Starmer versus the farmer: the lose-lose scenario

Who would have thought that, in the brave new world of the first labour government in 15 years, one of the most contentious decisions the new administration would take would be to impose new taxation on an already beleaguered farming sector?  There’s no doubt, except in the minds of a small number of denialists, that the previous Conservative governments collectively left a massive black hole in the country’s finances. The Labour Party were upfront and clear that some very difficult and unpopular decisions would have to be taken to try and balance the nation’s books.

But the farm inheritance tax plans announced in the recent budget were viewed by many, including myself, as a betrayal of the promises made by Starmer and Co in the run-up to the election. Many observers, including myself, believe the decision, if not reversed or at least altered, will leave the country with even more severe challenges ahead in terms of ensuring national food security. Listening to a procession of government representatives attempting to defend the decision over recent days has done nothing but add to the toxic situation now existing between the government and our farmers.

In an excellent article entitled ‘A farmers’ revolt is coming’, James Rebanks attributes much of the responsibility for farmers’ anger and anguish to the Brexiteers, who promised much but actually “bamboozled, deceived and confused” them. To then be double-crossed by the new government has added fuel to an already raging fire.  

Farmers have decided that enough is enough and now plan protests and even potentially to strike. Something we might imagine French farmers doing, as they have in the past, but not our own custodians of the countryside. I remember reading an article about President Obama, who looked to history to gain economic insights. Perhaps Starmer needs to do the same? While there seems to be disbelief that farmers would actually take militant action over what they perceive to be bad decision-making by the government, a look at our own history might prove prudent. This would provide valuable insights into quite a few ‘farmers’ uprisings’. The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, caused by high taxes and economic hardship, and Kett’s Rebellion of 1549, driven by poor economic conditions for tenant farmers, are just two examples. While history also shows that these rebellions were eventually crushed, they had long and lasting impacts.

A lose-lose scenario for farmers and government

The current dispute is not about who will win and who might lose. It is the true lose-lose scenario. If the government does not change course, farming will suffer another major body blow.  In the short-term food shortages may result, but in the medium term our national food security will be further weakened. In the unlikely event of a U-turn, the new government will have shown itself to be weak and willing to back down when challenged by protests.

It has been said that ‘politics is the art of possible’, so we must all hope that a political resolution can be found. The UK needs stability above all else and having those who feed us in such an angry mood is not the way to achieve it.