Sir Roger Gale
Member of Parliament for Herne Bay and Sandwich (including West Thanet)
 

Welcome to a  little light end-of year reading. The real reason for this `0mnibus` edition is that in November I ran out of time and steam and then it was too close to December so I thought ………….oh well perhaps we can let that pass and normal disservice will hopefully be resumed in  the New Year

We left October, for those of you who can recall that far back, with the fallout from Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves first ` Fiscal Event` now known as `The Hallowe`en Budget`. It would be unkind but not untrue to say that compared with this double barrel of shots in both feet, lead balloons were soaring away into the sunset. It was, and remains, the gift to journalists that cannot stop giving.

Predictions about the effect of the increase in Employers National Insurance contributions are already being realised with businesses either simply not replacing staff as they leave or in some cases having had to lay off employees in the run-up to Christmas in order to avoid shutting down the whole enterprise.  It is always said that budgets that are received well usually unravel as the fine print is examined to reveal the truth.  Aside from the acclaim of the  glove-puppets on the Government benches, capable of  expressing all of the critical analysis of a few rows of nodding dogs,  Ms. Reeves` offering was neither received well on the day nor improved by scrutiny. Business confidence – vital to Sir Starmer`s much-vaunted desire to grow his way out of the bills that he has run up settling strikes and pay-demands – is at a two-year low and heading south.  Much-needed overseas investment in infrastructure projects is on hold if not yet actually abandoned and the Prime Minister`s personal popularity ratings are, at the turn of the year, plummeting well into double-figure negatives.

It will be a while before much affection is once again afforded to the Conservative party but this level of disaffection in an administration that is barely six months old is perhaps a stark reminder that these days the electorate expects promises made in election manifestos to be kept and not discarded as a tiresome inconvenience. The `we didn`t know how bad it was` claim from a team in waiting that not only had access to all of the books but has been busy, since taking office, spending like there is no tomorrow, cuts little ice.

My analysis, at the end of October, of the effect of the `Family Farm Tax` as the press has dubbed the imposition of Inheritance Tax upon family run farming businesses, drew the predictable, if isolated, ill-informed comment about the `need to tax rich farmers`.  But if the Prime Minister was in any doubt about the fallacy of his assertion that `only a few hundred farms will be affected` then he surely had only to wander down to the end of Downing Street during any of the November or December demonstrations to see the tens of thousands of representatives from right across rural Britain gathered in Whitehall  to realise how hopelessly his Chancellor and his Government have got this wrong.  Of course there are some rich landowners and of course they must be expected to pay their way but the idea that `most` farmers are `rich` is arrant nonsense.  The overwhelming majority of small farmers (500 acres and below, let`s say) have been having a very hard time, squeezed between reductions in support-payments, aggressive supermarket buying  policies and the loss of tenanted  farmland to housing development and  they are finding it difficult if not impossible to make even a modest living out of their chosen way of life. That we are heading for a situation in which the nation is not and will never again be able to feed itself is fast becoming a reality exacerbated by the policies of a Government that clearly neither understands nor cares about the future of rural England. The Agriculture Minister, Steve Reed, may by now be regretting his statement that `the vast majority of farmers will not be affected at all`  while those of his new colleagues on the Labour benches, elected to represent rural seats for the first time, are already beginning to see the writing on the barn doors.

It is not, though, only small farmers that are suffering. The combined impact of the long-term effect of Inheritance Tax and increased National Insurance contributions is set to undermine the very foundations of the tens of thousands of small family businesses upon which our nation`s prosperity has traditionally been founded. Dombey may or may not be able to  pass on his business to his sons or daughters once he has paid his taxes  but the inability to afford to hire staff, particularly in the hospitality and entertainment sectors upon which we have hitherto relied heavily for employment, is already causing significant losses and I fear that some seasonal enterprises that have closed for the Winter may never open their doors again come the Spring.

In November `Together for Short Lives`, the umbrella that covers those excellent charities like Shooting Star and Demelza House that provide hospice care and outreach support for terminally ill children, held a briefing session in parliament.  This sector receives a pitiful amount of Government support for a service that, were it to have to be provided by the NHS, would cost a small fortune.  The effect of the increase in employers’ national insurance payments upon these and very many other charities will inevitably mean that hard-raised donations from a generous public will go not to the causes that they were intended to support but to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Services will also have to be reduced as the inevitable staff reductions, necessary to balance the books, take place. The `law of unintended consequences` is unforgiving and the repercussions of `The Hallowe`en Budget` are likely to be felt throughout the coming year and well beyond. A more confident Prime Minister would cut his losses (and probably his Chancellor as well!) but in spite of his massive parliamentary majority this Prime Minister is not confident, is he?

`Sir Starmer` has been engaged in launching a `Plan for Change`. You were probably under the impression that this was the Labour Party`s 2024 election manifesto, finely honed during fourteen years in opposition and with a relay team of match-fit Secretaries-of-State-in-Waiting ready to `hit the ground running`. Apparently you were wrong. After a series of false starts that would have left most competitors disqualified the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has sought to `re-calibrate` in the form of six `milestones`,  his ambitions for our Country.  This is not, emphatically not, a `reset` and nor is it a `relaunch`. Definitely not. And that the `millstones` do not contain a plan to tackle the `small boats issue` that the Government has pledged to address is clearly not an oversight. It is all a question of priorities and illegal immigration is not one of them. But climate change is. Mr Miliband believes that climate change is the greatest single threat to mankind  which is why he intends to spend billions of black-hole pounds to unilaterally attain his 2030 net-zero target via a network of hideous pylons and `converter stations` that will scar our landscape for eternity. `Sir Starmer`, on the other hand, shares his Deputy Prime Minister`s view that housing is the priority and like Angela Rayner is prepared to redefine greenbelt as `greybelt` and to sacrifice high-grade agricultural land to meet targets for the building of houses that have no mandatory grey water systems,  rooftop solar panels, or  electric vehicle charging points and no supporting infrastructure in the form of schools, healthcare and the like. Was the word `sustainability` mentioned in the `millstone speech`? If it was, I missed it. The Bourgeoise Women`s Tabloid newspaper described the `recalibration` as a `bingo-hall parade of buzzwords and nerdspeak` and while I do not ordinarily subscribe wholeheartedly to their editorial opinions this resonates with the sound of a nail being hit smartly on the head.

And while we are still on the subject of `recalibration` it might be an idea if the Prime Minister were to undertake a review of some of his front bench team`s curricula vitae. He has already lost his Transport Secretary, Louise Haigh, due to an unfortunate oversight and his Chancellor’s claims to economic experience would seem to be a little exaggerated to say the least. What future revelations are in store for a man who, whatever else he was doing during years in opposition, was not checking detail?

It seems like a very long time since The Tramp defeated the Democratic candidate Kamala Harriss in the United States Presidential election and, as President-elect for a second term appointed Elon Musk  to address the failings and excesses of government in Washington and John Fitzgerald Kennedy Junior (whose Father, for those not of the “I remember where I was when…..” generation ,  was a Democrat President) as the Republican Secretary of State-elect for Health. Giving the health job to a vaccine-sceptic might prove to be a step that the next Leader of the Free World may come to regret but presumably there is some madness in his method. Time will tell.

In the midst of all of this excitement Kemi Badenoch, confirmed  by the membership of the Conservative Party as its leader by secret ballot in early November, made her first appearance as Leader of the Opposition at the Despatch Box for Prime Minister`s Question Time.  Perish  the thought that on Wednesday`s at twelve noon `Sir Starmer` would prefer to  be just about anywhere rather than at the Despatch Box answering questions in the Commons and most particularly not having to respond to challenges from a feisty upstart that he does not know how to handle. For a man more suited to the Vice-Chancellorship of a redbrick university than the unruly bearpit of the PMQs it must be galling to have to react to a woman who clearly does not give a toss for convention and is more than prepared to get into a bare-knuckle fight with anyone in the Chamber if that`s what it takes.  Ms Badenoch  is growing into the job and with a parliamentary party behind her that, if only because of diminished numbers, is more united than it has been for a very long time, the punches are starting to land.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has felt compelled to resign following what effectively became a vote of no-confidence from his episcopal colleagues over his knowledge and handling of a priest with a singularly unsavoury past involving scores of young men at home and in Africa. We have a strong tradition of turbulent priests in Canterbury and notwithstanding some of his more tiresome and partisan political opinions I liked Archbishop Justin and I am saddened to see him forced to leave under such circumstances. His departure has left the Established Church in some turmoil with siren calls for further heads to roll and it is hard to see who King Charles, acting on the recommendation of Downing Street , will appoint to replace Welby. For a start – and this is not intended as a facetious comment – it would help if the new appointee to the See of Canterbury was to be a Christian with a grasp of the traditions and beliefs of the Church of England.  Having served as a member of the Ecclesiastical Committee I have made the acquaintance of some who appear to subscribe to  the view that `These are my principles and if you don’t like them I`ve got some more I my back pocket`.  Call me old-fashioned (I am) but while I understand the need for my church to reach out to new generations in language that is understood I do believe that re-writing the terms and conditions of the Anglican faith to suit convenience is neither desirable nor acceptable.

Which sort of leads us to a debate that resurfaced at the back end of this year and is I suspect set to dominate much of the early part of 2025.

Kim Leadbeater is the Labour Member of Parliament for Spen Valley, the seat that, as Batley and Spen, was held by her older sister, Jo Cox, who was murdered. I do not share many of Kim`s political views of course but I regard her as a parliamentary friend and as a person of very considerable principle and courage. It should surprise nobody that, having obtained a prominent position in the annual ballot for the introduction of Private Members Bills she should have sought to revisit the highly contentious issue of `Assisted Suicide ` through the vehicle of her Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life Bill). The last attempt to change the law was introduced as the Assisted Dying (No 2) Bill by the Labour MP Rob Marris in 2015 and was defeated by 330 votes to 118.  Kim Leadbeater`s bill was debated in the Commons on 29th November and was given a Second Reading by 330 votes in favour to 275 against. In February, the bill will therefore go into committee having, exceptionally for a Private Member`s Bill, first taken oral evidence. If it is reported to the Commons and granted a Third Reading it will then go off to the House of Lords for further scrutiny and possible amendment.

The debate on Second Reading had, given the strongly held opinions and tensions on both sides of the argument, all the ingredients for bitterness and acrimony. In fact, it was arguably one of the most civilised and thoughtful debates that the House has heard for months if not years with civility and respect reflected in many contributions based upon the personal experiences of Members. Having voted against the bill in the belief that what is required is a strengthening of hospital and hospice – based palliative care I have now agreed to serve as one of the co-Chairmen who will pilot the measure through committee. I and my Labour counterpart, who voted in favour of the bill, will immediately become and remain strictly impartial and will take no further part in votes or express opinions upon the proceedings. I imagine, though, that the remaining stages will attract not inconsiderable public comment and media interest.

And finally,  with many tens of thousands of potentially qualifying pensioners still not registered for pension credit and therefore about to lose their Winter Fuel Payments, the Treasury Grinch will no doubt have taken note of the fact that “Freezing This Christmas” performed by `Sir Starmer and the Granny Harmers`, has been topping the charts even before the cold weather has set in. Was it really worth the candle, Rachel?

Whether you are a farmer, a carer, a charity worker, a small business , a pensioner or even new to the Government benches and on the wrong side of many political arguments , Suzy and I would like to take this opportunity to wish you a healthy and, perhaps, a more peaceful New Year. At home and abroad 2024 has been, for many, a rugged twelve months. May 2025 be at least a little kinder to us all.