Bean counting and underestimating the impact of farmers never ends well

How best to communicate with farmers without getting a manure surprise. 

Last week’s Budget raised eyebrows – with some supportive, and some far less so. Farmers by all accounts fell into the latter category as Rachel Reeves announced that the Agricultural Property Relief inheritance tax exemption on farms worth more than £1 million would be removed. It hits a hardworking industry already struggling to make ends meet. 

It came as a surprise to pretty much everyone, with virtually no pre-briefing or expectation that the farmers, who have enjoyed inheritance tax breaks for decades, would be next in line for tax hikes.  

Could more have been done to communicate with farmers ahead of the Budget?  Did the Treasury underestimate the wrath of farmers, or did they fear a pre-Budget revolt? Or did they just get their numbers wrong? With the NFU hitting back today on Treasury numbers that 72% of farmers would be unaffected (instead saying that 66% of farms will be affected) this story has already run for the best part of the week, and looks set to roll and roll.  

But had the Treasury chosen to engage beforehand, they would have  had to navigate a communications environment where “a load of manure” is more than just a metaphor.  

There have already been threats that Downing Street officials may end up like their French counterparts who occasionally wake up to “organic deliveries” on their doorstep. Whilst the idea of muck spreaders redecorating Westminster can be seen as humorous, it’s certainly no prank. It’s a statement.  

Farmers are no-nonsense. Marketing buzzwords and complicated charts will not win them over. Clear, simple and direct communication is best, although then you are unable to obfuscate the facts. This is especially the case with a powerful union (the NFU) and a dedicated trade media that stands up for the industry. It would have been a struggle to maintain even neutral, let alone positive coverage on an issue such as this. A headline in the Telegraph last week described the announcement as Labour’s “closure of the mines” moment. And that’s a legacy of Margaret Thatcher that lives on to this day. 

Farmers are proud of their work and appreciate it when political animals and policy wonks  try to understand their world. But don’t try to out-farmer them. Some might suggest that in this instance the Treasury didn't appear to understand the challenges farmers face at all, or if they did, it’s a policy they were intent on pushing through anyway.  

The medium when engaging farmers is important too. Farmers are huge fans of podcasts and the radio. It’s not just Farming Today anymore, but with those long hours on the tractor or delivering, podcasts have become their loyal companions. From updates on grain markets to tips on animal care, they get a lot of their information through their earbuds.  

So, if you wanted to get a message to farmers, you might want to pitch to a podcast, instead of just a conventional media approach. Farmers today are more connected than ever. With smartphones, weather-tracking apps, and real-time market reports, they’re plugged into a digital world that helps them work more efficiently.  

Farmers are passionate defenders of their land, crops, animals, and way of life. They’ve got a “don’t mess with us” attitude, and I don’t blame them. Farming isn’t just a job; it’s a calling, one that demands everything from sunrise to sunset and more. And when one impacts their ability to pass their legacy onto their children, then no number of prepared Q&As will help – as is the case in this one.  

Taking a comms approach that just focuses on numbers was a risk for government here, especially given the fact that the numbers themselves are complicated to begin with. Official Treasury documents pointed to numbers suggesting just a small fraction of farms would be affected. This didn’t take into account the way farming businesses work, finance, cost and tax, each of which are horribly complex, with a traditional farming business and estate has many different components beyond just the land to pass on. There’s a huge amount of tenant farmers who depend on non-farming landowners to ply their trade and so the pass through effects are potentially huge even if not immediately quantifiable. Its messier than Downing Street could end up!  

British farmers do have some vocal champions in the celebrity sphere. Farming Champion of the Year 2021, Jeremy Clarkson,  tweeted  his disdain for Rachel Reeves’s Budget to his 8 million followers, highlighting the daily plight of farmers. Entrepreneur James Dyson has also criticised the policy shift on farming – speaking from his position as a major farm landowner himself – although arguably is exactly the sort of “farmer” this policy is intended to target. And Elon Musk brought global attention to the policy, responding to an X post saying, “We should leave the farmers alone.” 

Celebrities aside, the government will be acutely aware that, if it all goes wrong, they will need to be prepared to face the consequences. After all, farmers have trucks, trailers, and a whole lot of organic matter at their disposal. Communicate well, and help farmers, and you’ll have a powerful ally. Communicate poorly, and tax them higher, and you might just get “a special delivery.”