Debate contribution: Farming Families: Autumn Budget 2024

Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on 19 November 2024.

MLA

Mr Robbie Butler

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

19 November 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Farming Families: Autumn Budget 2024

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4666367

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I support the motion and express my deep concern about the UK Government's failure to adequately prioritise farming families and the rural economy in their 2024 autumn Budget. The decision to introduce new thresholds for inheritance tax and agricultural property relief represents not just a financial burden but a significant blow to the agriculture community, which forms the backbone of Northern Ireland's economy, culture and society. For anyone who wants to know what that looks like, there were over 6,000 farmers and their families at the Eikon centre in Lagan Valley last night, as the Member eloquently stated, to justify the import of today's motion. I thank the Members from the Democratic Unionist Party for the timely motion. The introduction of new thresholds for inheritance tax and agricultural property relief risks jeopardising the viability of many family farms, probably more so in Northern Ireland than in any other part of the United Kingdom. Succession planning is already a challenge for farming families due to the high cost of farmland, the relentless and moving government policies and the uncertainties in the agriculture sector. The changes will force families to make impossible choices, such as whether to sell off parts of their land or assets to meet tax obligations, which will undermine their ability to pass on farms to the next generation. Thankfully, our farmers are getting some airtime in the media to share their frustrations. We cannot ignore the additional barriers that this will create for new entrants to agriculture, if there are any. Young people, who already face challenges in accessing affordable land and resources, will be further deterred from pursuing a career in farming. That risks hollowing out the future of agriculture, as our ageing farming population will struggle to find successors who are willing or able to take on the financial and operational challenges of the sector. That seemed to be the single most resounding call at last night's event at the Eikon centre in Lagan Valley. At the start of that debate, we listened to a couple of young farmers outline the pressures that they now face with the viability of the very futures not just for them but for their children and their children's children. The changes also discourage investment in farm businesses at a time when we should encourage farmers to modernise their operations, embrace sustainable practices and improve efficiency. The draconian tax policies make it less appealing to invest in the future. We know that, if we do not invest, farms cannot adopt innovations in renewable energy, precision agriculture and sustainable land management, all of which are critical to addressing the climate crisis and ensuring food security. I am not even sure that the Labour Government agree that we face a real, tangible threat to our food security.

Food security is a national priority, and we cannot afford to undermine it through short-sighted policies.

I often tell this story, and I will tell it one more time, although I will probably tell it again: I remember Brazilian beef being introduced for the first time when I was a butcher. We had been used to selling Northern Irish, Irish and UK beef, which is a quality product, for years. You cannot compare the two. The Brazilian beef comes in and blows the price that local farmers can produce it for, but it is nowhere near as good. In fact, there is a sell-by date of three months on the blinking stuff when it is in your fridge. How can it stay good for three months? I would love to know what has been pumped into it. Anyway, I will get off my hobby horse about Brazilian beef. These policies risk diminishing our agriculture output and increasing our reliance on imports. We need to avoid that. The rising cost of food is already a concern for many families, and further pressure on local food production will only exacerbate the issue. Equally troubling are the Chancellor's decision to remove the ring-fenced farm support budgets and the failure to adjust them in line with inflation over a number of years. Without inflationary uplifts, the real value of farm support is eroding annually. For many small and medium-sized farms, the funding is not a luxury: it is essential to their survival. Farmers are grappling with rising input costs, from feed to fertilisers, and they need certainty about the financial support available to them, yet the Budget offers none. That lack of commitment undermines not only the livelihoods of farmers but the stability of the wider rural economy that relies on the success of agriculture. The motion rightly calls on the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to bring forward proposals to mitigate the impacts. There are a few here. I urge him to create a succession planning grant scheme; establish a young farmers' investment fund; and, although this might be more difficult, revisit targeted tax reliefs for farm incentives. The Minister will need to work closely with the Minister for Finance, perhaps to secure commitments to maintain and increase farm support budgets. Multi-year budgets are the gold standard, if they can be achieved, and we all need to face in that direction. Mr Deputy Speaker, I see you looking at the button. Give me another second or two. I thank the Members who tabled the motion. It is really important, and we need to reiterate the calls to champion farmers and the sector at this critical time.

909 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:38 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification