The contests come at a difficult time for Mr Farage, whose party has fallen behind Labour and the Conservatives in recent polls.

However, Thursday’s results could offer an indication of whether Reform’s local electoral support remains resilient despite its recent struggles nationally.

GB News takes a closer look at the six by-elections taking place this week.

Angela Rayner Plots a Crackdown on Landlords Despite Being Forced to Resign over the Stamp Duty Scandal

The relationship between the British government and private landlords has become an increasingly controversial issue in recent years. Rising rents, a shortage of affordable housing and growing financial pressure on tenants have placed the private rental sector under intense political scrutiny. Against this background, Angela Rayner has remained closely associated with Labour’s ambition to reform the housing market and introduce tougher regulations for landlords. However, her political position has become particularly complicated because she was previously forced to resign from the government following a controversy over the payment of stamp duty on her own property. The situation raises important questions about political accountability, fairness, public trust and the consistency of government policy.

Angela Rayner is a prominent Labour politician who previously served as Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Coming from a working-class background, she has frequently presented herself as a politician who understands the difficulties experienced by ordinary families. Housing affordability, tenants’ rights and the improvement of living conditions have been central themes in her political career. Her approach has generally reflected Labour’s argument that the housing system should provide greater protection for people who rent rather than allowing property owners to exercise excessive power over tenants.

One of the most significant issues facing the British housing market is the imbalance between landlords and renters. For many people, particularly younger workers and low-income families, purchasing a home has become increasingly difficult. High property prices, expensive mortgages and the rising cost of living have forced millions of people to remain in rented accommodation for longer than they originally expected. At the same time, rental prices have increased considerably in many parts of the country, placing additional pressure on household budgets. Consequently, the government faces growing demands to ensure that tenants receive fair treatment and have access to secure, affordable homes.

The Proposed Crackdown on Private Landlords

The latest proposals to strengthen government oversight of landlords demonstrate Labour’s determination to change the private rental market. A major element of this strategy is the introduction of a national database requiring private landlords in England to register themselves and their rental properties. The scheme is intended to improve transparency, provide local councils with better information and make it easier to identify landlords who repeatedly break housing regulations.

According to the government’s announcement in September 2026, the registration system will begin its regional rollout on 15 December 2026, starting in the West Midlands. Landlords will have to provide information about their properties and meet the registration requirements within the designated period. The system will eventually cover the entire country, with all relevant landlords expected to register by November 2027. The annual registration fee has been announced at £65 per property.

Supporters believe this measure could make a substantial difference to the rental sector. At present, some local authorities struggle to identify irresponsible landlords because information about privately rented properties is fragmented. A central database could help councils investigate complaints, monitor compliance with safety standards and take action against property owners who ignore their legal responsibilities. Tenants could also benefit from having more information before signing rental agreements.

Another important objective is to improve the quality of rented accommodation. Some tenants continue to live in properties affected by damp, mould, inadequate heating and dangerous electrical installations. These problems can seriously affect people’s health, comfort and quality of life. The government argues that stronger enforcement is necessary to ensure that landlords maintain their properties to acceptable standards rather than prioritising profits over tenants’ welfare.

Nevertheless, the proposed crackdown has generated concerns among property owners. Many landlords argue that they already face substantial financial responsibilities, including mortgage repayments, maintenance expenses, insurance premiums and taxation. Additional registration costs and administrative requirements could make property investment less attractive, particularly for individuals who own only one or two rental properties. Some fear that the government is placing too much responsibility on private landlords without addressing the underlying shortage of housing.

The Stamp Duty Scandal and Political Accountability

The controversy surrounding Rayner’s personal finances makes the political debate particularly sensitive. In September 2025, she admitted that she had underpaid stamp duty on an £800,000 flat in Hove. She had initially paid approximately £30,000, although the higher rate applicable to an additional property would have resulted in a bill of approximately £70,000.

The circumstances were complicated by her family arrangements. Before purchasing the Hove property, Rayner had transferred her share of the family home in Ashton-under-Lyne into a trust established for the benefit of her disabled son. She initially understood that this arrangement meant she was not liable for the additional stamp duty associated with owning another property. However, further specialist legal advice indicated that the relevant tax rules treated her circumstances differently.

Rayner acknowledged the mistake, accepted responsibility and referred herself to the independent adviser on ministerial standards. Following an investigation, Sir Laurie Magnus concluded that although she had acted with integrity and a commitment to public service, she had breached the ministerial code by failing to meet the required standards concerning her tax affairs. Consequently, she resigned as Deputy Prime Minister, Housing Secretary and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party on 5 September 2025.

The scandal was politically damaging because Rayner had been responsible for housing policy and was expected to demonstrate particularly high standards of financial and legal responsibility. Her position made the controversy more difficult to defend than an ordinary private tax dispute. As a senior politician involved in shaping housing regulations, she was expected to understand the importance of complying with property-related legislation.

However, there is an important distinction between making a tax mistake and deliberately avoiding taxation. In May 2026, HMRC concluded its investigation and found that Rayner had not deliberately avoided tax or acted carelessly. She paid the additional £40,000 required, bringing her total stamp duty payment to approximately £70,000, and did not receive a financial penalty.

This later development provides important context when assessing the controversy. Although the ministerial code breach had serious political consequences, the subsequent HMRC findings did not establish deliberate tax avoidance. Therefore, criticism of Rayner should be based on the established facts rather than assumptions about her intentions.

Questions of Fairness and Double Standards

The central question arising from this situation is whether politicians who introduce stricter rules for other people should be expected to demonstrate an equally high level of personal responsibility. For many members of the public, the apparent contradiction between Rayner’s previous tax controversy and the government’s tougher approach towards landlords creates an uncomfortable political picture.

Landlords are expected to comply with complicated regulations, pay the appropriate taxes and maintain accurate records of their properties. Failure to meet these requirements can result in substantial financial penalties. It is therefore understandable that some property owners may question whether politicians are applying the same principles of accountability to themselves.

Nevertheless, political responsibility should not automatically prevent someone from supporting legitimate housing reforms. The important issue is whether policies are fair, proportionate and based on evidence. A politician’s previous mistakes should be examined carefully, but public debate should also consider whether proposed measures genuinely improve people’s lives.

Furthermore, Rayner is no longer serving as Deputy Prime Minister or Housing Secretary following her resignation. The landlord registration programme is a government policy rather than a personal regulatory initiative that she currently controls. This distinction is important because political headlines can sometimes create a misleading impression about individual responsibility for government decisions.

The Possible Consequences for the Housing Market

Another significant concern is the potential economic impact of increasing regulation and taxation on private landlords. Although protecting tenants is an important responsibility, policymakers must also recognise that private landlords provide a considerable proportion of the UK’s rented accommodation.

If the financial burden becomes too heavy, some landlords may decide to sell their properties rather than continue operating in an increasingly expensive and complicated market. This could reduce the number of available rental homes and create additional competition among tenants. In areas where housing supply is already limited, such developments could contribute to higher rents.

The government must therefore find a balance between protecting renters and maintaining a healthy rental market. Responsible landlords should not be treated in the same way as those who deliberately exploit tenants or neglect their properties. A successful regulatory system should target irresponsible behaviour while encouraging property owners to continue investing in good-quality accommodation.

The introduction of a national database could be a positive step if it improves communication between landlords, tenants and local authorities. However, its success will depend on effective implementation, reasonable administrative costs and consistent enforcement across England.

Conclusion

Angela Rayner’s political history illustrates the complicated relationship between personal accountability and public policy. Her resignation following the stamp duty controversy damaged her political reputation and raised legitimate questions about the standards expected of senior government figures. Although HMRC subsequently cleared her of deliberate tax avoidance, the ministerial code breach remained an important part of her political record.

Meanwhile, the government’s proposed crackdown on landlords reflects growing pressure to improve housing standards, protect tenants and increase transparency within the private rental sector. These objectives are understandable, particularly when millions of people depend on rented accommodation and struggle with rising housing costs.

Ultimately, the credibility of housing reform depends not only on the strictness of its regulations but also on the fairness with which they are applied. The government must demonstrate that its policies protect ordinary tenants without unnecessarily punishing responsible landlords. Equally, politicians must accept that their personal conduct will be closely examined whenever they advocate stricter rules for others. Public trust can only be maintained when accountability, transparency and fairness apply consistently to everyone, regardless of their wealth, political influence or position in government.