Labour peer Baroness Mallalieu warns her party cannot win majority with the support of rural voters (Image: Roger Harris / Jonathan Buckmaster)
Labour has “knocked out” its chances of a second term in power and sent voters into the arms of Reform UK by launching a tax raid on farming families. This tough message comes from a trailblazing barrister and Labour peer who is dismayed at the distress her party has caused in the “unloved” countryside. Baroness Ann Mallalieu – who has lived in the national spotlight since she became the first female president of the Cambridge Union in 1967 – has no intention of hiding harsh truths from Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves.
Noting that the Chancellor was recently seen in tears in the Commons chamber, she says: “I would have to say, she has caused a great many people to be in tears. A great many.”
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Now 79, the baroness says she knows of two people who are so worried about the coming changes in inheritance tax for farms they are “genuinely threatening suicide” before the new rules take effect.
She says she is “absolutely certain” the decision to levy a 20% tax on inherited agricultural assets above £1million is stopping people from investing in their farms.
“If the Chancellor wanted productivity she couldn’t have thought of a worst way to produce it,” she says.
Ann Mallalieu, the first female president of the Cambridge Union (Image: Getty Images)
As a defence barrister, she was among the country’s high profile QCs. And in her defence of rural communities she has served for more than a quarter of a century as president of the Countryside Alliance.
Her family used to “swap pigs” with Labour legend and NHS pioneer Aneurin Bevan, but she laments the lack of understanding about the countryside among MPs today.
“Unfortunately,” she says, “at the moment we have quite a lot of politicians who think they know about the countryside because they have a weekend cottage they go to from time to time but [they] have absolutely no idea how their neighbours live.”
There are “very, very few people”, she says, “who have any direct contact with farming now”.
The consequences of the tax raid for Labour at the next election, she warns, threaten to be terrible.
“I have to say I think what they have done so far is to knock out the possibility of another term in office. It is not possible for a Labour Government to have an overall majority unless they have rural seats.”
And she is in no doubt who will reap the electoral benefits.
“I’m afraid what they have also done is to drive people to Reform,” she says.
Labour MPs in rural constituencies are “very” worried, she claims, and she now lives in hope of a u-turn.
Farming can be a “very lonely job” at the best of times, but she warns of a “profound depression” in the countryside with people suffering “sleepless nights” because of the Government’s policies.
Her love affair with farming began when her parents moved the family to “a very rural village in darkest Buckinghamshire where as well as Nye Bevan’s pigs they had “a house cow and some calves”.
A farmer let the local children clamber onto the tractor and help with his dairy cows and she was “mad to ride” ponies from the age of four.
“That started it,” she says. “I always wanted to farm.”
When her legal career took off she rented a cottage and kept “a lot of poultry”, and when her husband and her bought “somewhere with a little bit of land” she invested in a flock of sheep.
“I used to be lambing sheep during the night and then go off to the Old Bailey,” she says.
She worked alongside Sir John Mortimer of Rumpole of the Bailey fame and she looks back at this time as a “golden patch”.
“His speeches to the jury would have them holding their sides with laughter,” she remembers.
The pair often defended pornography cases. Sir John “hated” having to look at the films and books.
He would often dispatch the future baroness to examine the exhibits, saying: “You go and look at them because the jury will think if you’ve seen them they can’t be that bad.”
These were days when a female barrister was considered “unusual”.
“There were judges then who made no secret of the fact they didn’t think women should be at the bar at all,” she recalls. “But after a while they became some of my best friends.”
The attention was not unwelcome for someone at the start of her career.
“What was important was to be remembered,” she explains.
Baroness Ann Mallalieu addressing a protest outside Parliament after MPs voted for the hunting ban (Image: -)
She seemed destined to make her mark in public life.
Her grandfather, uncle and father were MPs and she shattered a glass ceiling when as a student at Newnham College she became union president.
“There were 16 men to every woman in Cambridge,” she remembers. “I had the most wonderful time.”
Her presidency led to a 1968 invitation to appear on Desert Island Discs. She picked Twist and Shout by The Beatles as her favourite book and decided to take to her island hideaway the collected works of Jane Austen and a four-poster bed.
Today, she lives on a smallholding on the edge of Exmoor National Park – and she revels in life in the hunting community.
“If you really want to take out someone you fancy,” she says, “you take a pretty girl out on a quad bike for a day’s hunting. That’s what you do.”
Hunts bring together people from all backgrounds, she insists, hitting away the stereotype “it’s all toffs”.
London, she says, is a “different world” where people live according to another set of values and do not have the same relationship with nature as their counterparts in the country.
“Here,” she says, “your life is governed by the seasons and the weather”.
She has had adventures in both town and country, and as a champion of farmers in Parliament she continues to live in both worlds. A sense of both gratitude and mission runs through her conversation.
“I have had a very lucky life,” she says.
For confidential support, the Samaritans can be contacted for free around the clock 365 days a year on 116 123.
Rachel Reeves Has Lost Labour the Election and Sent Farmers to Reform UK
Rachel Reeves has found herself at the centre of one of Labour’s most difficult political arguments: whether the government’s economic policies have damaged its relationship with Britain’s farming communities and helped create an opening for Reform UK.
The claim that Reeves has “lost Labour the election” is a political judgement rather than an established fact. No one can know in advance how voters will behave at a future general election. Yet the controversy surrounding Labour’s treatment of farmers has become an important part of the wider debate about the party’s electoral position, particularly in rural and semi-rural constituencies.
At the centre of the dispute is the government’s reform of agricultural and business property relief from inheritance tax. The changes, announced under the Labour government in 2024 and subsequently amended, took effect in April 2026. Under the final arrangements, 100% relief is available on the first £2.5 million of combined qualifying agricultural and business property, with 50% relief above that level. The allowance can also be transferred between spouses or civil partners.
For ministers, the policy is part of an attempt to raise revenue and address the public finances. For many farmers, however, inheritance tax has become a symbol of a much wider concern about the future of family farms.
A political row that refuses to disappear
The government’s original announcement triggered an angry response across parts of the farming sector. Farmers argued that the value of agricultural land does not necessarily reflect the income generated by a farm and that families could face difficult decisions when transferring farms between generations.
The government has repeatedly argued that the reforms are targeted and that most estates claiming agricultural property relief will not pay additional inheritance tax. According to the Treasury, up to 185 estates claiming agricultural property relief, including estates also claiming business property relief, were expected to pay more inheritance tax in 2026-27 under the revised arrangements.
The House of Commons Library has also noted that HM Revenue and Customs estimated around 1,100 estates in total would pay more tax following the changes, with 185 involving an agricultural property relief claim.
These figures are important because they demonstrate the difference between political rhetoric and the policy’s measured impact.
For farmers affected by the tax, however, the issue is not simply the number of estates. It concerns the principle of whether a family should be able to pass a working farm to the next generation without being forced to restructure or sell assets.
Why Reform UK sees an opportunity
Reform UK has been particularly active in presenting itself as an alternative for voters who feel disconnected from the traditional parties.
The party has sought to build support among rural communities as well as former Labour voters in towns that once formed part of the so-called Red Wall.
Nigel Farage has repeatedly argued that Labour has lost contact with traditional working-class voters. In a May 2026 article, he claimed that Reform’s local-election gains demonstrated a major movement of former Labour supporters towards his party. Those comments were Farage’s political interpretation of the election results rather than an independent assessment of voters’ long-term intentions.
Farming provides another potential route for Reform.
When a group feels ignored or threatened by government policy, opposition parties have an opportunity to present themselves as the political alternative. Reform has attempted to do exactly that, portraying Labour’s agricultural policies as evidence that the government does not understand rural Britain.
Whether that message will translate into lasting electoral support remains an open question.
Farmer anger predates the latest political battle
The political situation is also more complicated than a single tax policy.
Farmers have faced a combination of pressures including high operating costs, changing agricultural subsidies, labour costs, weather conditions, environmental requirements and uncertainty about future government policy.
Farmers Weekly reported in early 2025 that its sentiment survey recorded a sharp deterioration in farmer confidence following the Autumn Budget. The proportion of respondents describing their prospects as pessimistic or very pessimistic increased from 44% before the Budget to 61% afterwards. The survey also found that government policy became a much more prominent concern.
This suggests that the political damage cannot simply be reduced to inheritance tax.
Farmers’ attitudes are influenced by the overall policy environment, not just one announcement.
Could farmers really move to Reform?
There is evidence that Reform has attracted some agricultural support.
Farmers Weekly reported that, among respondents to its survey, 15% said they voted Reform UK in the 2024 general election, while 57% said they voted Conservative. These figures demonstrate that Reform already had a presence among farmers, although they do not establish that all subsequent changes in voting intention were caused by Labour’s tax policy.
Political parties therefore face a broader challenge.
The Conservatives have traditionally competed strongly for rural votes, while Labour has historically struggled in many agricultural areas. Reform’s emergence adds another competitor.
For Labour, the danger is not necessarily that every farmer becomes a Reform voter. The more immediate concern is that dissatisfaction could weaken Labour’s position in constituencies where small changes in turnout or tactical voting could matter.
The question of trust
Perhaps the most important issue is trust.
Farmers want to know whether government understands how farms operate as businesses and family enterprises. Ministers, meanwhile, must balance agricultural interests against the wider tax system and the need to raise revenue.
Once trust breaks down, even policies intended to protect smaller farms can be viewed with suspicion.
The government has attempted to emphasise the protections built into the revised inheritance-tax arrangements. The £2.5 million allowance, combined with other inheritance-tax allowances and spousal exemptions, means that some farms can pass substantial assets without additional inheritance tax.
Nevertheless, the continued political controversy shows that the technical details have not eliminated the underlying dispute.
Labour’s rural challenge
The wider political question is whether Labour can rebuild relationships with farming communities.
Recent developments suggest that the party recognises the problem. In September 2026, reporting on Andy Burnham’s outreach to farmers described efforts to rebuild dialogue between Labour and rural voters. Farmers interviewed in that reporting said relations under the previous Labour administration had been particularly difficult, while government figures were considering possible changes or additional support.
That is significant.
It indicates that the issue has moved beyond a single Treasury decision and become part of a broader debate about Labour’s relationship with rural Britain.
For Labour strategists, winning back trust may require more than defending the details of inheritance-tax reform. It could involve changes to agricultural funding, procurement, environmental policy and communication with rural MPs and farming organisations.
Has Reeves personally lost Labour the election?
That conclusion cannot be established.
Elections are decided by millions of voters and by a wide range of issues. Economic conditions, public services, immigration, taxation, leadership, local campaigning and international events can all influence voting behaviour.
It would therefore be misleading to claim that one chancellor or one policy has already determined the result of a future general election.
What can be said is that Reeves’s economic decisions have become politically significant within Labour’s relationship with farmers.
The inheritance-tax reforms have generated sustained opposition from parts of the agricultural community, while Reform UK has attempted to convert that dissatisfaction into political support.
That creates a genuine electoral challenge for Labour.
A battle that could shape rural politics
The argument over farmers and inheritance tax is ultimately part of a much larger struggle for the political identity of rural Britain.
Labour wants to demonstrate that it can represent farming communities while pursuing its fiscal objectives. Reform UK wants to position itself as the party willing to challenge what it describes as an out-of-touch political establishment. The Conservatives, meanwhile, continue to have an established relationship with many rural voters.
The result is an increasingly competitive political environment.
For farmers, the debate is about much more than party politics. It concerns whether family farms can survive across generations, how agricultural land should be taxed, how food production should be supported and how rural communities should be represented in Westminster.
For Labour, the lesson is equally significant: policies affecting a relatively specific group can have political consequences far beyond the number of people directly affected.
Rachel Reeves may remain at the centre of the controversy, but the outcome will ultimately depend on a much wider question — whether Labour can persuade rural voters that its economic and agricultural policies are compatible with the future of family farming.
For Reform UK, the opportunity is clear: turn dissatisfaction into lasting political support.
Whether that happens will not be determined by headlines alone. It will be decided by farmers themselves, through their political choices and their assessment of what each party offers them.
The political battle over Britain’s farms is therefore far from over.