Farmers can’t count on Labour’s promises

Children ride toy tractors past the Elizabeth Tower, commonly known by the name of the clock's bell "Big Ben", at the Palace of Westminster, home to the Houses of Parliament, during a farmers' protest against changes to inheritance tax rules for land ownership, in London on November 19, 2024
Children ride toy tractors past the Elizabeth Tower, commonly known by the name of the clock's bell "Big Ben", at the Palace of Westminster, home to the Houses of Parliament, during a farmers' protest against changes to inheritance tax rules for land ownership, in London on November 19, 2024

The weather in central London could hardly have been worse for the thousands of farmers attending the protest against the Government’s plans to raise inheritance tax (IHT). But if any group of people were used to getting up at the crack of dawn on a cold, miserable November morning here they were, with their banners, placards and the occasional tractor.

There was a distinct sense of déjà vu in seeing the countryside come to Westminster to picket the actions of a Labour government. In 2002, an estimated 400,000 demonstrators besieged the Palace of Westminster over the ban on hunting. Once again, the gulf between the mainly urbanite Labour Party and rural Britain was on show, despite election campaign promises to “govern for all”. Moreover, in the run up to the election ministers emphatically denied Tory allegations that they were planning to impose IHT on agricultural land.

Labour’s manifesto was silent on the issue but Steve Reed, now the Environment Secretary, assured National Farmers’ Union (NFU) leaders last December that Labour had no intention of changing the tax rules for farmland if they won the general election. The then NFU president Minette Batters said, “It’s good to see Labour has listened to our concerns and recognised the importance of keeping this policy.”

Sir Keir Starmer was also praised when he stated that “losing a farm is not like losing any other business. It can’t come back.” But as we now know, these assertions were designed to secure the backing of the industry as the election approached. Once in power, the pledges were dumped and the sympathy evaporated. It is breathtakingly cynical. No wonder farmers feel betrayed.

Ministers are now trying to limit the damage by claiming just a few hundred wealthy farms will be affected each year, whereas the NFU and the Country Land and Business Association believe the true total number could be close to 70,000.

But the numbers do not really matter because once the principle is conceded to impose the tax, the Treasury will come back for more by pushing up the rate and lowering the £1 million ceiling. It justifies this by demanding a contribution to the NHS and other unreformed public services where productivity continues to fall, while farmers toil to produce the nation’s food often on the margins of profitability. This Government’s priorities are now clear for all to see.