Farming and Inheritance Tax

Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts
Wednesday 4th December 2024

(2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Andrew Pakes Portrait Andrew Pakes
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the right hon. Member for being a champion in this House of skills and trade unions, which are sadly too rarely championed by Conservative Members. I recognise his points on our common wealth and the work that goes into looking after and protecting our land, but I also recognise the impact of the last Government on land and our farming communities. Let us look at the Conservatives’ record: 14 years of running down the DEFRA budget; a decade of austerity, which became a decade of insecurity; a Brexit turkey half-cooked; flood funding cut; trade deals that sold out British farmers; a farming budget £300 million underspent. If Conservative Members want to discuss food security and the future of our rural communities, bring it on.

The Conservative party saw more than 12,000 farmers and agribusinesses forced out of business since 2010. Farming has the lowest profitability of any sector in the economy. Conservatives abolished the Agricultural Wages Board and saw rural wages stagnate, as did many Liberal Democrat colleagues, who voted in the same Lobby. Now the Conservatives are defending the status quo when it comes to big business, big landowners and rising land prices. At the start of this debate, I thought that they were literally the last people on earth defending the status quo, but some of them seem to be talking about accepting some kind of policy, while those on the Front Bench seem to be saying that there should be no change whatsoever, so the merry-go-round continues.

The Opposition want all the spending but none of the responsibility. We talk about change. We know the change that this country voted for in our rural and farm communities. People voted for change because public services were broken, with rural schools crumbling, NHS waiting lists soaring, and rural GPs and NHS dentists harder to find. The Government are rightly focused on the cost of living crisis and improving access to GPs in our rural communities. What are the Opposition focused on? They are defending a tax break for estates worth up to £3 million while attacking a pay rise for the lowest paid workers in our rural communities. That says everything that we need to know about today’s Tory party.

Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
- Hansard - -

As a fellow Cambridgeshire MP, will the hon. Member give us some examples of farms in his constituency that support the measure?

Andrew Pakes Portrait Andrew Pakes
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I certainly recognise from door-knocking in rural communities and talking to rural workers that food poverty has gone up in my constituency. People have found it harder to get a bus to go and work on a farm, and people working on farms are struggling with the result of Liz Truss’s mini-Budget, which crashed our economy. The reality of the debate that we should be having is that profitability for British farmers goes back a generation, not to 4 July. That is why the Government are pledging to put £5 billion into the farming budget and are committed to working with farmers and the sector to get that money into productive food production. It is why we will use the heft of public procurement to buy British farming produce. Food security goes to the heart of the challenges facing our country. Fixing our public services goes to the heart of rebuilding our rural communities. If the House wants to do both, it will start by rejecting the Opposition motion.

National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill

Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts
Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The Government have repeatedly claimed that this is a tax on businesses, not a tax on working people, and how wrong they are. They are not only wrong, but deeply disingenuous to the people we represent who will see prices increase, their chances of employment become more difficult, and many businesses having to wind down or restrict their operations.

The owner of the Barley Mow pub in Hartford wrote to me expressing his concerns and frustration at the lack of detail the Government have provided about support for the hospitality industry. This echoes the representations made by UKHospitality, which has said that

“the tsunami of employment costs coming in April will ultimately do more to hamper growth than incentivise it. Increases to employer NICs and wages will make it harder for businesses to support employment and invest in their businesses.”

I would like to hear from the Economic Secretary, when she sums up, why the Government want the amazing pubs, restaurants and catering businesses in Huntingdon to suffer this unfair, ill thought through and deeply unpopular jobs tax.

The British Retail Consortium wrote to the Chancellor expressing its grave concerns about the impact this will have on the businesses it represents, with our largest supermarket chains having to pass on these costs to consumers, and that is before we talk about the impact of this Budget on farmers, but I am sure Labour Members will have plenty to say about that tomorrow.

Not only will businesses with high numbers of lower-paid workers be impacted, but I have received many emails from GP surgeries and hospices that are terrified about what this means for them. I pay tribute to the Cambridgeshire local medical committee for the work it has done in raising the fact that the average GP surgery in Huntington, with just under 14,000 patients, will face increased costs, with the minimum wage and national insurance changes, of approximately £48,000. That money is equivalent to the salary for three and a half sessions of a newly qualified GP, one full-time equivalent nurse, and almost two full-time healthcare assistants. Added to that, a GP who has served Huntingdon for 30 years told me that the increased costs might see many practitioners hand back their contracts. Who will suffer from that? The staff of Moat House surgery or Grove medical practice who could be out of jobs, and the patients of Priory Fields or Brampton surgeries who might lose their GPs.

Dr Duncan Outram and Dr Barbara Uszycka have a combined 62 years of service in the NHS, 50 of which have been serving Huntingdon. They told me that the estimated black hole of £37,000 is causing great concern not only about their future plans, but because it risks more young professionals leaving the NHS. GPs serve our communities in the most amazing way and they are a key part of medical care for so many of us. The impact that the measure will have on NHS provision is deeply damaging and must be reviewed. We must protect the NHS to ensure that our constituents get the care they need, but this policy does the opposite.

Added to the list of those concerned are hospices, which are already so overstretched. Despite being a key part of end of life care, they are terrified about the impact of this measure on the amazing care that they offer. Furthermore, we have hardly heard what it would mean for our armed forces. Although we constantly hear from the Government that they are prioritising national security, we do not know what the potential impact of this provision would be on the MOD’s budget. All that shows that the Government are rushing into implementing something, without any detail about what the impact will be in so many areas.

In conclusion, I urge the Government to rethink and have the moral courage to take ownership of their mistake. If they go ahead with this policy, we will see people lose their jobs, businesses be unable to expand, care provision stretched even further, and working people suffering. The Government should go back to their manifesto and say no to back-door stealth taxes on working people.

--- Later in debate ---
Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is real pleasure to rise in support of the Bill and to follow excellent speeches from Labour Members setting out eloquently why the Bill is necessary. As the House has dissected at length in recent weeks in the debates following the Budget and last week’s debate on the Finance Bill, which I was happy to take part in, the public finances that the Government have inherited are clearly in an incredibly parlous state—that is probably the politest description that anyone has used today. I want to outline briefly why the Bill is necessary and how it will protect and promote small businesses across our country.

The Bill forms part of a long-term plan to fix the foundations of our public expenditure and provide much-needed support to public services, which we must have if all our constituents are to receive the support they need. The measures in the Bill on national insurance cannot be seen in isolation; they are part of a range of actions announced at the Budget, including abolishing non-dom tax loopholes, extending the levy on oil and gas companies, and reforming stamp duty land tax.

The Bill represents not the easy choice so often taken by the Conservatives, who self-evidently failed to fix the roof while the sun was shining, while still putting up taxes to their highest levels for 70 years. It represents the tough choices that are necessary to get us back on an even footing. The measures contained in the Bill are in large part how the new Government will begin to address the need to cut NHS waiting times, which we all know were at record highs before the devastation caused by the covid-19 pandemic, as well as the crises in our courts, local government, social care and our schools among other areas.

I want to focus in particular on how small businesses are protected in this legislation as well as more broadly on the measures announced at the Budget. Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy across our country, and particularly so in my constituency. One of the great pleasures of the last few months has been to visit and meet the people who run small businesses across Dartford, in Swanscombe, Greenhithe, Longfield and other places.

I want to quote the Federation of Small Businesses, since it has been mentioned in the debate. In response to the Budget, and recognising that it was a tough Budget, it stated:

“Increasing the employment allowance for small businesses by a record amount is a very welcome move and we’re pleased the Chancellor has heard us loud and clear.”

Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty
- Hansard - -

You state—

Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty
- Hansard - -

Sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Member stated that he has spoken to constituents and many small businesses across his constituency, but he quoted the Federation of Small Businesses. Could we hear from businesses that he has spoken to as to how this measure benefits them?

Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The businesses in my constituency feel that the most important thing is to have a good trading environment, and I am happy to report that they feel that if we have support for public services and economic growth, the trading environment will be right for them.

The FSB also said:

“Against a challenging backdrop, today’s Budget shows a clear direction in business policy now for the whole of this Parliament to target support at small businesses, rather than big corporates—prioritising everyday entrepreneurs working in local communities in all parts of the country.”

That is thanks to the choice that the Labour Government have made to protect small businesses by increasing the employment allowance, as has been said, and expanding it to all eligible employers.

It must also be seen alongside the Government’s plans to rebalance business rates and new measures announced in September, which I very much welcome, to support small businesses and the self-employed by tackling the scourge of late payments, which, according to the Smart Data Foundry, cost small and medium-sized enterprises £22,000 a year on average and, according to research by the Federation of Small Businesses, lead 50,000 businesses to close each year. Taken on balance, the measures to assist small businesses and the measures to invest in public services make this a Budget that is positive for our country and will help to rebuild our economy.

Independent Schools: VAT and Business Rates Exemptions

Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts
Tuesday 8th October 2024

(2 months, 1 week ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dame Caroline, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this important debate.

My constituency of Huntingdon has three independent schools and the issue we are debating today will significantly affect Kimbolton school in the west of the constituency. The absence of any secondary school places at schools within a commutable distance of Kimbolton has caused concern for many of the parents who have contacted me. Cambridgeshire, and specifically Huntingdonshire, has grown significantly in recent years; with large areas of development already approved, as well as changes to planning regulations and the Government’s commitment to greater Cambridge, we will see tens of thousands of homes built in the county during this Parliament alone.

As secondary schools in Huntingdonshire already have waiting lists for every year group, and local parents are troubled by the governance and educational environment at the three schools within the Astrea multi-academy trust, an exodus from the independent sector might exacerbate existing issues and create unnecessary pressures. Thus far, the Government have done nothing to address or assuage these pressures and concerns.

The views of the students impacted are among the voices that we rarely hear. Harriet Dolby, the former head girl at Kimbolton school, who left the school this past summer, told me of her concerns about how the school’s culture could be irrevocably altered. She said:

“Kimbolton School has made such a significant impact on my life, giving me opportunities I would not have been able to get anywhere else, growing my confidence and helping me to gain positions of leadership, which have set me up with skills for the future. However, I am concerned that Kimbolton will not be able to make that positive impact on as many people’s lives in the future. 20% VAT on school fees will be too much of a stretch for too many parents and will likely damage the family feel made possible by having pupils from a wide range of family backgrounds. I am worried that the Kimbolton School that my siblings will attend won’t be the same school that I attended because of this VAT.”

I have little confidence that the Government will deviate from their present course, but mitigation of the concerns is much needed. The Government are wedded to their aspiration tax. It will level the playing field but, sadly, that level is likely to be lower and not higher.

Public Spending: Inheritance

Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts
Monday 29th July 2024

(4 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my hon. Friend for that question. It is to the previous Government’s huge shame that they spent billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on VIP-lane contracts, and on PPE that was never used; in some cases, it has literally gone up in smoke and been burned. We are appointing a covid corruption commissioner because that money belongs not in the pockets of Tory donors, but in our public services, and we will do everything within our power to get their money back.

Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Last week, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care said:

“Hospitals with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete are at the top of my list of priorities.”—[Official Report, 23 July 2024; Vol. 752, c. 517.]

If the new hospitals programme is delayed via review, so will be the rebuilding of the five RAAC hospitals that are not among the 40 referenced. Without avoiding the question with a soundbite, what reassurances can the Chancellor give that we will break ground on any of the new RAAC replacement hospitals, and specifically Hinchingbrooke hospital in my constituency of Huntington during this Parliament?

Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman should blame the previous Government for not funding the commitments that they made. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care will meet all the people affected, including those affected by hospitals with RAAC problems, as soon as possible. As a Leeds MP, I recognise the importance of new hospitals and ensuring that our hospital estate is fit for purpose, but we cannot spend money that we do not have.

Economy, Welfare and Public Services

Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts
Monday 22nd July 2024

(4 months, 3 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Mr Deputy Speaker, I am grateful to you for calling me to make my maiden speech during this King’s Speech debate on the economy, welfare and public services. I congratulate the hon. Member for Halifax (Kate Dearden) on her maiden speech. As a former officer in the Duke of Wellington’s Regiment, her constituency has deep links with my former regiment, and indeed its antecedent regiments, the 33rd and 76th of Foot.

It is fantastic to hear new Members on both sides of the House speak so passionately and eloquently about their constituencies. I speak as the first new Member of Parliament for Huntingdon since 2001, but I am only the third Member in my lifetime, and the fourth Member since the second world war. It is therefore an enormous privilege to have been elected to represent the constituency, and I am honoured to have been voted for by my constituents to follow such a long-serving Member of Parliament. My predecessor Jonathan Djanogly served the House and his constituents for some 23 years. In Parliament he served on the Trade and Industry Committee, as Solicitor General and as a shadow Business Minister. In government, he was the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice.

My predecessor’s proudest achievements came from the work that he delivered locally. His work on tackling flooding from the River Great Ouse saw significant flood alleviation projects delivered in St Ives and the Hemingfords, and further upstream in Godmanchester. That work has saved thousands from the crippling impact of flood damage on homes and businesses. I intend to build on that, delivering further flooding solutions across the constituency for villages such as Alconbury, Abbots Ripton, Wistow, Kimbolton, Broughton and Earith.

My predecessor is also rightly proud of his work in facilitating the delivery of both the A14 and the A428—road infrastructure projects that have transformed travel across Cambridgeshire, and stand to greatly enhance the region in its position at the tip of the UK innovation corridor. The development has set the conditions for Huntingdon’s future growth, offering the opportunity for better jobs and taking advantage of the Cambridge cluster and expansion across the region, meaning that Huntingdon can be a business hub in its own right, not just a dormitory town for London and Cambridge.

Despite the growth that Huntingdon has seen over the past 60 years, first via the post-war London overspill and now via expansive development, the constituency is still characterised by its thriving towns and vibrant villages. From the market towns of Huntingdon and St Ives to our rural villages, from Sawtry to Somersham, Houghton to Hamerton, Covington to Colne and Pidley to Perry—and three dozen others that will not stretch to my tortured alliteration—each has their own character and identity. Huntingdonshire is a region with a rich history, and one that it will be a privilege to steward.

That history extends to some of my other predecessors. Many Members will be aware that Huntingdon is the seat of a former Prime Minister, Sir John Major, who is still held in the highest regard across the constituency. It was an honour to receive his endorsement during the recent election campaign. Famously, it is also the former seat of the Lord Protector, Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell was the Member of Parliament for Huntingdon in 1628 for just over a year until Charles I dissolved Parliament. Records show that he made just one speech in that time—so far, so equal.

It is clear that Huntingdon expects a certain level of stature from its Members of Parliament. Notable as Sir John Major and Oliver Cromwell surely are, arguably they are not Huntingdon’s most famous product. It is not even the celebrated diarist Samuel Pepys, who attended Huntingdon Grammar School. In fact, that accolade should be awarded to a lunch-time staple that everyone is familiar with; one that everyone has a favourite version of; and one that some Members may well have had for lunch this very day.

John Montagu, three times First Lord of the Admiralty, Postmaster General and Secretary of State, is not notable for his political career or his colourful social life. John Montagu, whose family home was Hinchingbrooke House in Huntingdon, is best known today—somewhat arcanely—by his title and the moniker bestowed upon his favourite snack to consume during long sessions at the card table. Such was the popularity of said snack that other card players also wished to order it. They would cry, “I’ll have the same as Sandwich.” It obvious where this is going. John Montagu, the 4th Earl of Sandwich, was not prepared to break from the card table to eat, so would ask his servants to bring him slices of salted beef between two pieces of toasted bread. Yes, among its formidable political alumni, Huntingdon can also lay claim to a genuine global culinary revolution, described by The Wall Street Journal no less as Britain’s “biggest contribution to gastronomy”. Huntingdon is the birthplace of the modern sandwich—every day is a school day.

I digress. Huntingdon’s rich history is also characterised by an inextricable link to service via its long relationship with military aviation, initially through the Royal Flying Corps and subsequently during the second world war through RAF Bomber Command’s Pathfinder force and the United States army air force’s 303rd bombardment group. On 4 July 1942, the US eighth air force flew the first American mission over Nazi-occupied Europe from RAF Molesworth.

Latterly, during the cold war, RAF Alconbury saw the US air force provide covert high-altitude reconnaissance along the East German border in a new variant of its famed U-2 spy plane, in addition to providing battlefield damage assessment in the event of a nuclear strike. Most of that base is now Huntingdon’s newest housing estate, Alconbury Weald—surely the only housing development in the country with fully functional nuclear decontamination and washdown facilities. RAF Warboys, RAF Upwood and RAF Brampton have all since disappeared, but the constituency still retains those links. RAF Alconbury and RAF Molesworth are still operated by the United States air force, and RAF Wyton is on the cutting edge of our defence intelligence capability. Those links carry through into the constituency itself and it is striking just how many veterans have made their home within its boundaries. One in nine households within Huntingdon are home to a veteran, a staggering number when compared with other constituencies and a community that, as a British Army veteran myself, I am proud to represent as their Member of Parliament—even if to many of those RAF veterans I am just a Pongo.

I know well how important it is to support our veterans’ community and to commit to improving veterans’ welfare. Having undergone the process myself, the transition from service to civilian life has its challenges, and there are many stories of both success and failure. I served on a veterans advisory and pensions committee and know well how important it is to ensure that veterans are able to access the services they need. Veterans’ identity cards have helped to open those pathways for many who would otherwise struggle to evidence their service, but I hope the Government will look closely at how support itself is provided. Restructuring Veterans UK and creating a more comprehensive holistic offering, easing access via an overhauled veterans gateway, could streamline access to the welfare services that our veterans need.

While the cohort of veterans in this House is smaller than in the previous Parliament, it is now younger and sports Members on both sides who have more recent operational experience and, crucially, more recent experience of the often difficult post-military transition to a civilian life. Parliament is well-placed to champion veterans’ welfare and, given the debt our democracy owes to those who have served so proudly, I hope we can collectively ensure that the finest armed forces in the world are treated here as the finest veterans in the world. I know Huntingdon’s veterans will expect me to challenge the Government to meet that standard.

I am hugely proud of having been given this opportunity to serve Huntingdon, to be its champion both in Parliament and in the constituency. I look forward to meeting the challenges ahead.