Rachel Reeves’ Budget: A Crushing Blow to British Farmers
By Baroness Arlene Foster
As someone who grew up on a farm and represented a constituency filled with farmers, I feel the sharp impact of Rachel Reeves’ recent budget keenly. Yesterday’s announcement, which kept the agriculture budget flat at £2.4 billion for 2025/26, was a devastating setback for the farming community, which has been pleading for increased support in these difficult times. Farmers are already battling skyrocketing costs, unpredictable weather, and relentless pressure on margins. Yet, instead of the help they need, this budget only adds to their burdens.
One particularly painful blow is the increase in the National Living Wage by 6.7%, now set at £12.21, and the 16.3% hike in the National Minimum Wage for 18 to 20-year-olds, reaching £10 per hour. While fair wages are important, these changes will drive up labour costs significantly for farmers, many of whom are already struggling to break even. For family farms, which rely on seasonal labour to get by, this wage increase could be the final straw. They simply cannot shoulder higher labour expenses on top of existing financial pressures.
The end of old farming support schemes, particularly for those who once received over £100,000 in direct payments, will also hit hard. Reeves revealed that these businesses will see support drastically cut, with subsidies dropping to just £8,000 by 2025. These are not vast conglomerates; they are often larger family farms that play an essential role in our food supply. Reducing support so quickly jeopardizes the future of these operations and ignores the lifeline these subsidies provide to rural communities.
But perhaps the most disheartening change is the overhaul of Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) from April 2026. Under this new scheme, the first £1 million of combined agricultural and business assets will still receive 100% relief, but beyond that, only 50% relief will apply. For the average farming family, this means an effective rate of 20% tax on assets over £1 million—forcing farmers, who have always relied on passing their land to the next generation, into agonizing choices. The National Farmers Union (NFU) had warned of this, anticipating the “crippling” effects it would have on family farms and the stability of our domestic food production. They were right.
I know firsthand how important these farms are to our rural areas. Family farms are not just businesses; they’re homes, legacies, and lifelines for entire communities. To face the reality that these families may be forced to sell parts of their farms just to meet new tax obligations is gut-wrenching. The NFU has already pointed out that these changes will increase food production costs, leaving either the supply chain or consumers to carry the burden. Farmers, already hanging on by a thread after years of rising costs and extreme weather, simply cannot absorb these blows.
This budget is more than just numbers on a page; it represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the challenges facing British farmers. For a government to claim it is building a stronger economy, while ignoring the foundational role of our agricultural sector, is nothing short of shortsighted. Without meaningful support, we risk losing the very farms that form the backbone of our food security.
British farmers deserve better. They deserve a government that sees and values their contributions, not one that burdens them with policies that push them closer to the brink. Rachel Reeves’ budget has left rural Britain in the cold, and it’s British families who will pay the price for this shortsightedness.
New Assisted Dying Bill: A Christian Call to Protect the Vulnerable and Defend Dignity in Life
By Baroness Arlene Foster
Lord Falconer’s Controversial Push for Assisted Death: Are the Elderly and Sick at Risk?
As someone who grew up on a farm and represented a constituency filled with farmers, I feel the sharp impact of Rachel Reeves’ recent budget keenly. Yesterday’s announcement, which kept the agriculture budget flat at £2.4 billion for 2025/26, was a devastating setback for the farming community, which has been pleading for increased support in these difficult times. Farmers are already battling skyrocketing costs, unpredictable weather, and relentless pressure on margins. Yet, instead of the help they need, this budget only adds to their burdens.
One particularly painful blow is the increase in the National Living Wage by 6.7%, now set at £12.21, and the 16.3% hike in the National Minimum Wage for 18 to 20-year-olds, reaching £10 per hour. While fair wages are important, these changes will drive up labour costs significantly for farmers, many of whom are already struggling to break even. For family farms, which rely on seasonal labour to get by, this wage increase could be the final straw. They simply cannot shoulder higher labour expenses on top of existing financial pressures.
The end of old farming support schemes, particularly for those who once received over £100,000 in direct payments, will also hit hard. Reeves revealed that these businesses will see support drastically cut, with subsidies dropping to just £8,000 by 2025. These are not vast conglomerates; they are often larger family farms that play an essential role in our food supply. Reducing support so quickly jeopardizes the future of these operations and ignores the lifeline these subsidies provide to rural communities.
But perhaps the most disheartening change is the overhaul of Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) from April 2026. Under this new scheme, the first £1 million of combined agricultural and business assets will still receive 100% relief, but beyond that, only 50% relief will apply. For the average farming family, this means an effective rate of 20% tax on assets over £1 million—forcing farmers, who have always relied on passing their land to the next generation, into agonizing choices. The National Farmers Union (NFU) had warned of this, anticipating the “crippling” effects it would have on family farms and the stability of our domestic food production. They were right.
I know firsthand how important these farms are to our rural areas. Family farms are not just businesses; they’re homes, legacies, and lifelines for entire communities. To face the reality that these families may be forced to sell parts of their farms just to meet new tax obligations is gut-wrenching. The NFU has already pointed out that these changes will increase food production costs, leaving either the supply chain or consumers to carry the burden. Farmers, already hanging on by a thread after years of rising costs and extreme weather, simply cannot absorb these blows.
This budget is more than just numbers on a page; it represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the challenges facing British farmers. For a government to claim it is building a stronger economy, while ignoring the foundational role of our agricultural sector, is nothing short of shortsighted. Without meaningful support, we risk losing the very farms that form the backbone of our food security.
British farmers deserve better. They deserve a government that sees and values their contributions, not one that burdens them with policies that push them closer to the brink. Rachel Reeves’ budget has left rural Britain in the cold, and it’s British families who will pay the price for this shortsightedness.
Tesco’s Robo-Cops Get Northern Irish Accent – Scariest Security Yet!
Well, would you ever have believed it? Tesco’s have gone and given their new robot security guards Northern Irish accents. Yes, that’s right—out of all the accents across the UK they could have chosen, they picked ours. Now, I’m not sure whether to be flattered or slightly unnerved by the whole thing. I mean, on the one hand, it’s nice to see our accent out there representing us, even if it is coming from a machine. But on the other hand, anyone from Northern Ireland knows there’s something about our dialect that can be, shall we say, a wee bit intimidating when it wants to be.
Picture it. You’re wandering down the aisle in Tesco, maybe taking your time browsing the biscuit section, when all of a sudden, this robot wheels up to you and says, in a broad Belfast drawl: “Oi, you there, have ye paid for that, aye?” Now, that’s enough to put the fear of God into anyone, let’s be honest. There’s something about the sharpness of a Northern Irish accent that commands attention. It’s firm, it’s direct, and it has a way of cutting through any ambiguity. When someone from Northern Ireland tells you something, you listen. No room for messing about.
And that, I think, is what makes our accent a little scarier than any other in the UK, particularly when it’s coming from a robot! Where a Scouse accent might charm you, or a soft Welsh voice could lull you into a false sense of security, the Northern Irish accent hits different note.
It has a bluntness to it, a kind of raw edge that makes you sit up straight. You don’t question it, you just respond. Maybe it’s the way we clip our words, or the sharpness of our vowels, or perhaps it’s the fact that we tend not to dance around a subject. When we speak, we get straight to the point—and that point usually has a bit of weight behind it.
Now, I don’t know if the people at Tesco considered this when they programmed these robots, but I have to admit, it’s quite a clever move. Robots are meant to enforce the rules, keep order, and make sure everyone’s behaving themselves. And if you want a voice that commands respect, you could do far worse than the Northern Irish one. It’s not that we’re trying to be intimidating, mind you—it’s just that our accent comes with an inherent seriousness. It’s authoritative without even trying.
But of course, this isn’t the first time our accent has been labelled as “scary” or “intimidating.” It’s a stereotype that’s followed us for years, largely due to the Troubles and the way Northern Ireland has been portrayed in the media. For many people across the UK, the Northern Irish accent is still associated with conflict, with hard men and tough times. So perhaps it’s no surprise that Tesco decided to use our accent to give their robots a bit of extra authority.
But here’s the thing: while our accent can certainly sound a bit stern when needed, it’s also deeply misunderstood. Yes, there’s a bluntness to it, and yes, it can sound a bit harsh if you’re not used to it, but there’s also a warmth to the Northern Irish accent that often gets overlooked. It’s an accent that’s full of character, full of life. And when spoken with care, it can be as comforting as any other.
Take a moment to think about the times you’ve heard a Northern Irish accent in a different light. Maybe it was an old neighbour offering you a cup of tea, or a relative saying “love” at the end of a sentence. In those moments, our accent isn’t sharp or scary at all—it’s kind, it’s loving, it’s home. That’s the duality of our accent: it can be firm when it needs to be, but it can also be soft and full of heart. It’s an accent that reflects the people it comes from—tough, when necessary, but full of warmth underneath.
So, while the idea of a robot with a Northern Irish accent might initially seem a bit comical or intimidating, there’s something quite endearing about it too. It speaks to the versatility of our accent, and by extension, our culture. We’re a people who’ve been through a lot, but we’ve come out the other side with a voice that can be both strong and loving, depending on the circumstances.
In a way, it’s almost poetic that Tesco would choose our accent for their robots. After all, robots are meant to be efficient, no-nonsense machines designed to get the job done. And if there’s one thing that the Northern Irish accent is good at, it’s getting straight to the point. But there’s also a subtle reminder here that our accent, like the people who speak it, has many layers. It’s not just about being tough or stern—it’s also about warmth, community, and a deep sense of belonging.
So, next time you’re in Tesco and one of those robots rolls up to you with its Northern Irish drawl, don’t be too quick to judge. Sure, it might sound a bit serious at first, but listen closely, and you might just hear a hint of the warmth that makes our accent so special. Because when it comes down to it, in the right moments, there’s nothing more loving or comforting than a soft Northern Irish voice.
10 Years On: How Scotland’s Decision to Stay in the UK Saved Its Future—From Economic Chaos to Global Influence!”
As the 10th anniversary of the 2014 Scottish independence referendum is marked, it’s important to reflect on what staying in the Union has meant for Scotland and the United Kingdom as a whole. I have campaigned vigorously for Northern Ireland to remain an integral part of the UK, and with that same commitment to unity, I believe Scotland made the right decision ten years ago when it voted to stay within the Union.
The separatists in Scotland just as in Northern Ireland have sought to destroy the United Kingdom. A decade on, we can see that remaining in the Union has brought significant benefits to Scotland, not just in economic terms, but socially, politically, and internationally. Today, I want to highlight five ways in which Scotland’s place within the UK has made it stronger and better equipped for the future.
Firstly, one of the most compelling reasons Scotland remains stronger within the Union is economic stability. Over the past decade, the world has been rocked by financial crises, the COVID-19 pandemic, and more recently, the challenges of energy insecurity and inflation caused by geopolitical tensions. Through it all, Scotland has been able to draw on the economic resilience of the UK.
The British pound has remained a stable and reliable currency, protecting Scots from the volatility and uncertainty that a smaller, independent currency might have introduced. Had Scotland chosen independence, it would have had to navigate turbulent global markets, establish new financial systems, and create its own central bank. The Union’s broad shoulders allowed Scotland to weather these storms more confidently and ensured access to the wider UK market, which remains Scotland’s largest trading partner. This level of economic security is crucial for businesses, families, and individuals across Scotland, particularly in times of global upheaval.
Secondly, Scotland’s infrastructure has benefited immensely from being part of a broader, UK-wide investment strategy. From new roads and railways to broadband expansion, Scotland has received significant capital investment that would have been harder to come by as an independent nation. Major projects like the Borders Railway and the Queensferry Crossing were funded with UK resources, ensuring that Scotland stays connected, both internally and with the rest of the UK.
In addition, public services like the National Health Service (NHS) have been shielded from the kind of cuts that could have occurred in an independent Scotland. While the NHS in Scotland is devolved, it benefits from the pooling of resources and expertise across the UK, particularly during the pandemic when vaccine procurement and the swift rollout of COVID-19 vaccinations were coordinated centrally. This united approach to public health not only saved lives but showcased the strength of cooperative governance within the UK.
Thirdly, as part of the UK, Scotland continues to enjoy a political influence that punches well above its weight on the international stage. The collective influence of the United Kingdom on the global stage is far more significant, than a small independent state. As part of a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, a leading member of NATO, and a G7 nation, Scotland is represented in decisions that affect global security, trade, and diplomacy.
Moreover, within the UK, Scotland retains a unique voice in the corridors of power. Devolution has given Scotland autonomy over crucial areas like health, education, and justice, while remaining part of a Union that amplifies its international influence. With MPs in Westminster and representation in key international negotiations, Scotland is both local and global—a balance that would be difficult to replicate as an independent nation.
Fourthly, the cultural ties that bind Scotland to the rest of the UK are rich and enduring. Over the past ten years, we’ve seen these bonds strengthened, rather than weakened. The freedom to celebrate a distinct Scottish identity—whether through the arts, sport, or language—has only grown within the Union, supported by shared cultural institutions that promote diversity across all four nations.
Sport is one such unifying force. While Scotland’s national teams compete separately, the shared pride during international events like the Olympics is palpable. Scottish athletes benefit from UK-wide funding for Olympic sports, allowing them to train and compete at the highest level, with the full backing of one of the world’s most successful sporting teams. Such cooperation enriches Scottish culture and ensures that Scots remain at the forefront of the arts, sciences, and athletics.
Finally, staying within the Union has allowed Scotland, just like Northern Ireland, to contribute to and benefit from the diversity of the UK. Each nation within the UK brings something unique to the table, and together, we are stronger for it. Scotland has made significant contributions to the political, cultural, and social fabric of the Union, while also benefiting from the ideas, talents, and resources of its fellow nations.
In times of national crisis, such as during the pandemic, we saw this unity in action. Whether it was through cross-border medical support, shared research on vaccines, or the collective effort to protect jobs and livelihoods, the four nations of the UK worked together for the common good. This collaboration has strengthened bonds and underscored the importance of working together for the future.
As we reflect on the 10th anniversary of the Scottish referendum, it’s clear that Scotland has benefited enormously from remaining within the UK. Economic stability, shared infrastructure, political influence, cultural unity, and strength through diversity are just a few of the many advantages Scotland continues to enjoy today. The Union is not without its challenges, but it remains the best way forward for Scotland and the other constituent parts of the UK—a nation that is stronger, more prosperous, and more influential within the framework of a United Kingdom.
SNP Faces Setback as Unionist Parties Gain Ground in Scotland .
- Northern Ireland Nationalists Stagnate, Only 26% Support for United Ireland in Latest Poll .
- Rising Catholic Unionism: 21% of Northern Irish Catholics Favours UK Union .
- Together UK Foundation: Advocating for the Benefits of Remaining in the United Kingdom .
- Irish Parliament’s Push for Unification Referendum Ignores Belfast Agreement’s Consent Principle
It has not been a fun year for the forces of separatism in the United Kingdom. In the recent general election, the SNP have been pushed firmly back by the unionist parties in Scotland and in Northern Ireland nationalist parties failed again to increase their share of the electorate beyond 40%
Despite all the pressure for a Border poll in Northern Ireland and all the airtime given to its proponents, a recent poll in the Dublin based Irish Times, showed that only 26% of respondents in Northern Ireland would vote for a United Ireland if such a poll were called. Of those who would vote for staying in the United Kingdom 21% of the respondents were Northern Irish Catholics. This is an important statistic because for decades lazy commentators have equated religious designation with support for a political objective i.e., if you are a brought up in the Protestant faith you will be a unionist and if you are a catholic you will support a United Ireland.
As one of my fellow board members from my pro-union Foundation Together UK has said, Northern Ireland is the only place in Europe where your political opinion is determined by where you were baptised as a baby – and off course it is simply not true. Many who have been brought up in the Catholic tradition believe in the United Kingdom and the benefits they receive from it. They may not be “red, white and blue” unionists like me, but they are unionists none the less; some for economic reasons, some for cultural and political reasons and some for social reasons.
But despite reasons to be cheerful for those of who believe in the United Kingdom, be under no illusion that those who want to destroy the UK will not fade quietly into the background. Absolutely not. If the nationalist press is anything to go by, they take defeats and down turns and use them to energise themselves for the next onslaught. That is why those who believe in the United Kingdom must work together and speak to the benefits of the UK instead of just assuming everybody understands. That is the reason I have started Together UK Foundation – to do just that.
The spin doctors in Sinn Fein took retaining their seats in Northern Ireland as an indication of victory even though before the election their embattled leader Mary Lou McDonald said they were nailed on for gains.
Then this week the grandly titled Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement of the Irish Parliament, launched a report which said the Irish Government should plan for a referendum on constitutional change and prepare for Irish unification immediately.
The arrogance and ignorance in this report is just staggering. This joint committee of both houses in the Republic of Ireland’s parliament have ignored the fundamental principal of the Belfast Agreement of 1998, namely the principle of consent. To his credit David Trimble when he was negotiating the Belfast Agreement had achieved recognition that Northern Ireland was and would remain part of the United Kingdom until the people of Northern Ireland decided otherwise and the Republic of Ireland amended their constitution to deal with articles 2 and 3 which lay claim to Northern Ireland as part of their geographical territory. This was something which the EU never challenged even though it was contrary to International law.
It appears that the Irish parliament committee only takes the parts of the Belfast Agreement which they like and forget about the bits which are inconvenient.
It was always and still is a challenge to the implementation of the agreement, that for nationalists and republicans it was a route map to a so-called United Ireland where for the rest of us it was meant to be a settlement – a Northern Ireland at peace with herself. That chasm of understanding and interpretation is what has caused so much difficulty in our politics over this past 25 years. It’s not just making the agreement which is important but how it is interpreted for years to come – peace makers around the world I am sure acknowledge that.
Those of us who are unionists and believe in the UK as a diverse home for all must keep our wits about us and continue to put forward its positivity. We certainly cannot rest on our laurels as even those in the Irish parliament try to force our hand, despite the opinion polls and despite the election results. My response – no thanks.