There have only ever been eight Labour Prime Ministers and never before this year has one been removed by his party in office. Keir Starmer’s ejection was both unprecedented and extraordinary, given that it happened just two years after he had won a huge parliamentary majority. Yet, after yesterday’s Budget the single biggest question is why did they bother? Far from a rural reset, or indeed a reset on anything, Labour seems to have gone through the traumatic process of regicide for no other purpose than to change the name on the lectern outside 10 Downing Street.
The Budget offered the new administration the opportunity to reset its relationship with the countryside by tackling some of the running sores left over from two years of missteps. It could have finally axed the Family Farm Tax, which Andy Burnham had promised to revisit. It could have reduced employers’ National Insurance contributions, which have had a devastating impact on rural businesses and employment, or removed VAT on heating oil to help rural families. Indeed, it could have done anything that signalled the government understands the challenges facing rural communities.
The response to this opportunity was, to say the least, underwhelming. The government protected holiday lets from being taxed as second homes, although it increased tax on rental income. It also expanded rural rate relief to more businesses and extended the freeze on fuel duty. This is small beer, however, given the pain inflicted over the past couple of years and is a budget that could have been delivered by Rachel Reeves just as much as by John Healey. How it is meant to deliver ‘growth in every post code’ as the Prime Minister has promised is anyone’s guess. The government wants the theme of the budget to be ‘breathing space’ - whatever that means - but the real strapline of the Burnham government seems to be ‘change, but no change’.
Accepting that there will be no radical government intervention to support rural business and stimulate growth, the spotlight now falls on the other half of the equation. If the new administration is not going to do anything for the countryside, will it at least stop doing things to it? Whilst the Chancellor has been working hard at doing very little, backbench MPs have been asking Parliamentary Questions about legislation to restrict trail hunting, snares and shotgun ownership.
Ministers have confirmed that legislation to ban trail hunting “is planned to be introduced when Parliamentary time allows”. They have also said that “Defra is actively looking to bring a ban on snares into force as swiftly as possible” and that such a ban will require primary legislation. Meanwhile, the Home Office has said that it has “committed to introducing consultation” on licensing shotguns as Section 1 firearms and the Minister added that “we are always in the market to consider what more we can do”. Add to this the push towards licensing the release and shooting of gamebirds, which is the subject of Defra’s current call for evidence, and you have a full house of pointless proposals which will only damage the countryside.
Each of these proposals will, however, have to be signed off by the Prime Minister before legislation is bought forward. On these issues at least he has an opportunity to do nothing which would be welcomed in the countryside.
Photo credit: House of Commons