Labour’s lack of preparation and tax-heavy approach risk undermining small businesses and rural economies, warns Simon Hoare MP

After the General Election, I said that, in the interests of North Dorset and the wider country, I wished the incoming government well. I meant it. I am working collaboratively with ministers on certain issues and working ‘across the aisle’ on others. I am, however, becoming increasingly worried that the Government, despite its mammoth majority, appears to be so hesitant on some issues and plain ill-informed on others. My worries only grew when speaking to a Labour veteran, who told me how anxious many were on the government benches at just how underprepared they were for government. Labour’s victory was not a surprise one. We have to ask what they have been doing, for all those long years in opposition?
Preparing detailed, radical, dial-turning policy has not been done. Opinion Polls seem to suggest a growing disquiet with the Government. Local government by-elections – where Labour is losing ground – is turning theoretical polls into actual votes. Labour’s honeymoon lasted about as long as a Las Vegas shotgun marriage.

Dorset’s life blood
I write this on the cusp of the Budget, and it is worrying that the PM cannot define what a working person is – or indeed how the tax system should operate for them.
My anxiety is that Labour feel they can hike as many taxes as possible on business, and that those businesses will simply hang around and pay them: threats to end the 25 per cent tax free on personal pensions has already seen massive numbers of pensions being drawn down early.
Labour clearly still does not get small business.
Micro and small businesses are the life blood of the North Dorset economy and the Chancellor has them firmly in her sights. She appears to be unaware of how job-destroying her policies will be to this vital sector. She may have buttered up the CBI, but she has ignored the Federation of Small Business. Labour’s rural ignorance will become apparent if the Government changes the decades-standing approach to farm taxes. Too many small family farms will disappear under the weight of tax bills. This will change, for ever, and not for the better, the environment of rural North Dorset. Business confidence is falling just when it needs a shot in the arm.
People did not like paying increased tax under the last government but they understood it was because of the public spending undertaken during Covid. No one is buying this £22bn black hole fantasy that Labour has dreamt up. Still less are they buying that the economy was broken. Falling interest rates? Falling inflation? Rising business confidence and investment? No house repossessions or at scale business failures … If that is broken then it is a strange definition of the word.

Rub their noses in it
We all want a reliable public sector but Labour’s lack of understanding that you can only fund it sustainably through the endeavours of the private sector, through entrepreneurs, investors and risk takers who create the profits and jobs that generate the tax that pays for public services. Exempting public sector bosses, while crippling private sector ones, merely rubs the private sector’s nose in it.
What my inbox is telling me, and those of most MPs irrespective of party, is that people are furious at having been lied to at the General Election by Labour: “We will be pure and whiter than white until the offers of Taylor Swift tickets, suits, glasses and God knows what come along …”
One thing the British people hate is hypocrisy.
They would know there would be rising taxes within three months of forming a government, so why lie about it during the election campaign? The self-styled Iron Chancellor is already looking somewhat rusty. I am not certain she will pass her MOT.

We have not yet had time to unpick the detail of the new government’s first budget.
As I write I do not know to what extent Labour is committed to fixing the problems left by the last administration, or if it is simply continuing on with business as usual.
Instead, I thought I would address one of the major pieces of legislation due to come before Parliament very soon: The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill – commonly referred to as the Assisted Dying Bill.
First, I think it is important to deal with the facts of what this legislation proposes: there is a lot of misinformation both in the press and online.
As of today, the full text of the bill has not been published. Once it has, there will be time set aside to debate the legislation in Parliament and propose amendments, before any vote takes place.
The merits – or otherwise – of what the bill actually says, and not the hyperbole that surrounds it, is what matters.
What the MP proposing the bill has made very clear is that the change of law will only apply to adults who have a terminal prognosis, and have less than 12 months to live. They must also be cognitively healthy and therefore able to make an informed decision themselves.
It will not apply, blanket-like, to people living with a disability, mental health condition or long term/chronic pain, the elderly or anyone else – ONLY those with a terminal diagnosis, who have less than 12 months left to live, and are cognitively competent.
Importantly, it will require the agreement of two doctors and a judge before the patient’s decision can be agreed to.
The safeguarding mechanisms that the bill puts in place will, without doubt, influence how MPs vote.
No one will support a change in the law that risks anyone being forced or coerced into make a decision against their will.
While I will keep an open mind until the full details of bill are published, if it does achieve the high level of safeguards I wish to see, then I am currently minded to support a change in the law.
That said, I strongly believe we should be focused on dramatically improving assisted living (or palliative care) so that people do not have to endure pain and suffering, and can properly enjoy their final days with those they love and who love them.
Edward Morello MP
West Dorset

I am all too aware that the news this week – and probably for the next few – is likely to be all about Labour’s first budget, but something else caught my eye.
BBC Dorset reported that Dorset Council failed to ensure a child received suitable full-time education and was told to pay £7,200 in compensation. The Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) found the council failed to top-up the child’s education when they were put on a part-time timetable after their school place broke down. The news item was a bit worthy, a bit difficult to understand … but something made me pause and think. The case highlights something wrong with the UK’s educational framework, and simultaneously shows how much central government has ruined local government.
The specific case shows the misalignment of accountability for educational outcomes sitting with local government, while the authority to influence education has increasingly been removed from local council control.
The more general problem is that, as much as central government attempts to control everything from the centre, it lacks both the local understanding and the organisational horsepower to do the job properly. Thus, by attempting to do so much, central government ends up achieving so little.
Dorset Council, like all local authorities, retains oversight and control of children’s education provision, even if it arranges for schools or other bodies to carry out the functions on its behalf. However, the shift towards central control through academisation and the increased role of private trusts in managing schools have diluted councils’ influence.
This misalignment means that while Dorset Council is held accountable for educational outcomes, it lacks the authority to implement and enforce changes within schools.
This misalignment is the same in so many areas of local government. Roles and responsibilities are complicated, and people are confused. The consequences for the family referred to in the BBC report were distress and inconvenience, but the erosion of local government capability carries on regardless. Conservative governments have led the way in relentlessly relegating local councils to emptying bins and trying to deliver social care without bankrupting the council.
This tide must change.
Liberal Democrats want central government to be braver – to accept that it needs local government’s help to deliver economic growth and better public services.
Labour promises further devolution, which is good news, but it needs to come with meaningful powers and long-promised funding reform. Contrary to central government’s belief, giving up some power will improve everyone’s ability to deliver their promises.
Gary Jackson, LibDems