In the midst of the partygate scandal, Angela Rayner used the highly effective phrase “one rule for them and another for everybody else”. Nothing stokes public anger like the perception that those who enforce the rules flout them. In recent weeks, that phrase found a new home and taken on another dimension. Angela Rayner found her tax affairs the subject of intense scrutiny and, like Boris Johnson before her, was forced to step down. On the other side of the benches, Nigel Farage has dodged scrutiny about his tax affairs, exploited avoidance loopholes, and continues to grow in popularity. Even within the political sphere, there is one rule for wealthy politicians and another for everyone else.
Rayner and her siblings grew up in poverty on a council estate. Her mother had bipolar disorder and, as Rayner has said, “when I was young, we didn’t have books because my mother could not read or write.” For the most part, she was raised by her grandma “who worked at three jobs to put food on the table and didn’t stop until the day she died”. She became a teenage mother on a council estate at age 16. With the odds stacked against her, she became the embodiment of the social mobility so often espoused yet so infrequently achieved. For many, she provided hope that anyone with talent and determination can reach the heights of power in modern Britain.
This has clearly not been the case for much of British history. Before Starmer’s government, the proportion of the cabinet that had been privately educated, a hallmark of elitism, had sat above 30% for over 50 years.
Figure 1: Sutton Trust
Starmer’s Labour challenged this dynamic, with the ex-Deputy Prime Minister Rayner being a prime example. Unfortunately, this may turn out to be a one-off wave rather than a sea change, as their main competition in Reform UK present the multi-millionaire Farage for their leader and the multi-millionaire Richard Tice for their deputy leader, both of whom were born into wealth and went to fee-paying schools.
The story of Angela Rayner in politics is not just a story of representation. After spending nine years in opposition, Rayner used her one year in power to kickstart the process of significant national change. She championed a major overhaul of workers’ rights. The minimum wage has already been increased for millions, and a package of reforms are set to be introduced later in this parliament through the Employment Rights Bill, which will include day-one employment rights, improving statutory sick pay, enhancing protections for family leave and bereavement, banning exploitative zero hours contracts, and ending “fire and rehire” practices. She pushed to strengthen protections for tenants by introducing the Renters’ Rights Bill, which is likely to be brought into law later this year and ends no-fault evictions, ensures rent can only rise once a year with two months’ notice, and bans discrimination based on receipt of benefits or having children. She did not forget where she came from and, because of that, leaves a substantial political legacy.
Rayner rose due to serious political talent, an incredible story, and the championing of popular policies. She has fallen due to personal errors. For months, stories of tax-dodging on a property purchase have chased her. Her statement last week explained the complexity of the issue. Her son has life-long disabilities and had a trust set up for him so he could own a portion of the house. She then sold her portion of the house to the trust in January 2025 because she thought it was in his best interest, and proceeded to purchase her own flat in Brighton. On this new property, she paid stamp duty as if it was her primary residence despite still living in the original house. It seems a complicated family situation, but £40,000 less tax was paid than should have been, and the image of a politician of the people broke.
However, there lies a deep hypocrisy amongst those who orchestrated Rayner’s fall, certainly with Nigel Farage. Following his calls for Rayner to step down, and his opportunistic use of her resignation to claim the government is in crisis, many have been questioning Farage’s own relationship with the taxman. Led by Donkeys have highlighted that Farage took a pay packet of £40,000 to speak at “Nomad Capitalists” conference, an organization whose website boasts “We create and implement bespoke, holistic strategies for successful investors and entrepreneurs to legally reduce their tax bills, diversify and protect their assets, become global citizens and maximize their freedom.” The Guardian has followed suit by demonstrating that Farage uses a private company to reduce his tax bill on GB News Media appearances, meaning he pays a tax rate of 25% instead of 40% on these earnings. These are both perfectly legitimate, if highly unethical, ways for a public figure to make money and avoid tax. However, a more troubling accusation levelled at Farage in recent weeks is that he claimed last year to have “bought a house” in Clacton, but the property is actually owned by his partner. Given he already owns other properties, the reality that he has not in fact “bought a house” saved Farage £44,000 in stamp duty, 10% more than Rayner’s error.
In both cases, the principle that those at the top should pay their fair share remains, and in both cases, that principle has been broken. Whilst Farage’s tax-dodging may all be legal, the wealthiest in society always avoid tax legally. And whilst Rayner’s could plausibly have been a terrible mistake, Farage’s is certainly deliberate. No one speaks at a conference or registers earnings through a company “by mistake”.Farage called for Rayner to resign and, when he got his wish, he “dance[d] on her political grave”, as the New Statesman put it. The British public would be well within their rights to question whether Farage should follow the same path. They won’t be encouraged to do so because Farage is from the class of privately educated men that own the mainstream media, social media, and TV. He rarely gets asked difficult questions, and is therefore rarely held to account. Rayner has fallen, Farage will stay, and, as Rayner herself said four years ago, it remains “one rule for them and another for everybody else”.
Leave a comment