In a surprising turn, Nigel Farage criticises opposition scrutiny of Labour Deputy Leader Angela Rayner’s property holdings, defending her against accusations of hypocrisy amid ongoing political debates over housing and wealth taxes.
Nigel Farage has unexpectedly come to the defence of Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner amid mounting criticism over her ownership of multiple properties, including a luxury flat in Brighton and a London government flat whose council tax is covered by taxpayers. This controversy has ignited accusations of hypocrisy from opposition parties such as Reform UK, especially since Labour, under Rayner’s leadership, is advocating for higher taxes on second homes as part of its response to the ongoing housing crisis.
Speaking at a press conference, Farage criticised Conservative Shadow Housing Spokesman James Cleverly for his targeting of Rayner’s London residence, noting that Cleverly had not objected when former Cabinet minister Michael Gove lived there. Farage dismissed the criticism as mere party politics and expressed support for Rayner’s property portfolio, suggesting that if she acquired her properties legally and successfully, she deserved recognition. He also criticised what he called the media’s “hair shirt approach” to politicians, accusing the press of wanting politicians to adopt austere lifestyles that include going vegan and abstaining from alcohol, which he said was unrealistic.
Rayner’s property holdings have become a focus of political debate. Alongside her luxury Brighton flat and a home in her Greater Manchester constituency, she has the use of a grace-and-favour flat in Admiralty House, London, where the council tax — potentially set to double under Labour’s proposed tax regime — is paid by the government. Critics, including Reform UK leader Richard Tice, have labelled her actions “the Everest of hypocrisy,” accusing her of building a “property mountain” while lamenting housing shortages and pushing for wealth taxes. Conservative Party Chairman Kevin Hollinrake has also questioned the propriety of taxpayer funding of her council tax, a point contested by supporters who argue she pays the appropriate taxes.
A spokesperson close to Rayner emphasised her long-standing representation of constituents and noted that her government role necessitates frequent presence in London, justifying her use of the London flat. The deputy at the Department for Housing, Matthew Pennycook, who recently spoke out against wealthy individuals hoarding multiple properties and the distortions caused by short-term lets, contrasts with Rayner’s own property holdings, adding to perceptions of inconsistency.
Farage’s intervention comes amid broader political clashes, including Rayner’s repeated critiques of Farage himself, accusing him during Prime Minister’s Questions of advocating for unfunded tax cuts favouring the very richest. However, Farage remains critical of some Labour policies, such as the proposed Renters’ Rights Bill aimed at banning no-fault evictions, which he warns could reduce rental housing availability and compel landlords like himself to sell properties.
Despite her controversial property portfolio, Farage has previously praised Rayner as a “real” and formidable political figure, though he remains unconcerned about her prospects of becoming Labour leader, contrasting with her popularity among grassroots Labour supporters. His defence of Rayner on the property issue provides an unexpected counterpoint to the predominantly critical political discourse, revealing the complex intersections of personal finance, political principle, and party rivalry in the current UK political landscape.
📌 Reference Map:
- Paragraph 1 – [1], [2], [3]
- Paragraph 2 – [1], [2], [7]
- Paragraph 3 – [1], [3], [4]
- Paragraph 4 – [1], [3]
- Paragraph 5 – [1], [5], [6]
- Paragraph 6 – [4], [5], [6]
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative appears to be recent, with no evidence of prior publication. The Express.co.uk article is dated August 27, 2025, and is not republished across low-quality sites or clickbait networks. The content is original, with no earlier versions showing different figures, dates, or quotes. The inclusion of updated data, such as Rayner’s property holdings and political positions, suggests a high freshness score.
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
The direct quotes attributed to Nigel Farage and Angela Rayner are unique to this narrative, with no identical matches found in earlier material. This suggests potentially original or exclusive content.
Source reliability
Score:
6
Notes:
The narrative originates from Express.co.uk, a UK-based news outlet. While it is a known publication, it is not as widely regarded as some other UK news organisations. The report includes references to other reputable sources, such as GB News and the Evening Standard, which adds credibility. However, the reliance on a single outlet for the primary narrative introduces some uncertainty.
Plausability check
Score:
7
Notes:
The claims made in the narrative are plausible and align with known political dynamics. The narrative includes specific details, such as the property holdings of Angela Rayner and her political positions, which are consistent with publicly available information. The language and tone are consistent with UK political reporting. However, the lack of corroboration from multiple reputable sources means the narrative should be approached with caution.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The narrative appears to be recent and original, with unique quotes and plausible claims. However, the reliance on a single source and the lack of corroboration from multiple reputable outlets introduce some uncertainty. Further verification from additional sources is recommended to confirm the accuracy of the claims.
