Another U turn

Iets see the labour forever posters come on here and explain how it is a great policy change after supporting the thing and defending it in the first place.
 
Iets see the labour forever posters come on here and explain how it is a great policy change after supporting the thing and defending it in the first place.

Thing is that it was just virtue signaling as it would not have delivered much money.
 
They must be well dizzy by now with all those U turns.

IMG_8646.gif
 
Thing is that family owned and run farms will have passed it down the generations to avoid IHT and large concerns like those owned by limited companies would have been able to avoid it
 
Last edited:
The thing is, even though they've U turned, they'll already have lost those people's votes come 2029, if they even had them in the first place. So it's been a bit of a lose lose for Labour.
 
1) When Agricultural Property Relief was introduced under Thatcher, it was 50%.

2) Estate Duties/CTT/IHT & exemptions, reliefs, thresholds have been introduced, abolished, and fiddled with for hundreds of years, and nobody, be they business owners, farmers, or individuals has ever been happy about them.

But above all - anybody who thought that the government was wrong to make the last lot of changes, and said they should drop the idea, and then crows and mocks when the government does just that is being hypocritical, and contributes to creating the environment where governments will resist ever changing their mind as hard as they can.

If the tenor of the reporting and commenting is "welcome change of heart" instead of "embarrassing U-turn" and "humiliating climb down" that will contribute to creating an environment where governments are more willing to change course.
 
Back
Top