In recent years sudden events beyond our shores have had a devastating effect on Britian. The Covid pandemic, which began far away, soon affected our country, with its after-effects still being felt. Combined with the war in Ukraine, the first major conflict of its kind on mainland Europe in my lifetime, Covid’s economic consequences are profound, emphasising the pressing need for our nation to be economically resilient. To be overdependent on imported vital goods makes us vulnerable to all kinds of worldwide shocks.
There is nothing more fundamental to this resilience than having a sufficiency of food to feed national needs, and the more that is produced here, the better insulated we are from dramatic world events. Given that food security matters so much, so does the commercial viability of domestic farmers and growers. Nowhere is this more true than in Lincolnshire where, due to the preponderance of productive farmland, we grow so much of what’s consumed across the United Kingdom.
With all this in mind, the outrage at Budget measures which penalise farmers is just and right. The new Labour Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ plan to cut inheritance tax reliefs, including Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief, will have damaging consequences for British farming.
The APR was introduced to help keep farms within families by reducing the tax when, following a death, land is passed from one generation to the next. Changing the law so that agricultural assets valued at over £1 million will be taxed will affect farms as small as 65 acres.
Many British family farms are already struggling to cope with extreme weather events and corporate retailers – the big supermarkets – that squeeze primary producers’ commercial viability to breaking point.
The Government’s plans bely the fact that many asset-rich farmers are far from wealthy. The Chancellor has confused assets with income, as farm businesses profitability is not guaranteed, being subject to all kinds of variables - she should know there are no guaranteed returns or certain salaries in farming.
Family farms risk being destroyed within a generation, as thousands will simply not be able to afford to pass on their holdings to their children. The Government’s claims that three-quarters of farms will not be impacted are directly contradicted by the National Farmers Union’s estimate that, actually, two thirds of all working farms could suffer from the changes.
Farmers are right to be angry with changes about which they were neither consulted nor given notice. In fact, Labour’s Environment Secretary’s explicit promise not to do this has undermined faith in integrity of those now responsible for agricultural policy.
In Parliament last week I opposed these changes, and joined other MPs in challenging the Chancellor to withdraw this unfair family farms policy. In making a stand for British farming, we are fighting for the nation’s food security. For to secure national economic resilience by maintaining our nation’s capacity to feed its people, we must preserve the means of doing so.
