Anything that annoys Jeremy Clarkson must be a good idea

Jeremy Clarkson at a farmers protest over the changes to inheritance tax rules

I totally understand the government’s argument about levying the tax on business assets that are handed down. After all, why do farms differ from other businesses ? Why should farmland differ from other land? Furthermore, the tax will be imposed at a lower rate.

However, as I too am self-employed I am very aware that a lot of small farmers live a hand-to-mouth existence. But they can’t be too impoverished if they’ve still got a million quid in assets.

I grew up around farming folk so I know it’s a tough job. Working out of doors in all weathers, quite often for ridiculously long hours, much of it in solitude. Also, these days the large supermarkets drive crippling low bargains so they can sell cheap milk and eggs. One boasts on a litre carton that “10p goes to the farmer”. “Hang on, this milk cost over a quid”, you think, “so where does the rest of the money go?”

However, let’s not forget that a lot of farmers are mega rich. Much of the farmland which has been handed down through the centuries tax-free is owned by peers of the realm. Indeed, The King is technically a farmer, as is The Prince Of Wales.

The Tory press have predictably been full of hyperbole, calling the tax a Marxist land grab. Comparing Rachel Reeves to Karl Marx is frankly laughable. I heard one Scottish Tory even liken it to the Highland Clearances. Really? I may not have paying full attention, but I haven’t seen any news reports about farms getting burnt down. And to the best of my knowledge there is no plan to herd people onto boats and ship them over to Canada.

So I was very much on the fence. Until I saw Jeremy Clarkson on telly, getting hot under the collar and weighing in with his sixpence-worth against the tax. Which immediately made me a firm supporter of the government. Anything that annoys the odious Clarkson must be a good idea.