The Rest Is Politics is powered by Fuse Energy, a green electricity supplier powering homes across England, Wales and Scotland. Use referral code POLITICS after sign up for a chance to win a signed copy of Rory and Alastair's books with personalised messages. Learn more at getfuse.com/politics ⚡
Does Alistair believe in ‘innocent until proven guilty’? By his words, I’m not convinced, at all. Never, in all of the history of Democratic Nations, have the Elites been so disconnected from those they’re supposed to serve. And the more I listen, the less I think of them as deep thinkers, who understand complexity in society, and are just people who happen to have been born into, and had lucky breaks, to become a part of the elite class. I thought they’d have iq’s of at least 125, yet I’m not sure Rory, for example, is above 110. Alistair probably in the 120’s. The Elites are all ‘midwits’, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to not notice, sadly. It’s quite shocking, and deeply disconcerting.
While i agree that farmland should be taxed to deter unproductive landuse as a intergenerational tax dodge it should only be taxed when the farmland is rezoned for commercial or urban use based on how long the land has been farmed. The only part of inheritance tax that should be applied is on the residential dwellings on the farmland to deter palatial manor dwellings that were again dodging taxes by pretending to be farms.
There is a fundamental demand for land other than farming use that sadly makes it a bit of a no-brainer investment. I am surprised how the supermarkets have gotten away with paying farmers peanuts and how it's not been raised.
Spot on. Actually the Imheritance Tax would protect against land buying for tax purposes. But many farmers want their cake and eat it. Out of europe but still subsidised and protected/insulated from the headwinds of Brexit Economics. They want no inheritance tax but want the security of an appreciating asset. May be that they are taking a low wage but its disingenuous when you are sitting on an asset that is appreciating and profit that you choose to reinvest is still profit. The farmers fight should be with the MNC global corporations who use their monopsony power to drive down food supplier prices.
@@davidrobertson9174because if we forced supermarkets to buy at higher costs, they would pass that onto us and food inflation is pretty fatal for any government
And it makes me angry to see UKIP and Reform in particular exploiting this situation when they actually supported one of the major drivers of this situation - Brexit.¹
Disagree with Rory that Thatcher was the death knell to the coal industry, already in decline - did much of my dissertation on this point - a number of pits produced coal in a substantially economic/competitive manner - the gvmt ignored the evidence, because ideologically Thatcher's primary concern was to smash the power of the unions. She succeeded. The failure to give those mining communities a viable alternative way to earn a living led to generations of communities condemned to poverty. In turn, a portion of that fed into why communities later voted for Brexit, after a lifetime of being betrayed by gvmts since (both Tory & Labour). It was a betrayal of the social contract then, which persists to the present - creating the vacuum into which populists have stepped in the present day.
Wy would we buy coal at such a massive cost difference when we could get it elsewhere half the price. idiocy to be held hostage by the unions. they were broken as an industry already
Exactly. That Britain eventually got rid of heavy industry is not the surprise; this was the trajectory across the West. But West Germany (for example) transitioned all that unionised industry into high tech manufacturing, and are still world leaders. That's down to the communities and SME's that underpin the whole industry with supply chains. I live and work in Holland in construction and going back to the UK is like visiting a third world country at times. Seen a guy spending several hours trying to break a hole through a wall with a lump hammer and chisel.
Not going to defend La Pen, but if you think she and her party are in any way unique in the EU parliament you are fooling yourself. And if you think when it does occur it is limited to those at the political fringes, you are a complete fool.
The same people who threat over 'democracy' have no problem obstructing it when it doesn't serve their fringe interests. The natives may give up on politics and opt for a coup
Perhaps the tweak Alastair suggests could be tying inheritance tax to a sale event rather than an inheritance event? That way inter-generational farmers won't pay any tax at all, but rich people dodging tax will.
That still presumes that land should be the preserve of a hereditary class. If you had an annual land tax instead of IHT then you'd still pay, but in a way that it doesn't depend on deaths and seven year rules and all that. You keep all of the things most people like about land ownership: stability, security, the ability to pass things on to your family but without getting it for free just because your ancestors were lords or something. If you use land, you pay for it. If you want to think of it that way, financially you can see like everyone paying rent to the state (i.e. the rest of society) based on their landholding, but you get first dibs on it every year if you're prepared to keep paying to use the land.
@@zak3744are consumers prepared to pay more for food so farmers can earn enough to pay the land tax? If not how are the 50% of farmers who made less than £20 last year, typically working 7 days a week and not taking any holiday, meant to pay such a land tax? Would the land tax be waived if a weather/ disease/ pest problem event wiped out a farmer’s crop/ produce and so the business generates a loss?
This comment section clearly needs some serious moderation. The tendency to jump in just to bully Campbell has gotten out of hand. Yes, the Iraq dossier raised valid questions and sparked debate, but framing it as the defining moment of Alastair Campbell’s career is an exaggeration. His work and contributions span far beyond this single issue, reflecting a career built on dedication, insight, and integrity. Focusing solely on this one chapter ignores the broader positive impact he has had in many other areas
With respect, Campbell built his career treading the fine line between bullying and exerting pressure on journalists, and crossed it on many occasions. It's not harassment to point out when someone, who continues to be a vocal player in the political arena, is full of it, anymore than it would be for any other political figure.
I mean, let's not diminish his actions tho. He's an untrustworthy professional propagandist who was central to pulling the UK into an illegal war which killed 100s of thousands of innocent civillians while destabilising the region, the effects of which continue today. It's not bullying to say that, it's indisputable fact. And on balance, I'm not sure it's evened out by him having said once or twice that mental health is important. My personal view is he's not a great guy and he'll misrepresent the truth, turning it into he'd like you to believe it is. And everything he says should be heard in that context. That's not a personal attack, that's treating what someone says how it should be treated given their track record.
adverage cost per acre in England is £11,300 So if you had a 500 acre farm that'll already be 5.6 million on land alone. farming machinery, storage and other assets will probably be closer to 10 million. So a 2 million tax bill spread over 10 years interest free is £200,000 a year. Are farmers making £200,000 a year? I don't think so. They, as this policy intends, will need to sell their farm and take an early retirement as a mutli-millionaire (and get taxed 40% when they die) Labour want more land for housing, wind farms and other projects.
Actual farmers passing on a farm will transfer more than 7 years before death and thus not pay IHT. Untill that threshold is passed the risk of early death and IHT can be covered with life insurance.
I’m not convinced it’s even that deep. The contemporary Labour Party seem to just yearn for power. I’m not sure there’s much intellectual depth, as was the case with the previous Conservative governments. But, there’s a phenomenon where Democratic Nations begin to fail the closer to 90 iq the average of the population gets,a with no nation with a below 90 iq average being even close to democratic. Maybe we are just importing our way away from Democratic Nationhood? Has anyone in the halls of power taken this into consideration? Like encouraging indigenous people to have babies, like those awful Hungarians have, or are we moving to the new definition of Democracy, to mean the institutions, not the people? Food for thought, I think, anyway.
@@adodgygeeza So farmers have to guess when they're going to die? And then count back 7 years, move out of their farmhouse, into another house... pay rent... oh wait, where they getting the money from? They're farmers... they cant farm, if they're not at the farm. You haven't though this through have you? You need to read up the rules on the 7 year rule.
@@playersinexile72 BECAUSE ITS LAND. IT'S A FINITE ASSET. WE CANT CREATE MORE LAND. WITHOUT LAND, YOU CANT BUILD THINGS. SO LAND IS WORTH ALOT. YOU CANT BUILD IN THE SKY. YOU NEED LAND. GRAVITY IS A THING. HOW STUPID ARE YOU PEOPLE?!
It is time for the democracies of the world to draw a line in the sand and split entirely both culturally and economically from the autocratic alliance of Russia, China etc. No trade, no flights or visas, no educational links, no joint involvement in international sporting events. Countries like India and several in Africa and South America who try to court both sides would be expected to decide one way or another. Let these autocracies and their docile populations then be left to stew in their own future instead of leeching on the benefits, markets and culture created by the free world. A world reset of this nature is needed urgently if we are not to sleepwalk into domination by expanding dictatorships.
Yeh they need to throw it back and use their logic against them. Then show on record moments of Dyson, Clarkson,farage et al saying they only bought land to avoid tax
Farms / IHT what am I missing, isn't the solution obvious? A) of course they should not apply IHT. B) But of course they should impose a sales tax on farms. Result: real farming families retain their farms / IHT avoiders whose descendants would sell the farm upon inheriting them - will pay a sales tax. farmers keep farms, tax avoiders pay IHT in another form. Job done?
Would that not reduce the amount of land coming onto the market? Would it then drive up prices? When you say a sales tax is it paid by the seller or purchaser?
@@jamesthomas4841 a better solution is to tax anyone the full 40% IHT who bought farmland since 1990 and hasn’t farmed it themselves, or had an immediate family member farm it. That would trigger a rush in sales from investors prior to April 26 and a glut of CGT into the Tresury. It could also stipulate farmland sold by investors prior to April 26 must be sold to a farmer, perhaps or with a 5% or 10% reduction in CGT as an incentive.
I'm going to be incredibly disappointed in Starmer if he backs off on this now. It'll show that Tory Voters and Right Wing media can dictate policy to a Labour Government
Okay... I've worked with farmers in the past and they are hardworking amazing people.... However if your business is making no profit, then in any other sector you would go bust. How many generational family businesses have failed and no one really batted an eyelid! Also most farms haven't revalued for decades which means the reality of their value is massively downplayed! The idea that farmers are struggling is because they are stubborn as hell... Which is admirable in its nature... To a point!
Brexit was an utter disaster for many famrers who had it good under EU, better perhaps than many were weilling to admit. they were warned at the time about the dangers of exiting the EU but unbelievably they voted it for nonetheless. That is their right and they may have had their reasons but it was a hell of an own goal
They didn't vote for it. This is a dumb prejudice. Farmers aren't a monolithic bloc - in polls before Ref it was about 50-50 leave/remain among farmers. How would you show farmers supported it?
If Labour is so enamoured with the EU, it can take some of the tens of billions it is squandering on carbon capture, a technology which is a complete non starter, and replace the farming subsidies the EU provided (at a much lower cost than out net contribution to the EU I might add). Instead, Labour is destroying the generational link between farming families, thereby killing off our farming industry. No one else is going to spend huge sums of money on farm land to make a paltry living doing long hours and hard and dirty work in the elements. Its either carried on by family farmers or it will die off. Far more likely it would be bought up to concrete over the countryside to accommodate a burgeoning population, population growth driven solely by mass immigration, but which neither Tory nor Labour government will do anything to curtail. Never mind that we never asked if we wished to be reduced to a minority in our own homeland and lose vast swathes of the greenbelt to boot. And these are the same parties who pretend to care about the environment, obsessing over our tiny contribution to total CO2 emissions, headless of the economic hardship this will cause, all the whilst despoiling the environment.
@notalefty999 Completely agree with you. The recent budget's inheritance tax changes are a disgrace and may massively hurt small farmers, who are a cohort of society who are already struggling.
The land is so expensive because the rich are using it to dodge obscene amounts of tax. Labour are doing this wrong - they should be taxing people who buy land extortionate amounts particularly if they are not using the land for farming.
There is a simple way to “tweak” this. Put farms with proof of farm-based trading against some simple but difficult to abuse criteria outside the scope.
They need to pay IHT Listened to a tax expert the other day there able to claim as a couple 1 million agri relief 1 million business relief and 500k IHT each if they structure it correctly so between 3-5 million with the average family farm near me costing 2.5 million
So the UK gave the EU £100. The EU gave back £80, of which £10 was given to farmers. Now, the UK keeps the £100 but only gives the farmers £7. That is a decision made in the UK and has little to do with leaving the EU, but has to do with the fact the UK is in so much debt.
Both incorrect. They gave us £80 back but the additional trade you get being in the largest single market in the world accounted for a further £120 on top.
I periodically think about the fact that Alastair Campbell - a man who lied to justify a war that created a mental health crisis & severe generational trauma on a scale difficult to comprehend - is publicly lauded in the UK as a 'mental health advocate'. What is the message here exactly? and what does it say about UK society? It's OK to commit war crimes so long as you talk about how it made you depressed on TV afterwards? How virtuous and brave Campbell is.... What also comes to mind when I think about this is Owen Jones sympathetically discussing mental health with Campbell as though he's just a good bloke trying to 'raise awareness' rather than a war criminal cynically laundering his reputation by pretending to care about others. The only time I would be remotely interested in hearing Alastair Campbell's thoughts on mental health is if he were speaking from a jail cell after his conviction for war crimes. The war on Iraq destroyed the mental health of millions of people - in many cases irreparably - & its impact continues to traumatise millions, not just in Iraq but across the entire region. Campbell's direct involvement in unleashing all that destruction should never be forgotten But instead of ever facing justice, Campbell's career has flourished in many ways and he wins awards "in recognition of his work to break down the stigma around mental illness"
Absolutely spot on. Played the MH card to avoid being attacked on his decisions. Basically the UK version of Dick Cheney and remember how hated he was on leaving office.
The message it sends is that as long as you're part of a priviledged political class, you can pretty much get away with murder. You can be responsible for doctoring intelligence that led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, face no consequences and then seek rehabilitation through platforming mental health issues, writing a couple of books, and launching a centrist/neoliberal podcast and talking edlessly about Donald Trump.
Oh dear...you only believe what you want to believe because it's easier and simpler to think that way. It's more complex than 'YOUR' simplistic view. At least he is trying to do something to promote mental health, I wonder what 'YOU' are doing? you talk about moral high ground and yet you are taking one here.
why don’t they just say, okay - if the farm has been in your family for x generations, the tax doesn’t apply to you. Therefore if you’ve just bought a farm for the tax loophole you’ll have to pay the tax, and if you’re a family owned farm who’s been doing it for generations, you’re safe
The UK is in a really dire state. It should accept that it’s a middle income power and behave like the Dutch or Norwegians, all this chest beating gets us no where. The imperial delusions of Brexit reduced our growth & now all I’m hearing is how we have to increase defence spending. We have trident must we have aircraft carriers? I really don’t see this ending well.
If you want an example of deluded, try worrying about defence spending as the chief economic mismanagement the country engages in, not say, the £100bn welfare bill paid to working age people, accounted for in no small part by people claiming to be too ill to work on the basis of unfalsifiable illnesses. Or billions squandered every year on materially providing for "refugees" fleeing France when their claims should be dismissed out of hand and they immediately deported simply on the basis of the circumstance of their arrival. The government spends staggering amounts of money causing active harm, whether it is disincentivising work or attracting culturally alien, crime prone, low human capital immigrants. Yet you balk at the far smaller sum we spend on our military. Granted, I have to question where those £50bn are going, but at least in principle, defence spending, alongside policing, represent the two core responsibilities a government must fulfil. Its doing a bad job at both and its certainly not where the axe should fall in terms of public spending. And if defence cuts are needed, they should find some useless employees to sack (there are bound to be a fair few, its the public sector), not cut military hardware.
@@notalefty999 people are sick in part because of an underfunded NHS, and poor food. In terms of priorities, I'd prioritise a human rights-based solution to the fact of migration, than the possibility of war.
@@Jafmp By far and way the most common conditions which account for huge increase in incapacity related benefits since 1990 (the number of claims has more than trebled) is mental health. There has not been a stark decline in the quality of nutrition of physical health over this same period. As for underfunded NHS, that claim is utterly delusional. Mismanaged maybe, but it is lavishly funded. And human rights are not a solution of any kind to illegal immigration. They are the problem. They are the reason why we cannot have a vaguely sane way of dealing with illegal immigrants; they can engage in obviously fraudulent asylum claims in most cases successfully and even when found to be false, face no penalty whatsoever. You need only get into Britain by hook or by crook, claim to be seeking asylum and the chance of you being deported is close to zero. All courtesy of our wonderful human rights legislation, which produces such moral abominations as illegal immigrants committing crimes like rape and manslaughter not being removed due to right to a family life, in addition to making asylum claims essentially a blank cheque from the taxpayer payable to anyone who wants to commit fraud.
You are meant to ask should we continue to allow rich people to buy up farmland as a tax dodge? The answer is no & they should be paying 40% IHT & not 20%. Real farmers have little to do with this
Farmers in many ways were a instrument in our own recovery from GFC 15 years ago & also our farmers were under threat from the Vulture funds because of expenses which may over weigh income !!
I worked for the UN, indeed still do consulting for them. The world still needs a UN like organization, but the current one is inherently corrupt, inept and venal. Huge reform is needed, I would say a break is needed between the current UN and a new organization greater than that between the old League of Nations and the UN. No one woking in the UN in the D1 grade and above should be employed in the new organisation and the “DEI” geographical representation recruitment policy abandoned.
Funny how clarkson was bragging that he put his money in farming so that his kids don’t have to pay inheritance tax Also, he was very for leaving the European Union who paid uk farmers pots money to help them every year. Clarkson is only focused on himself
I've never heard Alistair criticise any Labour MP in the current government. I find it difficult giving credibility to anyone that tribalistic, he's in danger of becoming just a walking propagandist at this point.
You do realise that he’s not becoming one but is one, when he criticises it is not at the expense of the party as a whole, he sometimes criticises people who he wants gone, now they are in power he can’t criticise anyone, and so is back to being full spin doctor
@@benwilliams1267 not you again. fat lad sat on his backside every single video, writing the same comment. do ur balls tingle from the likes you get? so many different podcasts to choose from and here you are. absolute melt 🤣🤣🤣
It would interesting to see the tax benefits that the "Corporate Farms" get in comparison to private/smallholding farmers? My family in Australia are from farming background, most private farms are selling to major corporations, in part because there are no generational retention and the cost of operating. I support the farmers in protecting the right for inheritance event.
The situation we're in with inheritance tax (IHT) and farming can be traced back to Margaret Thatcher in 1984 with the advent of Agricultural Property Relief (APR) that benefited her wealthy supporters which was extended in 1992 by John Major. As a direct consequence of these policies, the prevailing price of farmland is now driven by it being used as a financial instrument for tax avoidance rather than an asset for farming crops or livestock. The increase in inheritance tax should reduce the appeal of farmland to wealthy tax avoiders and hence lower the cost of farmland which will benefit real farmers and aid farms to stay in families. These protests are being prompted by wealthy interests as there is nothing noisier than a rich person being threatened with paying their fair share. These very vocal protests are supported by the right wing press that are obliging their paymasters by maintaining this divisive narrative. Real farmers are being duped by the glitz of personalities and being co-opted by the right wing politicians, notably Farage decked out in his tweed country costume. There's an argument that IHT applied to farms should have a higher tier for say farms worth £5m or £10m+ where the 50% discount on IHT is removed so the rate paid is the same as everybody else. That would be a substantial benefit for real family farms and get Clarkson, Dyson and others to pay their fair share. At the end of the day it is wealthy individuals avoiding/evading tax that increases the tax burden on ordinary working people. This price distortion is exactly the same that has beset the UK housing market and the main cause of the current crisis. Houses are also used too much as financial instruments rather than as a place to live.
Great comment. As someone who has worked as a rural surveyor selling farmland, I have first hand experience on this. Farmland values are not commensurate of the income the land can generate, instead it is the tax saving that dictates the value. This puts farmers at a disadvantage when they want to increase the size of their holding, as they are competing with buyers with different objectives. This is bad for farming, bad for food production and bad for successors. The rules should be amended to allow for a higher threshold if the farm is being passed onto an active farming successor. It will bring down the value of land but that is good for farming in the long term.
Absolutely 100% correct and I’m amazed that Rory isn’t aware of this. He likened it to Thatcher desolating the coal industry - nonsense. Thatcher started the decline of farming in the UK by letting the free market have rip at it and by turning into a financial instrument for the rich. Those effects have been slow growing and have been concealed by EU subsidies for decades. It’s all 100% the Tories doing and now Labour are getting flack for taking one step in the right direction. They could do a lot more of course, namely preventing the major food manufacturers from pushing the prices so low that the farmers can’t make a return, but it’s a start.
Excellent articulation. The removal of the 50% discount for a higher tier sounds like a tweak they need to make. "There is nothing noisier than a rich person being made to pay their fair share" 😂 💯
@@sambob6517 let's not gloss over the farmland value due to the amount being bought by housing developers, to build the houses that Labour say they're going to build - and which we need. It's all tax saving, is it?
@@scoundrelh7582 actually that’s quite different. Farmland around towns has hope value (potential). It doesn’t really influence the value of farmland in open countryside away from built up areas, unless there is some chance of future development.
It's not what brexit did to farming it's the incompetance of our own governments. The mistake was not in voting for brexit it was the mistake of thinking our politicians were decent enough to run the country.
@@seanoconnor8843 mistake was Austerity and the belief system that allowed unregulated gig workers flooding in on zero hour from eastern Europe Combine the 2 and you have people getting poorer and opportunist like Farage feeding of the resentment To this day Reform and the Tories are talking small state and deregulation the 2 things that got us here in the 1st place
Does Malcom Tucker in BBC sitcom 'The thick of it ' bear any like-ways to yourself back in the Day ? Except for being Scottish of course ? Great show & a pure credit to State controlled broadcasting which is capable of seeing both sides !
It is unfair to claim that Alastair Campbell is acting like a Labour spokesperson, as he has consistently demonstrated a balanced approach in his commentary. He has shown a willingness to address both sides of the argument, presenting objective perspectives even when discussing contentious issues. While his background and strong opinions may lead some to associate him closely with Labour, his recent analyses often reflect a nuanced understanding of the political landscape rather than partisan rhetoric. To dismiss his contributions as merely promotional for one party undermines the depth and impartiality he brings to the discussion
Alastair Campbell cheat code: when AC describes Starmer, or Labour, as doing X, Y, Zed "pretty well" or "fine" it means he loathes their performance and hates their amateurish approach.
Someone needs to tell Ross from Ipswich that the Chinese economy is shrinking in every sector other than exports. Has been in deflation at GDP level for 6 quarters.
Oh poor farmers only get a £3m tax break plus a 50% reduction on the tax they pay after that. Single people only get 10% of that and then get taxed at 40%. Farmers live off SUBSIDIES, that's just as much passive income as the interest on my bank account - which unlike land doesn't even cover inflation. If Jeremy Clarkson wants to avoid tax I suggest he takes things into his own hands and saves us from more rants for ever. He could, for instance, give his fortune to third world farmers to mitigate the damage he has done promoting gas guzzling cars. Stopping land being a tax dodge (or at least reducing the extent of rich people's tax avoidance), may well lead to a fall in land prices (taking even more family farms out of tax) and may marginally help the landless who would like to get into farming. They may be able to buy the odd hectare and market garden when some farmers have to relinquish some of their silver spoons. I am thinking of spending the pot I have responsibly accumulated to pay for potential care costs in older age.
I have a question. If a sport event was to be interrupted by a war, would Trump be motivated to intervene? The Ukrainian Open could replace a security pact!
With so many tax loopholes holes out there unplugged, There might be scope to advance revenues. Amazon top of the list. The winter payment scrapping, was bad politics. The two white elephant carriers can be sold off. The number of unknowns in land ownership is not acceptable. Nor is 1% owning 50% of land, the 1.8 hectares for grouse shooting, could be taxed.
There is nearly 1 million acres of land that has skipped inheritance tax for around 1 thousand years. Farming land prices will reduce once the tax dodgers realise they will have to pay up which means even fewer farmers will have to pay.
@@EmmaLaBunn At this point I don't care and even with all the media bs lies the general public doesn't either. Were was the big protest when brexit obliterated them? The majority voted brexit and the rest allowed themselves to be used. Where was the massive protests with the Aus/NZ deals that will put the final nail in the coffin?? So WTF is it that 'farmers' only protest over taxes? over half our food is imported and because of tory deals that will drastically decrease, the only farmers left in 10 years will be the clarkson tax dodgers. They are letting themselves be used again so fuck em. I don't care anymore 'cos they sure af don't care about farming. It should have been a full tax the same as the general public because clarkson and his mates will still be saving 20%. Farming for farmers not tax dodgers.
@@EmmaLaBunn Probably not because the changes introduced by Reeves still provide clear tax benefits to rich investors hoping to avoid IHT. If you buy farmland you have to pay less inheritance tax than if you bought other assets.
According to DEFRA, last year, 30 per cent of farms made a loss, while a further 25 per cent made less than £25,000. Given the awful weather this year with fields flooded, it's not right to impose more costs on these guys who we depend on. On a side point, I took Rory's advice from a previous podcast and bought James Rebanks' book, English Pastoral - A Inheritance. A phenomenal book, very well written, hugely informative and encouraging.
Rory is right, Alastair is wrong on the future of farming. Brexit didn't help, but the downfall of farming [our rural community] started 20 years earlier when the environmental NGO's muscled into Defra and were able to dictate future farming policy. 20 years ago we had cheap food, but BPS was in place to support farmers. today we still have cheap food "just", but this will change with "supply and demand" Today, we have no BPS left, instead "public money for public good" which is nearly all a environment payment at the of cost "Food Security" which nationally has been declining for years to dangerously low levels today. Today, we have the added problems of Climate Change and increasing political instability [wars, history repeating itself] which will make food a weapon of war in the not too distance future. So, we all need farmers, fisherman and gamekeepers, all primary food producers in our "island nation" inheritance tax is the last straw for the survival of our industry and giving all future generations a chance to continue in farming and sustainable food production for us all. .
Farming in the UK will continue. You don't need to exaggerate to make your case. Having no IHT on farmland is, in historical terms, an aberration that stretched from 1992 to April 2026 Farming did not collapse in the centuries before that. They will be fewer farms in future and those that survive will generally be larger. However that has been the case since the open fields were enclosed into farms.
To that question from a recent podcast "but why do people vote for Trump?". I mentioned this podcast to a mate (who voted for Brexit) and he scoffed at both of you? I now see that there is this instinctive rejection of intellectuals and the political class. In a way, why not? It just shows that we're spending too much time with "our people", rather than having genuine equal exposure to people across the economic and intellectual spectrum
No environmentalist anywhere is trying to encourage productive fields to be 'abandoned' and left for trees to grow. No. Just shows Rory has no clue about the env political landscape.
"Does the West really care about human rights?" This is a nonsensical question because the West is a geographical landmass that cannot 'care' about anything at all.
Rory mentioned antisemitic violence, making the same old mistake of conflating antisemitism and anti Israeli ism, the former being outrageous, the latter absolu
The fundamental point being missed on the Ajax Tel-Aviv football violence is that the violence didn't happen between supporters near the stadium, the violence happened across the city. That is why Israeli commentators, Jewish leaders, and Dutch politicians were so quick to liken it to the night of broken glass. Because it was organised violence against Jews and Israelis right across the city, not just in one location. It was people in headscarfs waiting at train stations and bus stop to attack Jews and Israelis. It wasn't one group of people chanting one thing and another chanting another and them coming to blows. It was one group chanting one thing, another chanting another, the police getting a good grip on any violence near the game, then as supporters were heading home, targeted attacks on individuals based on their Jewish identity irrespective of if they were involved in chanting or whatever. I mean to try and justify the violence against Israelis by pointing at chanting made some time before hand by a small group of Ultra's is just evidence of a media landscape where antisemitsm and the persecution of Jews is so normalised. Why can't Isrealis just be the victim of a horrendous attack? Why can't the media just accept that there is a large number of mostly muslims, arab muslims who want to kill and injure Jewish people for no other reason than that they are Jewish? The media and especially left wing media are desperate always to try justfiy violence against Jews even when there is none.
You pay no IHT on gifts made 7 years before you die, I don’t see what the issue is. If you want to keep the farm in your family, gift it to your son before you turn 60.
I'm sorry the reason the farmers are being caught by inheritance tax is because farms are being bought purely to become fax avoidance schemes and not for farming purposes. If you remove the tax break, it stops farmland being used as a financial instrument, farm land reduces in price and then the farmers will not be affected by the tax.
Do you not think it's also because land is finite in the UK? and over time, as the population expands, so does the housing demand? Do you not think that maybe house builders would want to buy land to build houses on? Energy companies may want to build wind farms?
@@scapingby house builders aren't allowed to build on a lot of farmland, no it's because - as many others have said - farmland has been turned into a economic instrument largely for tax avoidance.
@@playersinexile72 Ok, so you think land only increases in value because wealthy individuals are buying up all the farmland? There's no other factors that are driving up the price of land? So if you were to magically remove the incentive for wealthy individuals to buy farmland... what will happen to the price of land? will it just drop to the floor? What do you mean house builders cant build on farmland? Farmland is only farmland if farmers farm that land. It's just land. House builders can buy land, and build housing on their land. If farmers are forced out of farming.... house builders will buy the land, and build housing. It's not difficult. Will they need planning permission? Of course, but they can afford lawyers to make it happen.
@@playersinexile72 I work in construction. Of the last 32 projects I've either worked on or tendered, 3 have been ex-RAF bases, 5 have been brownfield sites, and 24 have been farmland. Please educate yourself before spreading misinformation.
The IHT exception for farmers only came into place in 1984... Obviously no issue before that point for small family farms. Surprised to hear a conversation here that doesn't mention this very key point! This is nowhere near as consequential as the media have managed to make out, and orders of magnitude less than the impacts of Brexit
Amazing how well informed Alistair is informed about our politicsihere in the Netherlands! And from what I know via all sorts of media and platforms, what he tells is correct. Sincere compliments!
The fundamental point is fairness. Farmers can't be a special case. Focus on food security and the environment would enable small farmers to earn a decent living.
Would it? Is it "fair" to subsidise them and no-one else? Circa 50% of farms are loss-making, absent CAP payments. And almost 75% of produce comes form the top 25% of producers. The country could lose one third of farms, reclaim the lands (even for rewilding and nothing else) and barely notice a difference in domestic food supply - and be better off financially. "Fair" needs a fuller context.
@@CurtOntheRadio importing all our food is unsustainable. I agree that subsidies are not tackling the root cause but we can't afford in terms of climate change to continue to import everything.
@@CurtOntheRadio ahh you’re in favour of offshoring food production to parts of the world with poorer ecological regulation. Also it appears see no issue in increasing our dependence on importing food and increasing its exposure to the he vagaries of international trade. We subside 100% of teachers, doctors and nurses salaries because they provide essential services. Senior doctors earn over £100k. Do you not think food provision is an essential service? If farmers benefit from the value of their land by selling it they (rightly pay) CGT. Until they sell it’s a tool from which they provide what I consider an essential service.
@@sookibeulah9331 Why assume those things about me? I could say you're in favour of depriving kids of schoolbooks, preventing cops on the beat leaving grannies defenceless and seeking to pollute our rivers.
@@Jafmp Why assume that's what I want? If the goal is to increase domestic food production then it's going to cost in some fashion - consolidation of farms, investment, something - what? And where is the money coming from? Equally, where is the money coming from so rural locations can get better broadband, improved roads and local schools? Someone else can pay for it all? WHO? Fact is, British farms have a sh1t record on exploiting capital investment and fully half the farms require subsidy absent which they would be (financially) underwater. Brexit didn't help, did it? This is sh1t situation we've all got ourselves into. Why should farmers alone be protected from it?
Alistair is so partisan and pretends to debate points however he cannot help but show his allegiance to labour most of the time whilst Rory is more balanced in his discussions. Get with the programme Alistair and look more closely at Labour policies without your bias being engaged....
Should Labour Retreat On Farming, humm no, but what they should do, is explain it. and Clarson is a red herring by his own words he got a farm as a TAX dodge,
Yes it shpulf. Sent 35 years in food process8ng - UK has shortest food chains in eorld, wr only make 60% of our own food, and we have war 8n Europe.and Middle East. Money in industy is made by supermarkets which operate a csrtel. There were 4 OFT investigations in my career ehich said "noti8ng to see". Reality is that no one would talk - 70% food sales controlled by 4.supermarkets. Farmers make 1 - 2%. Yet another reas9n wr left uk - if you are at risk on food and energy you're finished. Now self sufficiet in country eith low tax, solif services, and balanced approach to rnergy (slow move to renewables).
Why does it have to be China? Doesn't India have 1bn people and a burgeoning middle class we can sell things to? I think you'll find way more brits speak Hindi / Gujarati than mandarin Chinese. If Trump does his worst, we have to rely on (post-Modi) India carrying the flag for democracy.......
Farming would better if 100% inheritance tax was payable, not 50%. This would lower the value of the land as it stop being a tax avoidence purchase, and bring more young people into farming. Farmers are making the wrong argument. The issue on which the need goverment help is on what they earn, not what they own. This has been the case since, I think it was Ted Heath, decided to end Resale Price Maintenance. First we saw the rise of Convenience Stores, and then of the supermarket with their vastly more powerful negotiating powers. Being in the EU helped the farmers but they now need government help to even up their power to negotiate. I wouldn't for one moment suggest a return to RPM but no one should have to live on the incomes some farmers do.
How would 100% inheritance tax be payable by the family farmers? What would work better is full IHT on anybody who purchased farmland after 1984 and didn’t farm it themselves or by an immediate family member. It would be easy to determine, through tax records, if it a farm was tenanted out or if the farm had a manager and a team of employees while the owner investor worked elsewhere. Investors would rush to sell before April 26 which would bring in a CGT windfall for the Treasury and drop the value of farmland quite rapidly. As carbon offset forestry schemes, wind/solar suppliers, developers and leisure companies would try to snap up cheaper farmland. The government could offer a 5% or 10% discount on CGT when the farm is sold to a farmer as an incentive and keep farmland in food production.
Is there a reason the captions have been disabled on the last 2 episodes? I'm a deaf viewer and am struggling without them. Please can you re-enable them? Thanks!
Uh - Campbell is just so infuriatingly tribal - yawn! giving up on this podcast - could do without him being just a spokesman for labour rather than providing analysis - the arrogance and lack of contrition is just part of his core psyche meanwhile poor Rory hasn’t got the memo and carries on trying to be even handed whilst clearly being in awe him. Its like watching the bully brother with his adoring but naive little brother
It's odd how both of you prove with your own stories that democracy and human rights don't actually mean anything to you, then immediately have no issue with Le Pen being kicked off the ballot. This is why working people have left you
France has been the EU's largest agricultural producer. Yet, the country's agriculture sector has seen a huge decline in recent times. Insufficient pay, EU regulations and unfair competition from cheap imports are some concerns plaguing the farmers in France and other European nations. So it’s all down to Brexit is it?
These two discussing morality is so absurd, with one the defender of the chief abuser in the COE and the other the spin doctor for Labour. They are both so morally repellent it boggles the mind.
Then don’t watch the programme then, they provide analysis which is always bias to some degree you need to have the brain to process what they offer and make your own mind up. There is no need to be so angry about their views they are entitled to them and neither has claimed they are completely neutral as that would be impossible
Is Rory ok? Whenever he is not talking, he's pulling some crazy faces as if he's in deep pain, either he has a toothache, his legs are being bitten off by a tiger under the desk or he's struggling not to sh*t himself.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
The Rest Is Politics is powered by Fuse Energy, a green electricity supplier powering homes across England, Wales and Scotland. Use referral code POLITICS after sign up for a chance to win a signed copy of Rory and Alastair's books with personalised messages. Learn more at getfuse.com/politics ⚡
Does Alistair believe in ‘innocent until proven guilty’? By his words, I’m not convinced, at all. Never, in all of the history of Democratic Nations, have the Elites been so disconnected from those they’re supposed to serve.
And the more I listen, the less I think of them as deep thinkers, who understand complexity in society, and are just people who happen to have been born into, and had lucky breaks, to become a part of the elite class. I thought they’d have iq’s of at least 125, yet I’m not sure Rory, for example, is above 110. Alistair probably in the 120’s.
The Elites are all ‘midwits’, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to not notice, sadly.
It’s quite shocking, and deeply disconcerting.
Only the good guys censor, right?
While i agree that farmland should be taxed to deter unproductive landuse as a intergenerational tax dodge it should only be taxed when the farmland is rezoned for commercial or urban use based on how long the land has been farmed. The only part of inheritance tax that should be applied is on the residential dwellings on the farmland to deter palatial manor dwellings that were again dodging taxes by pretending to be farms.
Or to put the argument another way, if farms make no money, why is farmland so expensive? Answer because it's used for tax avoidance.
There is a fundamental demand for land other than farming use that sadly makes it a bit of a no-brainer investment. I am surprised how the supermarkets have gotten away with paying farmers peanuts and how it's not been raised.
@@davidrobertson9174They can spin as passing on low prices to customers
Spot on. Actually the Imheritance Tax would protect against land buying for tax purposes. But many farmers want their cake and eat it. Out of europe but still subsidised and protected/insulated from the headwinds of Brexit Economics. They want no inheritance tax but want the security of an appreciating asset. May be that they are taking a low wage but its disingenuous when you are sitting on an asset that is appreciating and profit that you choose to reinvest is still profit. The farmers fight should be with the MNC global corporations who use their monopsony power to drive down food supplier prices.
@@davidrobertson9174because if we forced supermarkets to buy at higher costs, they would pass that onto us and food inflation is pretty fatal for any government
And it makes me angry to see UKIP and Reform in particular exploiting this situation when they actually supported one of the major drivers of this situation - Brexit.¹
Disagree with Rory that Thatcher was the death knell to the coal industry, already in decline - did much of my dissertation on this point - a number of pits produced coal in a substantially economic/competitive manner - the gvmt ignored the evidence, because ideologically Thatcher's primary concern was to smash the power of the unions. She succeeded. The failure to give those mining communities a viable alternative way to earn a living led to generations of communities condemned to poverty. In turn, a portion of that fed into why communities later voted for Brexit, after a lifetime of being betrayed by gvmts since (both Tory & Labour).
It was a betrayal of the social contract then, which persists to the present - creating the vacuum into which populists have stepped in the present day.
Indeed. The Labour governments closed more pits than Maggie.
Wy would we buy coal at such a massive cost difference when we could get it elsewhere half the price. idiocy to be held hostage by the unions. they were broken as an industry already
Exactly. That Britain eventually got rid of heavy industry is not the surprise; this was the trajectory across the West. But West Germany (for example) transitioned all that unionised industry into high tech manufacturing, and are still world leaders. That's down to the communities and SME's that underpin the whole industry with supply chains.
I live and work in Holland in construction and going back to the UK is like visiting a third world country at times. Seen a guy spending several hours trying to break a hole through a wall with a lump hammer and chisel.
@@nickhobbs6514 shame that their economy is hitting the skids as energy prices are killing them.
maybe she wanted to both smash the unions and also replace coal with north sea oil and gas...
UK going back to before WW2 where we didn't produce any significant farm produce. Rest of the world does it cheaper. People forget their history.
Not going to defend La Pen, but if you think she and her party are in any way unique in the EU parliament you are fooling yourself. And if you think when it does occur it is limited to those at the political fringes, you are a complete fool.
The same people who threat over 'democracy' have no problem obstructing it when it doesn't serve their fringe interests. The natives may give up on politics and opt for a coup
Perhaps the tweak Alastair suggests could be tying inheritance tax to a sale event rather than an inheritance event? That way inter-generational farmers won't pay any tax at all, but rich people dodging tax will.
The really rich people never sell anything. They just take out collateralized loans against their assets.
That still presumes that land should be the preserve of a hereditary class.
If you had an annual land tax instead of IHT then you'd still pay, but in a way that it doesn't depend on deaths and seven year rules and all that. You keep all of the things most people like about land ownership: stability, security, the ability to pass things on to your family but without getting it for free just because your ancestors were lords or something. If you use land, you pay for it.
If you want to think of it that way, financially you can see like everyone paying rent to the state (i.e. the rest of society) based on their landholding, but you get first dibs on it every year if you're prepared to keep paying to use the land.
@zak3744 probably the best comment I've read on this. I just thought we go the whole way and nationalise farming, and franchise farms 😂😂
That’s already the case. Farmland is subject to CGT when it’s sold.
@@zak3744are consumers prepared to pay more for food so farmers can earn enough to pay the land tax?
If not how are the 50% of farmers who made less than £20 last year, typically working 7 days a week and not taking any holiday, meant to pay such a land tax?
Would the land tax be waived if a weather/ disease/ pest problem event wiped out a farmer’s crop/ produce and so the business generates a loss?
This comment section clearly needs some serious moderation. The tendency to jump in just to bully Campbell has gotten out of hand. Yes, the Iraq dossier raised valid questions and sparked debate, but framing it as the defining moment of Alastair Campbell’s career is an exaggeration. His work and contributions span far beyond this single issue, reflecting a career built on dedication, insight, and integrity. Focusing solely on this one chapter ignores the broader positive impact he has had in many other areas
With respect, Campbell built his career treading the fine line between bullying and exerting pressure on journalists, and crossed it on many occasions. It's not harassment to point out when someone, who continues to be a vocal player in the political arena, is full of it, anymore than it would be for any other political figure.
I mean, let's not diminish his actions tho. He's an untrustworthy professional propagandist who was central to pulling the UK into an illegal war which killed 100s of thousands of innocent civillians while destabilising the region, the effects of which continue today. It's not bullying to say that, it's indisputable fact. And on balance, I'm not sure it's evened out by him having said once or twice that mental health is important. My personal view is he's not a great guy and he'll misrepresent the truth, turning it into he'd like you to believe it is. And everything he says should be heard in that context. That's not a personal attack, that's treating what someone says how it should be treated given their track record.
@@kaboodlefish I suppose you're Reform eh.
Knowingly misleading the nation to illegally take it into an unjust war. But it was ages ago. People are so picky.
@kernowchris umm.. Nope. And never would be.
adverage cost per acre in England is £11,300
So if you had a 500 acre farm that'll already be 5.6 million on land alone.
farming machinery, storage and other assets will probably be closer to 10 million.
So a 2 million tax bill spread over 10 years interest free is £200,000 a year.
Are farmers making £200,000 a year? I don't think so.
They, as this policy intends, will need to sell their farm and take an early retirement as a mutli-millionaire (and get taxed 40% when they die)
Labour want more land for housing, wind farms and other projects.
Actual farmers passing on a farm will transfer more than 7 years before death and thus not pay IHT. Untill that threshold is passed the risk of early death and IHT can be covered with life insurance.
Why is the land worth so much if you can't make money off of it?
I’m not convinced it’s even that deep. The contemporary Labour Party seem to just yearn for power. I’m not sure there’s much intellectual depth, as was the case with the previous Conservative governments. But, there’s a phenomenon where Democratic Nations begin to fail the closer to 90 iq the average of the population gets,a with no nation with a below 90 iq average being even close to democratic.
Maybe we are just importing our way away from Democratic Nationhood? Has anyone in the halls of power taken this into consideration? Like encouraging indigenous people to have babies, like those awful Hungarians have, or are we moving to the new definition of Democracy, to mean the institutions, not the people?
Food for thought, I think, anyway.
@@adodgygeeza So farmers have to guess when they're going to die? And then count back 7 years, move out of their farmhouse, into another house... pay rent... oh wait, where they getting the money from? They're farmers... they cant farm, if they're not at the farm. You haven't though this through have you?
You need to read up the rules on the 7 year rule.
@@playersinexile72 BECAUSE ITS LAND. IT'S A FINITE ASSET. WE CANT CREATE MORE LAND. WITHOUT LAND, YOU CANT BUILD THINGS. SO LAND IS WORTH ALOT. YOU CANT BUILD IN THE SKY. YOU NEED LAND. GRAVITY IS A THING.
HOW STUPID ARE YOU PEOPLE?!
It is time for the democracies of the world to draw a line in the sand and split entirely both culturally and economically from the autocratic alliance of Russia, China etc. No trade, no flights or visas, no educational links, no joint involvement in international sporting events. Countries like India and several in Africa and South America who try to court both sides would be expected to decide one way or another. Let these autocracies and their docile populations then be left to stew in their own future instead of leeching on the benefits, markets and culture created by the free world. A world reset of this nature is needed urgently if we are not to sleepwalk into domination by expanding dictatorships.
Keir? Is that you????
Yeh they need to throw it back and use their logic against them. Then show on record moments of Dyson, Clarkson,farage et al saying they only bought land to avoid tax
Farms / IHT what am I missing, isn't the solution obvious? A) of course they should not apply IHT. B) But of course they should impose a sales tax on farms. Result: real farming families retain their farms / IHT avoiders whose descendants would sell the farm upon inheriting them - will pay a sales tax. farmers keep farms, tax avoiders pay IHT in another form. Job done?
You're being far too sensible. Most of those commenting BTL have got far too many bees under their bonnet to consider solutions.
Would that not reduce the amount of land coming onto the market?
Would it then drive up prices?
When you say a sales tax is it paid by the seller or purchaser?
CGT is liable when farmland is sold - so that solves the sales tax issue.
@@jamesthomas4841 a better solution is to tax anyone the full 40% IHT who bought farmland since 1990 and hasn’t farmed it themselves, or had an immediate family member farm it. That would trigger a rush in sales from investors prior to April 26 and a glut of CGT into the Tresury. It could also stipulate farmland sold by investors prior to April 26 must be sold to a farmer, perhaps or with a 5% or 10% reduction in CGT as an incentive.
@sookibeulah9331
I can see lawyers having an amusing time arguing about the definition of " farmer " .
"Farmers" have never been pro labour. They all voted Brexit and they all vote Tory at every election.
I'm going to be incredibly disappointed in Starmer if he backs off on this now. It'll show that Tory Voters and Right Wing media can dictate policy to a Labour Government
@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 Yes. If he gives them what they want they'll never give him any credit anyway.
Farmers didn't vote for brexit, rural communities did, but farmers didn't
@@rebelbiscuit Nah every farmer i know voted Brexit. Half of them had UKIP posters up in their fields for years even before Brexit.
@@henryburton6529 not where I'm from they all voted to remain for the subsidies
Okay... I've worked with farmers in the past and they are hardworking amazing people.... However if your business is making no profit, then in any other sector you would go bust. How many generational family businesses have failed and no one really batted an eyelid!
Also most farms haven't revalued for decades which means the reality of their value is massively downplayed! The idea that farmers are struggling is because they are stubborn as hell... Which is admirable in its nature... To a point!
Brexit was an utter disaster for many famrers who had it good under EU, better perhaps than many were weilling to admit. they were warned at the time about the dangers of exiting the EU but unbelievably they voted it for nonetheless. That is their right and they may have had their reasons but it was a hell of an own goal
Have you listened to the reason why the French farmers went on strike because their situation hasn’t improved at all by being in the EU?
They didn't vote for it. This is a dumb prejudice. Farmers aren't a monolithic bloc - in polls before Ref it was about 50-50 leave/remain among farmers.
How would you show farmers supported it?
If Labour is so enamoured with the EU, it can take some of the tens of billions it is squandering on carbon capture, a technology which is a complete non starter, and replace the farming subsidies the EU provided (at a much lower cost than out net contribution to the EU I might add).
Instead, Labour is destroying the generational link between farming families, thereby killing off our farming industry. No one else is going to spend huge sums of money on farm land to make a paltry living doing long hours and hard and dirty work in the elements. Its either carried on by family farmers or it will die off.
Far more likely it would be bought up to concrete over the countryside to accommodate a burgeoning population, population growth driven solely by mass immigration, but which neither Tory nor Labour government will do anything to curtail. Never mind that we never asked if we wished to be reduced to a minority in our own homeland and lose vast swathes of the greenbelt to boot.
And these are the same parties who pretend to care about the environment, obsessing over our tiny contribution to total CO2 emissions, headless of the economic hardship this will cause, all the whilst despoiling the environment.
@notalefty999 Completely agree with you. The recent budget's inheritance tax changes are a disgrace and may massively hurt small farmers, who are a cohort of society who are already struggling.
@@LuDel95 How can they be "small farmers" with so much asset value?
The land is so expensive because the rich are using it to dodge obscene amounts of tax. Labour are doing this wrong - they should be taxing people who buy land extortionate amounts particularly if they are not using the land for farming.
Great podcast I’m coming to London in a few weeks let’s make the transition happen. All the best Rory and alistair Campbell great job on the podcast..
There is a simple way to “tweak” this. Put farms with proof of farm-based trading against some simple but difficult to abuse criteria outside the scope.
They need to pay IHT
Listened to a tax expert the other day there able to claim as a couple 1 million agri relief 1 million business relief and 500k IHT each if they structure it correctly
so between 3-5 million with the average family farm near me costing 2.5 million
Yes Rory - get Mr Reebanks on the channel - amazing and inspirational traditionalist. He makes sense and shows how Nature actually works.
So the UK gave the EU £100. The EU gave back £80, of which £10 was given to farmers. Now, the UK keeps the £100 but only gives the farmers £7. That is a decision made in the UK and has little to do with leaving the EU, but has to do with the fact the UK is in so much debt.
Incorrect, for every 100 we gave them they gave us back 50.
Both incorrect. They gave us £80 back but the additional trade you get being in the largest single market in the world accounted for a further £120 on top.
It was pretty obvious to some of us this would happen.
For that contribution we got 100's of billions in free trade
@@SlowhandGreg Exactly but somehow these galaxy brains didnt include that in their calculations......
weird
I periodically think about the fact that Alastair Campbell - a man who lied to justify a war that created a mental health crisis & severe generational trauma on a scale difficult to comprehend - is publicly lauded in the UK as a 'mental health advocate'.
What is the message here exactly? and what does it say about UK society? It's OK to commit war crimes so long as you talk about how it made you depressed on TV afterwards? How virtuous and brave Campbell is....
What also comes to mind when I think about this is Owen Jones sympathetically discussing mental health with Campbell as though he's just a good bloke trying to 'raise awareness' rather than a war criminal cynically laundering his reputation by pretending to care about others.
The only time I would be remotely interested in hearing Alastair Campbell's thoughts on mental health is if he were speaking from a jail cell after his conviction for war crimes.
The war on Iraq destroyed the mental health of millions of people - in many cases irreparably - & its impact continues to traumatise millions, not just in Iraq but across the entire region. Campbell's direct involvement in unleashing all that destruction should never be forgotten
But instead of ever facing justice, Campbell's career has flourished in many ways and he wins awards "in recognition of his work to break down the stigma around mental illness"
you 'periodically' think about it do ya lad?
Absolutely spot on. Played the MH card to avoid being attacked on his decisions.
Basically the UK version of Dick Cheney and remember how hated he was on leaving office.
The message it sends is that as long as you're part of a priviledged political class, you can pretty much get away with murder. You can be responsible for doctoring intelligence that led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, face no consequences and then seek rehabilitation through platforming mental health issues, writing a couple of books, and launching a centrist/neoliberal podcast and talking edlessly about Donald Trump.
Oh dear...you only believe what you want to believe because it's easier and simpler to think that way. It's more complex than 'YOUR' simplistic view. At least he is trying to do something to promote mental health, I wonder what 'YOU' are doing? you talk about moral high ground and yet you are taking one here.
the message is get over it, politics is tribal and irrational
why don’t they just say, okay - if the farm has been in your family for x generations, the tax doesn’t apply to you. Therefore if you’ve just bought a farm for the tax loophole you’ll have to pay the tax, and if you’re a family owned farm who’s been doing it for generations, you’re safe
top ten family owned farms are owned by Dukes with an acreage of between 250,000 to 20,000
The UK is in a really dire state. It should accept that it’s a middle income power and behave like the Dutch or Norwegians, all this chest beating gets us no where. The imperial delusions of Brexit reduced our growth & now all I’m hearing is how we have to increase defence spending. We have trident must we have aircraft carriers? I really don’t see this ending well.
If you want an example of deluded, try worrying about defence spending as the chief economic mismanagement the country engages in, not say, the £100bn welfare bill paid to working age people, accounted for in no small part by people claiming to be too ill to work on the basis of unfalsifiable illnesses. Or billions squandered every year on materially providing for "refugees" fleeing France when their claims should be dismissed out of hand and they immediately deported simply on the basis of the circumstance of their arrival.
The government spends staggering amounts of money causing active harm, whether it is disincentivising work or attracting culturally alien, crime prone, low human capital immigrants.
Yet you balk at the far smaller sum we spend on our military. Granted, I have to question where those £50bn are going, but at least in principle, defence spending, alongside policing, represent the two core responsibilities a government must fulfil. Its doing a bad job at both and its certainly not where the axe should fall in terms of public spending. And if defence cuts are needed, they should find some useless employees to sack (there are bound to be a fair few, its the public sector), not cut military hardware.
@@notalefty999 people are sick in part because of an underfunded NHS, and poor food. In terms of priorities, I'd prioritise a human rights-based solution to the fact of migration, than the possibility of war.
@@Jafmp By far and way the most common conditions which account for huge increase in incapacity related benefits since 1990 (the number of claims has more than trebled) is mental health. There has not been a stark decline in the quality of nutrition of physical health over this same period.
As for underfunded NHS, that claim is utterly delusional. Mismanaged maybe, but it is lavishly funded.
And human rights are not a solution of any kind to illegal immigration. They are the problem. They are the reason why we cannot have a vaguely sane way of dealing with illegal immigrants; they can engage in obviously fraudulent asylum claims in most cases successfully and even when found to be false, face no penalty whatsoever. You need only get into Britain by hook or by crook, claim to be seeking asylum and the chance of you being deported is close to zero.
All courtesy of our wonderful human rights legislation, which produces such moral abominations as illegal immigrants committing crimes like rape and manslaughter not being removed due to right to a family life, in addition to making asylum claims essentially a blank cheque from the taxpayer payable to anyone who wants to commit fraud.
You are meant to ask should we continue to allow rich people to buy up farmland as a tax dodge? The answer is no & they should be paying 40% IHT & not 20%. Real farmers have little to do with this
Did anyone else notice that on the Spotify version of this episode it ended mysteriously when Alistair said “Ghillain disappeared….”
Spot on Rory - the maths just doesn’t work on IHT calcs from HMG.
Farmers in many ways were a instrument in our own recovery from GFC 15 years ago & also our farmers were under threat from the Vulture funds because of expenses which may over weigh income !!
Rory is spot on with that Dylan review
I worked for the UN, indeed still do consulting for them. The world still needs a UN like organization, but the current one is inherently corrupt, inept and venal. Huge reform is needed, I would say a break is needed between the current UN and a new organization greater than that between the old League of Nations and the UN. No one woking in the UN in the D1 grade and above should be employed in the new organisation and the “DEI” geographical representation recruitment policy abandoned.
Funny how clarkson was bragging that he put his money in farming so that his kids don’t have to pay inheritance tax
Also, he was very for leaving the European Union who paid uk farmers pots money to help them every year.
Clarkson is only focused on himself
Beautiful defence of farmers Rory.
What percentage of farmers voted leave and then to top it off voted Johnson?
I've never heard Alistair criticise any Labour MP in the current government. I find it difficult giving credibility to anyone that tribalistic, he's in danger of becoming just a walking propagandist at this point.
You do realise that he’s not becoming one but is one, when he criticises it is not at the expense of the party as a whole, he sometimes criticises people who he wants gone, now they are in power he can’t criticise anyone, and so is back to being full spin doctor
You can always watch somethng else. 1000000s of channels are available!
@@benwilliams1267 not you again. fat lad sat on his backside every single video, writing the same comment. do ur balls tingle from the likes you get? so many different podcasts to choose from and here you are. absolute melt 🤣🤣🤣
Agreed. Before the election really enjoyed the debates and the different points of views but now just seems to be the labour show!
@@Sukha_Phatjuan he’s not in danger of becoming one. It literally used to be his job.
It would interesting to see the tax benefits that the "Corporate Farms" get in comparison to private/smallholding farmers? My family in Australia are from farming background, most private farms are selling to major corporations, in part because there are no generational retention and the cost of operating. I support the farmers in protecting the right for inheritance event.
Biggest family landowners are Dukes with acreage from 250,000 downwards
Those poor farmed grouse moors how will they manage
If you don’t have the big stick to threaten a country like China over human rights, then don’t bother raising the issue at all.
The situation we're in with inheritance tax (IHT) and farming can be traced back to Margaret Thatcher in 1984 with the advent of Agricultural Property Relief (APR) that benefited her wealthy supporters which was extended in 1992 by John Major. As a direct consequence of these policies, the prevailing price of farmland is now driven by it being used as a financial instrument for tax avoidance rather than an asset for farming crops or livestock. The increase in inheritance tax should reduce the appeal of farmland to wealthy tax avoiders and hence lower the cost of farmland which will benefit real farmers and aid farms to stay in families. These protests are being prompted by wealthy interests as there is nothing noisier than a rich person being threatened with paying their fair share. These very vocal protests are supported by the right wing press that are obliging their paymasters by maintaining this divisive narrative. Real farmers are being duped by the glitz of personalities and being co-opted by the right wing politicians, notably Farage decked out in his tweed country costume. There's an argument that IHT applied to farms should have a higher tier for say farms worth £5m or £10m+ where the 50% discount on IHT is removed so the rate paid is the same as everybody else. That would be a substantial benefit for real family farms and get Clarkson, Dyson and others to pay their fair share. At the end of the day it is wealthy individuals avoiding/evading tax that increases the tax burden on ordinary working people.
This price distortion is exactly the same that has beset the UK housing market and the main cause of the current crisis. Houses are also used too much as financial instruments rather than as a place to live.
Great comment.
As someone who has worked as a rural surveyor selling farmland, I have first hand experience on this. Farmland values are not commensurate of the income the land can generate, instead it is the tax saving that dictates the value. This puts farmers at a disadvantage when they want to increase the size of their holding, as they are competing with buyers with different objectives. This is bad for farming, bad for food production and bad for successors.
The rules should be amended to allow for a higher threshold if the farm is being passed onto an active farming successor.
It will bring down the value of land but that is good for farming in the long term.
Absolutely 100% correct and I’m amazed that Rory isn’t aware of this. He likened it to Thatcher desolating the coal industry - nonsense. Thatcher started the decline of farming in the UK by letting the free market have rip at it and by turning into a financial instrument for the rich. Those effects have been slow growing and have been concealed by EU subsidies for decades. It’s all 100% the Tories doing and now Labour are getting flack for taking one step in the right direction. They could do a lot more of course, namely preventing the major food manufacturers from pushing the prices so low that the farmers can’t make a return, but it’s a start.
Excellent articulation. The removal of the 50% discount for a higher tier sounds like a tweak they need to make.
"There is nothing noisier than a rich person being made to pay their fair share" 😂 💯
@@sambob6517 let's not gloss over the farmland value due to the amount being bought by housing developers, to build the houses that Labour say they're going to build - and which we need. It's all tax saving, is it?
@@scoundrelh7582 actually that’s quite different. Farmland around towns has hope value (potential). It doesn’t really influence the value of farmland in open countryside away from built up areas, unless there is some chance of future development.
It's not what brexit did to farming it's the incompetance of our own governments. The mistake was not in voting for brexit it was the mistake of thinking our politicians were decent enough to run the country.
@@tomvalentine9985 the mistake was holding a referendum. Cameron takes all the blame
@@seanoconnor8843 mistake was Austerity and the belief system that allowed unregulated gig workers flooding in on zero hour from eastern Europe
Combine the 2 and you have people getting poorer and opportunist like Farage feeding of the resentment
To this day Reform and the Tories are talking small state and deregulation the 2 things that got us here in the 1st place
Does Malcom Tucker in BBC sitcom 'The thick of it ' bear any like-ways to yourself back in the Day ? Except for being Scottish of course ? Great show & a pure credit to State controlled broadcasting which is capable of seeing both sides !
There's a video on TH-cam of Alastair reacting to/talking about the show
It is unfair to claim that Alastair Campbell is acting like a Labour spokesperson, as he has consistently demonstrated a balanced approach in his commentary. He has shown a willingness to address both sides of the argument, presenting objective perspectives even when discussing contentious issues. While his background and strong opinions may lead some to associate him closely with Labour, his recent analyses often reflect a nuanced understanding of the political landscape rather than partisan rhetoric. To dismiss his contributions as merely promotional for one party undermines the depth and impartiality he brings to the discussion
Bahahaha
You're a funny guy.
And you're acting like Alastair Campbell's spokesperson
If boris Johnson had been out of the country as long as starmer has, do you think Alastair would be as fair? No chance
@ Attending the G7 and G20 summits is a common practice for world leaders
Alastair Campbell cheat code: when AC describes Starmer, or Labour, as doing X, Y, Zed "pretty well" or "fine" it means he loathes their performance and hates their amateurish approach.
Someone needs to tell Ross from Ipswich that the Chinese economy is shrinking in every sector other than exports. Has been in deflation at GDP level for 6 quarters.
Land prices in Ireland are also very high ...Michael O'Leary (Ryanair) would contend that prices are being pushed by the dairymen .
Oh poor farmers only get a £3m tax break plus a 50% reduction on the tax they pay after that. Single people only get 10% of that and then get taxed at 40%. Farmers live off SUBSIDIES, that's just as much passive income as the interest on my bank account - which unlike land doesn't even cover inflation.
If Jeremy Clarkson wants to avoid tax I suggest he takes things into his own hands and saves us from more rants for ever. He could, for instance, give his fortune to third world farmers to mitigate the damage he has done promoting gas guzzling cars.
Stopping land being a tax dodge (or at least reducing the extent of rich people's tax avoidance), may well lead to a fall in land prices (taking even more family farms out of tax) and may marginally help the landless who would like to get into farming. They may be able to buy the odd hectare and market garden when some farmers have to relinquish some of their silver spoons.
I am thinking of spending the pot I have responsibly accumulated to pay for potential care costs in older age.
I have a question. If a sport event was to be interrupted by a war, would Trump be motivated to intervene? The Ukrainian Open could replace a security pact!
No they should triple down then reform the regulations on Trusts
SAIC, who own MG, are desperate to build a factory here, but won't because of the anti-Chinese business crap
Wouldn’t it be wonderful,if we could all do things we love and get tax breaks from government to sustain it…
if it's worthwhile, what has it achieved
With so many tax loopholes holes out there unplugged,
There might be scope to advance revenues. Amazon top of the list. The winter payment scrapping, was bad politics. The two white elephant carriers can be sold off. The number of unknowns in land ownership is not acceptable. Nor is 1% owning 50% of land, the 1.8 hectares for grouse shooting, could be taxed.
There is nearly 1 million acres of land that has skipped inheritance tax for around 1 thousand years. Farming land prices will reduce once the tax dodgers realise they will have to pay up which means even fewer farmers will have to pay.
It's the theory, it's the hope, but will it be reality?
@@EmmaLaBunn At this point I don't care and even with all the media bs lies the general public doesn't either. Were was the big protest when brexit obliterated them? The majority voted brexit and the rest allowed themselves to be used. Where was the massive protests with the Aus/NZ deals that will put the final nail in the coffin?? So WTF is it that 'farmers' only protest over taxes? over half our food is imported and because of tory deals that will drastically decrease, the only farmers left in 10 years will be the clarkson tax dodgers. They are letting themselves be used again so fuck em. I don't care anymore 'cos they sure af don't care about farming. It should have been a full tax the same as the general public because clarkson and his mates will still be saving 20%. Farming for farmers not tax dodgers.
@@EmmaLaBunn
Probably not because the changes introduced by Reeves still provide clear tax benefits to rich investors hoping to avoid IHT. If you buy farmland you have to pay less inheritance tax than if you bought other assets.
Land proces will never go down. Please don't argue if you don't know what you're talking about.
@@hughesy6062008?
I'd sooner walk across Afghanistan than attend that Dylan concert.
According to DEFRA, last year, 30 per cent of farms made a loss, while a further 25 per cent made less than £25,000. Given the awful weather this year with fields flooded, it's not right to impose more costs on these guys who we depend on. On a side point, I took Rory's advice from a previous podcast and bought James Rebanks' book, English Pastoral - A Inheritance. A phenomenal book, very well written, hugely informative and encouraging.
They look like The Two Ronnies in that initial section. Either that or a couple of oddballs at an undertakers convention...
Screw Clarkson and any and all that sail in him.
You should have called this video "Starmers Vs Farmers"
Rory is right, Alastair is wrong on the future of farming.
Brexit didn't help, but the downfall of farming [our rural community] started 20 years earlier when the environmental NGO's muscled into Defra and were able to dictate future farming policy.
20 years ago we had cheap food, but BPS was in place to support farmers.
today we still have cheap food "just", but this will change with "supply and demand"
Today, we have no BPS left, instead "public money for public good" which is nearly all a environment payment at the of cost "Food Security" which nationally has been declining for years to dangerously low levels today.
Today, we have the added problems of Climate Change and increasing political instability [wars, history repeating itself] which will make food a weapon of war in the not too distance future.
So, we all need farmers, fisherman and gamekeepers, all primary food producers in our "island nation"
inheritance tax is the last straw for the survival of our industry and giving all future generations a chance to continue in farming and sustainable food production for us all. .
Farming in the UK will continue. You don't need to exaggerate to make your case. Having no IHT on farmland is, in historical terms, an aberration that stretched from 1992 to April 2026 Farming did not collapse in the centuries before that.
They will be fewer farms in future and those that survive will generally be larger. However that has been the case since the open fields were enclosed into farms.
No comment from the chaps on Bidens approval of long range weapons in Ukraine?
To uncomfortable for the chaps I think.
To that question from a recent podcast "but why do people vote for Trump?". I mentioned this podcast to a mate (who voted for Brexit) and he scoffed at both of you? I now see that there is this instinctive rejection of intellectuals and the political class. In a way, why not? It just shows that we're spending too much time with "our people", rather than having genuine equal exposure to people across the economic and intellectual spectrum
No environmentalist anywhere is trying to encourage productive fields to be 'abandoned' and left for trees to grow. No. Just shows Rory has no clue about the env political landscape.
"Does the West really care about human rights?" This is a nonsensical question because the West is a geographical landmass that cannot 'care' about anything at all.
If you had a brain you'd be dangerous, thank god you haven't.
Rory mentioned antisemitic violence, making the same old mistake of conflating antisemitism and anti Israeli ism, the former being outrageous, the latter absolu
Alastair absolutely right, gov needs to clearly outline the policy & stop so called celebrities & media distorting the facts.
The fundamental point being missed on the Ajax Tel-Aviv football violence is that the violence didn't happen between supporters near the stadium, the violence happened across the city. That is why Israeli commentators, Jewish leaders, and Dutch politicians were so quick to liken it to the night of broken glass. Because it was organised violence against Jews and Israelis right across the city, not just in one location. It was people in headscarfs waiting at train stations and bus stop to attack Jews and Israelis. It wasn't one group of people chanting one thing and another chanting another and them coming to blows. It was one group chanting one thing, another chanting another, the police getting a good grip on any violence near the game, then as supporters were heading home, targeted attacks on individuals based on their Jewish identity irrespective of if they were involved in chanting or whatever. I mean to try and justify the violence against Israelis by pointing at chanting made some time before hand by a small group of Ultra's is just evidence of a media landscape where antisemitsm and the persecution of Jews is so normalised. Why can't Isrealis just be the victim of a horrendous attack? Why can't the media just accept that there is a large number of mostly muslims, arab muslims who want to kill and injure Jewish people for no other reason than that they are Jewish? The media and especially left wing media are desperate always to try justfiy violence against Jews even when there is none.
Yep. Revolting. And so much of the Left just doesn't even notice it. I find that terrifying, tbh.
Total Zionist diatribe.
Look this loophole needs to be close period
Clarkson cynically bought land in order to avoid inheritance tax. Take the lot I say
You pay no IHT on gifts made 7 years before you die, I don’t see what the issue is. If you want to keep the farm in your family, gift it to your son before you turn 60.
You know that “We love it because it upsets the right people” thing that right wing types say, is this that but in reverse?
I'm sorry the reason the farmers are being caught by inheritance tax is because farms are being bought purely to become fax avoidance schemes and not for farming purposes. If you remove the tax break, it stops farmland being used as a financial instrument, farm land reduces in price and then the farmers will not be affected by the tax.
Do you not think it's also because land is finite in the UK? and over time, as the population expands, so does the housing demand? Do you not think that maybe house builders would want to buy land to build houses on? Energy companies may want to build wind farms?
A lá Jeremy Clarkson 😂
@@scapingby house builders aren't allowed to build on a lot of farmland, no it's because - as many others have said - farmland has been turned into a economic instrument largely for tax avoidance.
@@playersinexile72 Ok, so you think land only increases in value because wealthy individuals are buying up all the farmland? There's no other factors that are driving up the price of land? So if you were to magically remove the incentive for wealthy individuals to buy farmland... what will happen to the price of land? will it just drop to the floor?
What do you mean house builders cant build on farmland? Farmland is only farmland if farmers farm that land. It's just land. House builders can buy land, and build housing on their land. If farmers are forced out of farming.... house builders will buy the land, and build housing. It's not difficult. Will they need planning permission? Of course, but they can afford lawyers to make it happen.
@@playersinexile72 I work in construction. Of the last 32 projects I've either worked on or tendered, 3 have been ex-RAF bases, 5 have been brownfield sites, and 24 have been farmland.
Please educate yourself before spreading misinformation.
I am worth £3m and I should have have to pay any inheritance tax? Get real
More farmers will lose their land through divorce than inheritance tax. There are ways around inheritance tax, for everyone, not just farmers
Rory please stop interrupting Mr Cambell
The IHT exception for farmers only came into place in 1984... Obviously no issue before that point for small family farms. Surprised to hear a conversation here that doesn't mention this very key point! This is nowhere near as consequential as the media have managed to make out, and orders of magnitude less than the impacts of Brexit
Its not about farming, its about land ownership as a tax dodge.
So many people skip this wonderful podcast because of the awful ad at the beginning.
Only my take but Starmer vs Clarkson very click baity, prefer to keep a level above please
Content enjoyable as always so no need
Still at it.....................get the facts from Richard Murphy, Gents
Amazing how well informed Alistair is informed about our politicsihere in the Netherlands! And from what I know via all sorts of media and platforms, what he tells is correct. Sincere compliments!
The fundamental point is fairness. Farmers can't be a special case. Focus on food security and the environment would enable small farmers to earn a decent living.
Would it? Is it "fair" to subsidise them and no-one else? Circa 50% of farms are loss-making, absent CAP payments. And almost 75% of produce comes form the top 25% of producers. The country could lose one third of farms, reclaim the lands (even for rewilding and nothing else) and barely notice a difference in domestic food supply - and be better off financially.
"Fair" needs a fuller context.
@@CurtOntheRadio importing all our food is unsustainable. I agree that subsidies are not tackling the root cause but we can't afford in terms of climate change to continue to import everything.
@@CurtOntheRadio ahh you’re in favour of offshoring food production to parts of the world with poorer ecological regulation. Also it appears see no issue in increasing our dependence on importing food and increasing its exposure to the he vagaries of international trade.
We subside 100% of teachers, doctors and nurses salaries because they provide essential services. Senior doctors earn over £100k.
Do you not think food provision is an essential service?
If farmers benefit from the value of their land by selling it they (rightly pay) CGT. Until they sell it’s a tool from which they provide what I consider an essential service.
@@sookibeulah9331 Why assume those things about me?
I could say you're in favour of depriving kids of schoolbooks, preventing cops on the beat leaving grannies defenceless and seeking to pollute our rivers.
@@Jafmp Why assume that's what I want?
If the goal is to increase domestic food production then it's going to cost in some fashion - consolidation of farms, investment, something - what?
And where is the money coming from?
Equally, where is the money coming from so rural locations can get better broadband, improved roads and local schools?
Someone else can pay for it all? WHO?
Fact is, British farms have a sh1t record on exploiting capital investment and fully half the farms require subsidy absent which they would be (financially) underwater.
Brexit didn't help, did it? This is sh1t situation we've all got ourselves into. Why should farmers alone be protected from it?
Alistair is so partisan and pretends to debate points however he cannot help but show his allegiance to labour most of the time whilst Rory is more balanced in his discussions. Get with the programme Alistair and look more closely at Labour policies without your bias being engaged....
Use proper English - "merch" is not a word!
I am now going to unsubscribe.
Should Labour Retreat On Farming, humm no, but what they should do, is explain it. and Clarson is a red herring by his own words he got a farm as a TAX dodge,
Yes it shpulf. Sent 35 years in food process8ng - UK has shortest food chains in eorld, wr only make 60% of our own food, and we have war 8n Europe.and Middle East. Money in industy is made by supermarkets which operate a csrtel. There were 4 OFT investigations in my career ehich said "noti8ng to see". Reality is that no one would talk - 70% food sales controlled by 4.supermarkets. Farmers make 1 - 2%. Yet another reas9n wr left uk - if you are at risk on food and energy you're finished. Now self sufficiet in country eith low tax, solif services, and balanced approach to rnergy (slow move to renewables).
Clearly BlackRock the new buyer.
God, I hate this promo! Get some dignity guys
How anyone can compare working in a coal mine to owning land is frankly the most rich typical Torie thing. I thought I liked this guy.
Why does it have to be China? Doesn't India have 1bn people and a burgeoning middle class we can sell things to? I think you'll find way more brits speak Hindi / Gujarati than mandarin Chinese. If Trump does his worst, we have to rely on (post-Modi) India carrying the flag for democracy.......
Two spin doctors talking. Should call this podcast: "The rest is spinning" and not "The rest is politics"
New swoosh+ is much better. Thank you!
Farming would better if 100% inheritance tax was payable, not 50%. This would lower the value of the land as it stop being a tax avoidence purchase, and bring more young people into farming. Farmers are making the wrong argument. The issue on which the need goverment help is on what they earn, not what they own. This has been the case since, I think it was Ted Heath, decided to end Resale Price Maintenance. First we saw the rise of Convenience Stores, and then of the supermarket with their vastly more powerful negotiating powers. Being in the EU helped the farmers but they now need government help to even up their power to negotiate. I wouldn't for one moment suggest a return to RPM but no one should have to live on the incomes some farmers do.
How would 100% inheritance tax be payable by the family farmers?
What would work better is full IHT on anybody who purchased farmland after 1984 and didn’t farm it themselves or by an immediate family member. It would be easy to determine, through tax records, if it a farm was tenanted out or if the farm had a manager and a team of employees while the owner investor worked elsewhere. Investors would rush to sell before April 26 which would bring in a CGT windfall for the Treasury and drop the value of farmland quite rapidly. As carbon offset forestry schemes, wind/solar suppliers, developers and leisure companies would try to snap up cheaper farmland. The government could offer a 5% or 10% discount on CGT when the farm is sold to a farmer as an incentive and keep farmland in food production.
Is there a reason the captions have been disabled on the last 2 episodes? I'm a deaf viewer and am struggling without them. Please can you re-enable them? Thanks!
Uh - Campbell is just so infuriatingly tribal - yawn! giving up on this podcast - could do without him being just a spokesman for labour rather than providing analysis - the arrogance and lack of contrition is just part of his core psyche meanwhile poor Rory hasn’t got the memo and carries on trying to be even handed whilst clearly being in awe him. Its like watching the bully brother with his adoring but naive little brother
This.
Goodbye.
It's odd how both of you prove with your own stories that democracy and human rights don't actually mean anything to you, then immediately have no issue with Le Pen being kicked off the ballot. This is why working people have left you
I think Tiff Needell is more authentic
Easily the best politics show around.
France has been the EU's largest agricultural producer. Yet, the country's agriculture sector has seen a huge decline in recent times. Insufficient pay, EU regulations and unfair competition from cheap imports are some concerns plaguing the farmers in France and other European nations. So it’s all down to Brexit is it?
My arse fuse put back 100% of their profits
These two discussing morality is so absurd, with one the defender of the chief abuser in the COE and the other the spin doctor for Labour. They are both so morally repellent it boggles the mind.
They’re both Tories
Then don’t watch the programme then, they provide analysis which is always bias to some degree you need to have the brain to process what they offer and make your own mind up. There is no need to be so angry about their views they are entitled to them and neither has claimed they are completely neutral as that would be impossible
I find tax-dodger Clarkson almost as loathsome as Piers Morgan, and a very different character than the 'every-man' he loves to portray himself as.
@@sodiumlights they’re both multi millionaires, at least clarkson has some personality about him, Morgan’s the definition of slippery eel
Certainly not
Is Rory ok? Whenever he is not talking, he's pulling some crazy faces as if he's in deep pain, either he has a toothache, his legs are being bitten off by a tiger under the desk or he's struggling not to sh*t himself.
China has a lot to answer for
Needs a medical diagnosis. It’s not the best look! Pushing himself too hard
Cognitive dissonance