Tag Archives: Government

The £0.5bn revenue raiser, incurring the wrath of farmers

GK Senior Adviser James Allan visited the farmers protest in Westminster and assesses the likelihood of a government u-turn and its agriculture policy plans.

On 19 November, farmers were out in force and took to the streets of Westminster for a heartfelt protest for a sector that feeds the nation. At the autumn budget, the Chancellor Rachel Reeves introduced a cap of £1m for assets eligible for Agriculture Property Relief and Business Property Relief. Estimated to raise £0.5bn a year by 2029/30 for spending on public services, the measure has been dubbed a ‘family farm tax’ for farmers that “don’t do it for the money because there is none”.

The extent to which the Chancellor’s action equates to a “death knell” for the family run farm is somewhat contested. While the Country Land and Business Association estimates 70,000 farms will be impacted by the change, various policy wonks and tax specialists argue that this does not consider other reliefs and is based on the quantity of farms, rather than ownership structures. Disputed figures aside, it risks fueling a shift public opinion against the government and one of the shortest-lived honeymoon periods for a new Prime Minster. A survey carried out by JL Partners found that 53% of respondents felt the autumn budget was unsuccessful, so the farming community are not alone.

Is this Reeves’ Cornish pasty tax moment?

When then-Conservative Chancellor George Osborne introduced a 20% tax on hot foods to end VAT anomalies in 2012, few anticipated the political drama of “pastygate” which ensued. The Conservative government was criticised for being out of touch, with some commentators even alleging class war. Then Prime Minister David Cameron was caught out for saying he’d eaten a pasty in Leeds Railway Station when the West Cornwall Pasty Company duly noted that the pasty outlet had closed two years previous. The controversy detracted from Osborne’s budget and ultimately led to a government u-turn and a negative with 49% of people describing the government’s handling of pastygate as a “shambles”. In a similar vein, the political fallout from this protest will be difficult for the Labour government to manage. Whatever Reeves’ next move, pastygate demonstrates that u-turns are not unprecedented when public opinion moves against a pinch point policy issue.

Beyond the political drama

Politics aside, the protests cut to the core of several interrelating policy issues, chief among them food security. Should farmers up the stakes and choose to strike, the government has already confirmed contingency plans to mitigate against likely food shortages. Any disruption to already fragile “just in time” food supply chains, which are a hallmark of the British supermarket industry, would have an immediate knock-on effect for the consumer, and in turn, the voter. This year of global elections has demonstrated that voters do not reward incumbents when food prices rise.

Yet given the 60/40 split of domestic and imported food produce respectively, the issue of food security is both desperately domestic and international. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine not only led to record levels of food inflation, hitting low-income households the hardest, but also a decline in business investment in the UK food and drink sector. Then there’s the issue of climate change. While India and Pakistan account for roughly 46% of UK rice imports, the government acknowledges that India is increasingly a climate vulnerable country. In short, a greater dependence on food imports arising from a possible collapse of domestic farming exposes the UK to yet more unpredictable geo-political and climate risks.

The British farming sector does not operate in isolation; it is critical to the UK’s broader rural economy, supporting industries such as agricultural machinery, agri-tech and innovation, and food processing. More than this, farmers are custodians of the UK countryside, contributing to environmental goals of biodiversity, carbon sequestration and sustainable land management and forestry. Though contentious, the Chancellor’s action prompts a broader conversation about agricultural reforms which align with national priorities and ensures the voice of the farming community is heard. The government has yet to set out substantive details but spoke of a new deal for farmers during the election campaign. Now in government, Defra Secretary Steve Reed has signalled a focus on trade deals undercutting low welfare and low standards; maximising public sector purchasing power to back British produce; and a land-use framework to balance nature recovery and long-term food security.

Whether Reeves doubles down or pivots on the Agriculture Property Relief depends on the government’s willingness to expend political capital to defend its decision. Labour’s instinct will be to fight on but the party finds itself on new ground. Its broad but narrow majority is part contingent on non-traditional Labour voters, many of them in rural areas. The MPs in these constituencies will have their eyes on a 2029 general election. Maintaining the rural vote and positioning Labour as the party of both rural and urban communities will be a challenge for the government. How Starmer and Reeves handle the ‘family farm tax’ could well define this iteration of the Labour Party. For investors and businesses alike, keeping abreast of these political battlegrounds, and preparing for the associated commercial risks and opportunities, will be important in making the case to a government that might well bend to a shift in public opinion.

Pensions reform: Will the Chancellor’s vision become reality?

The Chancellor’s first Mansion House Speech, has made it clear that pensions reform is the first item on the Treasury’s agenda for financial services policy and regulation. Following an autumn budget that caused some business leaders to question the government’s pro-growth agenda, Rachel Reeves’ speech emphasised the important role that pensions reform will play in delivering long-term economic growth.

As expected, Reeves reiterated her intent to pool Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) assets into a handful of megafunds. This proposal has been set out in the Pension Investment Review: interim report. The report, published by the Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions, sets out the initial findings for ‘phase one’ of the government’s review. A consultation on this measure has also been launched alongside the report, offering stakeholders the opportunity to share views on new requirements for pooling and the governance of funds.

The government has also launched a separate consultation on a proposal to set a minimum size limit on Defined Contribution (DC) scheme default funds in the private sector. The government believes that this measure will encourage consolidation and allow savers to be moved more easily from underperforming pension schemes to schemes that deliver higher returns.

The government’s vision for the pooling of schemes has been welcomed by industry trade bodies, given the returns it could generate for savers and the scope it could create for pension funds to invest in longer-term assets. It is no secret that the Chancellor is keen for the UK to mirror the Australian system, where there is greater investment in infrastructure assets.

However, the government will still need to assuage stakeholder concerns about these proposals, given the disruption it could bring to the pensions market. The government will need to balance its own policy goals with market realities. If the government requires a significant portion of pension funds to be invested in the UK, how will industry stakeholders be impacted, given some will view the maximising of returns as their primary objective, rather than investment in British assets?

The government will also need to address concerns around the timeline for implementation. Given the pensions review is still in progress, there remains an opportunity for stakeholders to engage with the government to ensure that proposed policy changes support economic growth, and that the implementation process provides the industry with sufficient time to adjust to the new regime.

The government has announced that the final report of its pensions review will be published in Spring 2025 and that the Pensions Schemes Bill will also be introduced to Parliament shortly afterwards. By this stage, the government will need to have set out a roadmap for its reforms. It will also need to address how, if at all, to mandate the consolidation of the LGPS, and funds in the DC market, and whether new rules will be introduced to regulate pension scheme selection advice and investment consultancy.

These questions highlight the complexity of the task that the Chancellor faces. Despite these challenges, pensions reform remains at the heart of the government’s most important mission – delivering economic growth. The Chancellor’s speech and the newly launched consultations set out further details on the government’s vision for reform. The industry will now have the chance to scrutinise those plans and share its view on how to minimise implementation risks and maximise opportunities for growth.

GK Strategy is a political and regulatory consultancy firm supporting management teams and investors to understand and navigate complex policy changes.

We’d be delighted to share our perspectives on what the government’s pensions reforms could mean for you and how you can engage with policy debates. Please contact joshua@gkstrategy.com if you would like to discuss the reforms with the GK team.

GK Strategy – General Election Update

General Election Results Briefing

The GK team reacts to the 2024 General Election results, with GK’s Strategic Advisers sharing their insights on Labour’s historic victory, and the implications for Sir Keir Starmer’s new government.

To read our briefing please click here.

Disrupted Global Supply Chains: Is a Strategic Shift on the Horizon?

GK Adviser Felix Griffin looks at the forces disrupting global supply chains and explores how industries and governments are adapting to this ‘new normal.’

Beyond shortages and delays: the existential challenges facing global supply chains

The intricate network of global supply chains currently faces a confluence of unprecedented challenges. The initial shockwaves of the COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in meticulously planned production and transportation systems. While there were tentative signs of recovery in 2023, geopolitical developments, like the war in Ukraine and heightening tensions in the Middle East, have exacerbated disruptions, impacting the flow of critical resources. This is compounded by the growing impacts of climate change, which manifests in extreme weather events that disrupt production and transportation, highlighting the limitations of just-in-time manufacturing models. Inflationary pressures are squeezing margins for businesses and impacting consumer spending due to rising costs of raw materials and energy. Labour shortages in many industries add another layer of complexity, creating bottlenecks and hindering smooth operations.

The consequences of these pressures are far-reaching. Consumers face significant price hikes across various goods, driven in part by supply chain disruptions. Shortages of certain products are becoming commonplace, and even when available, delivery times have significantly increased. Businesses are caught in a precarious position, struggling to meet demand while grappling with rising costs and the potential for product scarcity.

The question remains: are these disruptions a temporary blip or a sign of a new normal? Experts suggest that we are entering a new era for global supply chains, one that necessitates a paradigm shift towards increased resilience. Businesses need to adapt and become more agile to navigate this increasingly complex landscape. Diversifying their supplier base and production locations can mitigate risk by reducing reliance on any single geographic region. Nearshoring, the practice of relocating production closer to consumer markets, can lessen dependence on long-distance transportation, which is vulnerable to disruptions and rising fuel costs. Technological advancements offer a compelling solution where they can be realised. Investments in automation and data analytics can enhance efficiency, transparency, and even enable real-time adjustments to production based on fluctuating demand.

Governments themselves play a crucial role in ensuring supply chain integrity. Strengthening import/export controls and fostering domestic production of critical goods can lessen reliance on potentially volatile regions. Fostering international cooperation on supply chain diversification and transparency is proving to mitigate risks and ensure access to essential resources during periods of heightened tension. Echoing the concerns of Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden, this new era necessitates a reassessment of national security risks embedded within globalised supply chains. Dowden aptly pointed out, in a recent address at Chatham House, that while globalisation has brought economic benefits, it has also exposed vulnerabilities. The recent actions announced by the UK government, including a review of Outward Direct Investment (ODI) risks and an update to the National Security and Investment (NSI) Act, serve as a model for other nations. These steps acknowledge the potential for exploitation by hostile actors, as highlighted by Russia’s manipulation of gas prices and China’s use of economic coercion. By working collaboratively with the private sector, governments can play a crucial role in building a more resilient and secure global supply chain network for the future.

Building a more resilient and adaptable supply chain network is not without its challenges. It requires a strategic shift in perspective and potentially higher upfront investment. However, the long-term benefits far outweigh the initial obstacles. By collaborating effectively, businesses and governments can foster a more robust system that ensures a smoother flow of goods, minimises disruptions, and ultimately benefits all stakeholders, from manufacturers and retailers to consumers across the globe.

Underfunded & Underprepared: Is Britain’s Defence Broken?

GK Adviser Felix Griffin dives into the challenges facing the MoD, from funding shortfalls to sluggish decision-making, and explores potential paths forward.

Incoherent strategy and a lack of funding is hampering progress

The UK’s Ministry of Defence finds itself grappling with a yawning funding gap, a rapidly evolving global landscape demanding a more responsive military, and an uncertain political landscape.

The biggest hurdle? Money – not just the lack of it but also how its spent.

Having fallen down the pecking order in the Chancellor’s recent budget, defence spending is set to receive no additional funding under the current government’s remaining tenure.

Meanwhile rising costs, particularly in nuclear deterrence and ambitious naval programmes, have created a staggering £16.9 billion hole in the MoD’s Equipment Plan – a shortfall which effectively handcuffs the MoD’s ability to modernise its equipment and carry out crucial projects necessary to maintain a robust defence posture.

There’s more to this than just money. Recent warnings highlight long-standing and systemic inventory failures in all three categories of inventory across the UK armed forces: Capital Spares, Raw Material and Consumables, and Guided Weapons, Missiles and Bombs. This raises a critical question: even with increased funding, would the UK be able to effectively equip its armed forces? The current evidence suggests not, presenting a deeper problem that needs addressing.

These issues point not only to a lack of innovation in procurement and strategic thinking, but also to sluggish decision-making processes that hinder the MoD’s ability to react swiftly to emerging threats.

Defence Secretary Grant Shapps’s stark assessment of the current situation – a transition from a “post-war world into a pre-war world” – rings all too true. The war in Ukraine serves as a stark reminder of the impact of large-scale conflict in Europe, while regional instability in the Middle East and the ever-growing tensions in the Asia-Pacific all demand a more agile and capable military from the UK. These diverse threats, which are by no means an exhaustive list, require a comprehensive and adaptable defence strategy from the MoD; something which the most recent Integrated Review (2021) failed to deliver, even after it was refreshed in 2023.

With the possibility of a new Labour government becoming increasingly likely, the party’s stance on defence policy and spending adds another layer of uncertainty.

I attended a Policy Exchange event on 28 February, which saw Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, John Healey, articulate his party’s vision for national defence. While recognising outdated practices and the imperative to modernise, Labour’s defence plans appear largely underdeveloped, or at least under-communicated.

Despite outlining some interesting plans, including a new national armaments director and the enhancement of the Chief of Defence Staff’s role, Healey’s speech fell victim to his party’s commitment to fiscal prudence, lacking significant substance and ambition. Though highlighting the state of defence when Labour left in 2010, with comparatively higher levels of defence spending (2.5% of GDP), as well as better troop numbers and satisfaction (over 100,000 soldiers and 60% approval), Healey emphasised the need to streamline existing processes before making financial commitments, underscoring a cautious approach. Nevertheless, Labour’s emphasis on reform and strategic preparedness offers a glimpse into their aspirations for bolstering the nation’s security in an increasingly uncertain world.

Reflections on the Future of Council Tax

GK Associate Hugo Tuckett assesses the likelihood of council tax reform amid rising concern about local authority financial resilience.

Is council tax reform on the horizon?

Amid rising bankruptcies in recent years, and growing concern about the sustainability of council finances, funding mechanisms for local authorities – and particularly council tax – are attracting growing political scrutiny.

In December 2023, the Local Government Association reported that almost one in five council leaders and chief executives it surveyed think it is very or fairly likely that they will need to issue a Section 114 notice this year or next due to a lack of funding. A Section 114 notice is issued by a council’s finance officer if they believe the council’s expenditure will exceed the resources it has available. Eleven Section 114 notices have been issued since 2018, with only five issued in the 30 years prior.

Given that council tax receipts now make up over half of local authority spending power (56.9% in 2023-24 compared to 49.1% in 2015-16), ensuring the council tax regime is operating effectively is critical to the long-term sustainability of local authority finances.

The Levelling Up Committee recently made a series of recommendations to the Government on council tax reform. In its report, the Committee reiterated its previous conclusions about the “unfairness and outdatedness of the council tax regime”.

The Government has since said it has no plans to conduct a revaluation of council tax bands (the Committee’s key recommendation) as, amongst other factors, “it would particularly risk those on a lower income, including pensioners, who have seen their homes appreciate in value”.

Here is the focal point of political discourse. A Conservative Government, aware that (according to recent YouGov polling) the Party is now the most popular only among the over-70s, will be aggrieved to conduct a revaluation of property bands which would hit the pockets of its core voter base. A Labour government on the other hand, with traditionally greater allegiances to younger, non-home owning voters and those on lower incomes could take a fresh look at this issue. One option likely to be under consideration is the introduction of new, higher bands of council tax.

Given the Shadow Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has ruled out numerous tax rises ahead of the upcoming General Election, council tax reform represents one revenue-raising lever still available to her. While the details of any potential reform are still unknown, it is a near certainty that the council tax regime will only grow in political salience in the years ahead.