manchester, with a 25% discount in 2007, under the policy introduced by Margaret Thatcher in 1980.

She sold the property eight years later, making a £48,500 profit, according to a report by the Mail on Sunday, based on an upcoming biography of Ms Rayner by Lord Ashcroft, titled Red Queen.

The report sparked criticism from Tory MP Mark Jenkinson, who tweeted: “So Angela Rayner is a massive hypocrite, who knew?”

She was not ashamed of her purchase

But Ms Rayner hit back on X, formerly known as Twitter, saying she was not ashamed of her purchase, but angry that the Tories had made housing unaffordable for many people.

She wrote: “Being able to buy my council house in 2007 was a proud moment for me. I worked hard, saved and bought it by the book. I’m not ashamed – but I am angry that the Tories have since put the dream of a secure home out of reach for so many others.”

She also accused Lord Ashcroft and his friends of taking an ‘unhealthy interest’ in her family and trying to ‘kick down’ at people like her who ‘graft hard in tough circumstances to get on in life’.

Ms Rayner, who grew up in poverty and left school at 16, said Labour supported the right of council tenants to own their homes, but wanted to review the high discounts and the lack of replacement of social housing.

‘That’s not hypocrisy, it’s the right thing to do’

She said: “We’ve said we’ll review the unfair additional market discounts of up to 60% the Tories introduced in 2012, long after I was able to exercise the right to buy (25%) under the old system. That’s not hypocrisy, it’s the right thing to do.”

Ms Rayner added: “But the problem with the Right-to-Buy was never ordinary people’s dreams of owning their own home – it was that council housing stock was sold off and then not replaced. It’s helped fuel the housing crisis.”

Previously criticised the Right-to-Buy scheme

Ms Rayner has previously criticised the Right-to-Buy scheme for giving some tenants ‘loads and loads of discount’ and said she would review it if Labour won the next election.

In an interview with i newspaper last year, she said: “If someone’s lived in their property for a long time, they’ve been paying rent and it’s their home, then, yes, Right-to-Buy is a good thing. But we need to make sure that it doesn’t have a negative impact on the availability of affordable housing.”


Share This Article


Comments

Beaver

12:12 PM, 26th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 26/02/2024 - 11:48
And that requires investment because as you correctly point out the current growth in rents is being driven by lack of supply; this is exacerbated by left-wing politicians attacking the PRS.

If the money from the council houses that were sold was used to provide more accommodation then that might potentially fix the problem as Mrs. Rayner alludes to. But that's not the whole problem.

Where I live council house tenants don't pay what I have to pay in council tax. They are given houses (because they are entitled to them) that have the bedrooms, gardens and off-road parking that I had to finance and pay for privately (even though I pay more tax than they do). And when I paid for my principle private residence privately I had to pay for that out of after-tax earnings. Nobody offered me a 25% discount on that house; but council tenants near where I live have had that discount offered to them, and taken it.

But if you took those council houses with lots of bedrooms, gardens and off-road parking near where I live, sold them and were able to invest that in apartments then you'd probably be able to house two families or maybe three families for every one that was previously 'entitled' to a house.

25% discount on two houses, one of which was sold later for a large profit after tax. Flipping brilliant! Most of us middle-income earners and small landlords weren't doing that Mr. and Mrs. Rayner.

So if that's true it would be wise for Keir Starmer to keep Angela Rayner on the back benches for a while. At the very least she shouldn't be allowed near housing policy; only a fool would do that.

GlanACC

12:13 PM, 26th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Polly Bleat, Shelter, Generation Rent seem to be a bit quiet on this one

Beaver

12:59 PM, 26th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 26/02/2024 - 12:13
Not really news for them is it? Second-property-owning-socialists is hardly a new phenomenon.

Beaver

13:30 PM, 26th February 2024, About 3 months ago

So earlier this month Mrs. Rayner attacked landlords over mould and threatened to extend that to private landlords.

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/labour-pledges-to-extend-awaabs-law-to-private-landlords-84945

In November Mrs. Rayner said that landlords were getting away with turfing people out of their homes.

https://www.itv.com/news/2023-11-13/landlords-turf-people-out-of-homes-due-to-section-21-ban-delay-rayner-says

In November Mrs. Rayner said that labour would respond to the tories abject failure to tackle the housing crisis.

https://policymogul.com/key-updates/32394/angela-rayner-responds-to-mortgage-and-landlord-possession-statistics

So is there a difference between Mrs. Rayner and her husband buying two properties to make a lot of money with a big tax saving in order to provide a more secure future for themselves and a small landlord buying a buy-to-let to supplement a pension? A lot of labour voters in the civil service did that and they got attacked for doing it along with everybody else who was trying to provide for their family's future: The difference is that those small landlords pay tax; or at least my wife and I did.

And wasn't it Gordon Brown and a labour government that kicked many of those changes off?

Cider Drinker

13:34 PM, 26th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Another problem with RTB is that good tenants were more likely to buy their homes. That’s great if all the good neighbours buy their homes too.

Sadly, in many areas, only 50% or less bought their homes. This left 50%+ to become social housing tenants. One or two bad tenants would ‘drive out’ good tenants. Bad tenants would take their place. As time passed, good RTB owners were also driven out of their homes. Private landlords would buy the properties. Generalising (a bit), only bad private tenants would want to live amongst the bad social housing tenants.

We need housing estates of like-minded people.

GlanACC

13:47 PM, 26th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 26/02/2024 - 13:34
Even worse, the good RTB tenants left and sold to landlords, who thought 'this is a bloody big house' and divided the propery into 20 rooms (exagerating there) and let out as an HMO, thereby making the neighbourhood and community even worse.

JeggNegg

11:07 AM, 28th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 26/02/2024 - 12:13
I wonder why that is?

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now