Gone are the days of an honest politician, but in a world of populism and post-truth, many were left wondering ‘Was that it?’ when Angela Rayner resigned over an underpayment of stamp duty. For the record, I felt her resignation was correct, especially as Rayner was a minister overseeing housing; however, this is not the world we’ve lived in for the last fifteen years, lying has become accepted, and by no means is Rayner the first minister to underpay tax, so whatsets Rayner apart from her peers?: Her background. Rayner is an outlier of the political class as someone who has risen from the very bottom of society to the very top of government.
There aren’t enough working-class women in parliament, let alone ministers. This made her mistake all the more painful, as Rayner had been able to project authenticity in her criticisms of austerity as someone who had come from the vulnerable, who would most be affected. Rayner was held to a higher standard due to her class, which was ultimately a classist double standard that has been following her throughout her political career.
To illustrate this point, take the treatment of Farage for a similar issue, in which he claimed he had bought a house in his constituency when, in fact, his wife had instead. If Farage had bought the house in question, he would’ve been due to pay an additional £44,000 in stamp duty. Farage and Reform co-leader Richard Tice have claimed that Farage’s tax affairs are irrelevant.
This is where the classist double standard emerges. Why were Rayner’s tax affairs so intensely debated when Farage, the seemingly heir apparent to Downing Street, was able to brush any scrutiny of himself under the carpet? This leaves the sour taste of Rayner being targeted because of her background.
This is not the first time she has been a victim of this sort of prejudice
This is not the first time she has been a victim of this sort of prejudice. In 2022, an anonymous Tory MP, through a newspaper, accused Rayner of deploying tactics from the film ‘Basic Instinct’ because she could not compete with Johnson’s ‘Oxford Union debating training’, illuminating a pattern of classist and sexist rhetoric towards Rayner from within the Commons and wider political reporting. This sends the message loud and clear to those from a working-class background in politics now or in future that a target will remain on their backs. “Placing all protests and strikes under one label of posing ‘distress or disruption’ sets a dan-