Labour Needs A Rural Reset

Johnnie Furse writes:

Keir Starmer is out, Andy Burnham is in. Our new Prime Minister, in his first speech in the role, has promised a “circuit breaker for Britain” and made pointed references to “wrong turns” made in the 1980s. So while Burnham gets to work organising his new government, one might ask what kind of circuit breaker he will be offering to rural communities. What “wrong turns” does he consider have been made in the countryside?

He would do well to ask his predecessor. As Sir Keir sipped a valedictory pint of London Pride after handing over the keys to No. 10, he doubtless found himself wondering where it all went wrong. Perhaps he turned to his colleague, the former Chancellor, and said “we didn’t do great with that farm tax, did we?” He would be right in saying so.

Rural affairs do matter for the Labour party. More than 100 of their MPs — a quarter of their total — represent rural constituencies. This isn’t a coincidence. The fact that there are so many rural Labour seats (antipathy towards the Conservatives aside) is thanks to the overtures which Starmer made to rural people ahead of the 2024 General Election, which saw record numbers in the countryside vote Labour.

It seems almost like black comedy now, but turn the clock back two years and we had the first Labour leader to attend an NFU conference, a leader who had written for Country Life promising to “roll up his sleeves” and renew “the bond of respect” between countryside and politicians. A leader who said he did “care deeply about the countryside” and knew that “losing a farm is not like losing any other business”, one who — crucially — recognised the problems created by the fact that “more and more decisions that affect communities are taken by people who not only live miles away, but also have little empathy for their challenges”.

But, as we all know, that’s not what happened. More than a few “wrong turns” were made. Rural communities were hit by a barrage of policies and proposals such as the Family Farm Tax, business rates hikes for rural pubs and enterprises, and a crackdown on game shooting and trail hunting. No wonder many have accused the government of a “war on the countryside”. Rural people have stood up in droves to protest against these proposals, with tractor protests covering newspaper front pages and more than 91,000 people writing to the government to oppose the ban on trail hunting — the greatest response to a Defra consultation in history.

Of course, it never had to be this way. A great many rural people took Starmer’s words at face value. It is hard to see what reason the government had for pursuing such attacks on rural communities. Policies like the Family Farm Tax provided a negligible gain for the Treasury, damaged Starmer’s reputation in the countryside and wasted huge amounts of political capital. Facing enormous dissatisfaction within the Parliamentary Labour Party he had to announce his resignation.

Andy Burnham inherits this legacy — a historic low point in relations between government and countryside. He certainly would do well to try to fix it. Labour’s numerous rural MPs have already been dragged through the mud, being whipped to support policies deeply unpopular among their constituents — they will be reluctant to have the same thing happen again. It would be unwise for the new Prime Minister to alienate a significant portion of the PLP. Already, one anonymous rural Labour MP told the press that Mr Burnham “has a problem” if he “lacks anyone around him who understands farming and rural communities”, adding that he “doesn’t strike me as someone who’s interested” in countryside affairs.

Mr Burnham has already highlighted, however, that he has some understanding of rural issues. In his speech in Manchester at the end of last month he spoke of giving “powers for our rural economies to address issues specific to them”, stated that food and farming are a critical sector, announced that he would reform business rates to support pubs and talked about “protecting more green spaces from development”. He has also previously made comments about needing to revisit the Family Farm Tax. Is this, then, “place first, not party first”?

Much could be indicated about Burnham’s rural policy direction from those he has chosen to appoint as Defra ministers. Countryside campaigners called for one of the many rural Labour MPs to have a ministerial position within the department — and Burnham has listened. Jennifer Riddell-Carpenter, who was previously Chair of the Labour Rural Research Group — a group of rural Labour MPs, has indeed been given such an appointment. Until we see policy, however, it’s impossible to know.

If Mr Burnham is serious about making politics work for everyone, rural and urban, he cannot simply fall into the same trap of repeating promises already made and already broken. That path leads to more frustration and hurt among rural communities, more frustration and resentment among a quarter of his MPs, as well as vast amounts of unhelpful coverage in the media. That is no path to a fruitful and long-lasting premiership.

Mr Burnham has the chance to reset relations with the countryside but that can only be done by legislating for, and with, rural communities, not against them. For the countryside to thrive, it needs support — not restrictions and increased burdens. The countryside is no sideshow and if Mr Burnham wishes to be a successful Prime Minister he needs it on his side. The opportunity is there for him — will he take it?