Should we have some nationalised farms

[Frowningprovidence]

Thie inheritance tax debate has thrown up fears that big corporations are going to buy up all the small farms and generational knowledge will be lost. I assume people fear this increases prices?

With climate change food security is meant to be a big issue

So should we be having a national trust equivalent for farms. A lot of the big houses went to the national trust as owners couldn't pay inheritance tax or run them anymore

I'm not suggesting forcing purchases of all farms! Just when they come up for sale, the state buying them or a trust.

Or can we regulate big corporations that buy farms to secure our food supply/prices.

God no. I already avoid guidelines on food and I’m all the better for it. No way I want state interference on farms

I was just reflecting that if there an extreme far right thread put up on say cutting support to poor people or on restricting immigration then it would almost certainly firstly get heavily criticised and then pulled by MN.

Yet an extreme far left thread such as this advocating extreme fare left policies gets to stay up.

I'm not calling for this thread to be pulled but just pointing out the inconsistencies.

As the person who started the thread, I want to reassure that I am not promoting, or advocating for an extreme far left.

It was a genuine question in response to inheritance tax on farms being on the news

I was curious if a national trust for farms would work. I've never really though of the national trust as far left before today.

people have, rightly, reminded me of communism and the pitfalls of this approach, and highlighted that the national trust already owns a lot of farms.

I think a lot of people come to mumsnet with a pre formed stance on issues and like to promote a side or argue.

I literally had no knowledge of farming at all and was curious. I'm now less ignorant. So I'm pleased about the responses

@Frowningprovidence

"As the person who started the thread, I want to reassure that I am not promoting, or advocating for an extreme far left.

It was a genuine question in response to inheritance tax on farms being on the news"

Ironically the introduction of IHT on family owned farms could also be viewed as a far right position as well. In that farmers unable to pay the IHT would have to sell up and the main buyers would be investment funds.

So you then have the situation of investment funds owning more and more farmland and where their motive is purely maximising returns for their investors rather than long term stewardship of the land.

The pollution of the Wye Valley river with phosphates being an example of this.

Do you mean like a charity that acquires the land and then leases it back to those farmers so they can continue farming? And still pay the inheritance tax?

No.

We should support our existing family farms, not fuck them over.

I don't know, is that how the national trust works?

I think if you leave something to charity it's not taxed, then it's a reduced rate of tax on the rest, if more than 10% of the estate goes to charity.

But as I say, it is curiosity as to if it would help, not my personal manifesto for the future that prompted the question.

The responses are interesting.

I don't like the idea of the government buying up farms like this, even if they are for sale.

Government consists of a merry-go-round of clowns that we elect - the least bad of a terrible bunch, every time. These people are interested in votes. They have fucked up education, NHS, everything really. Why would we want them to fuck more up for us?

Anyone who has any critical thinking skills at all would not want to be high up in government. It's a dirty business. I'd leave the farming to farmers.

Genuine question, but what would the purpose of nationalized farms be? Would it be about the environment, about preserving a traditional landscape, or about food security? All those things have very different aims and goals.