As the autumn leaves swirled around our Surrey townships, Chancellor Rachel Reeves delivered her second Budget on 26 November – a document as grey and unyielding as a winter fog over the Basingstoke Canal.

Building on last year’s £40billion tax wrecking ball “one-off measure to stabilise the public finances”, Reeves was back for another £26bn to plug a further black hole, mostly of her own making.

Yes, who would have guessed it, but it turns out if you increase the cost of employing people, unemployment will go up, economic growth will stagnate, tax revenues will disappoint, and further borrowing will be required. How long will debt markets tolerate the “we are the party of growth” narrative, when most of the levers are pushed instead of pulled?

If you don’t believe in the Laffer curve [the concept that there is a relationship between tax rates and tax revenue], this is the path you take, propelling the nation toward a record tax burden of 38.3 per cent of GDP by the end of the decade.

Woking’s teachers, nurses, small business owners and retirees are about to be dragged into higher tax bands, punished for saving and investing for their future. The message from this budget is clear: do the “right thing” and you will be penalised, choose a benefits lifestyle and you will be rewarded.

And should you aspire one day to own a beautiful home, you could be hit by the “high value council tax surcharge” from 2028. This “mansion tax” raid on wealth, with no linkage to ability to pay, is a punitive idea first floated by Sir Vince Cable when he was Liberal Democrat leader.

Once dismissed as fringe leftism, it’s now being dusted off and implemented by Labour. It’s coming for Woking’s larger properties in Westfield, Hook Heath and St John’s.

If you’re not impacted, sigh with relief, you may even believe it’s fair - but one day, it might come for you; the state just crossed the Rubicon, declaring a stake in private property.

The impact on the market, and follow-on consequence, is as yet unknown, but price distortions seem inevitable.

The impact of the so-called green agenda on sky-high energy bills receives a nod, with transfer of certain green-related costs and taxes (to where is not fully clear), but fuel duty’s rise starting next year, compounded by the new EV pay 3p per mile tax from 2028, recognises the shift to EVs will cost the Chancellor dear in lost tax from fuel sales.

It’s time to pay the piper, now that we’ve been drawn in; domestic and business transport will feel the pinch.

In summary, the ideologies underpinning this budget are anathema to Reform UK. We believe in motivating and rewarding work, while reducing employment costs, by minimising tax and regulation to grow the economy.

While benefiting society financially, we also understand a lack of sense of purpose and fulfilment for many significantly underpins our mental health crisis.

And private ownership of property should remain a deeply protected right.

“An Englishman’s home is his castle” they say. Mess with that at your peril.

This week’s Budget confirms what many of us in Woking already suspected: a vote for the Liberal Democrats locally is a vote that ultimately puts Labour in power nationally — and that means one thing for our town’s hard-working families, commuters, homeowners and savers: higher taxes, year after year.

Behind the headline-grabbing talk of “fairness” and “investment”, the reality is far harsher. The 2025 Autumn Budget will raise taxes by £26billion by 2029-30 — on top of the £40bn of extra taxes introduced in Labour’s first Autumn Budget in 2024.

The impact of the Budget falls squarely on ordinary earners through frozen tax thresholds, hikes on savings, pension contributions, dividends, rental income and even ISAs.

During the leaders’ debate at the last general election, Rishi Sunak issued a stark warning: “Your pension, your house, your savings — you name it — Labour will tax it.”

For Woking voters, that warning was not rhetoric. This Budget makes it a reality. If you vote Liberal Democrat here, you don’t get a Liberal Democrat government. You get Labour. And Labour means higher taxes.

The Government will freeze income tax and national insurance thresholds until at least 2031. As wages rise with inflation or career progression, more Woking workers will be quietly dragged into higher tax bands.

This fiscal drag doesn’t make headlines, but it empties wallets — particularly for commuters already facing high travel costs, childcare and mortgages.

Labour didn’t stop there. From April 2029, pension contributions made through salary-sacrifice schemes will only receive national insurance relief on the first £2,000. Anything above that is taxed normally — directly penalising responsible savers, including many Woking residents planning for retirement.

Dividend income, rental income and savings interest will all see a 2 percentage point rise in tax. Landlords with small rental portfolios, young families saving for a first home, and older residents trying to secure their retirement will all feel the squeeze.

Even cash ISAs, long seen as a safe and simple saving tool, are being hit: under-65s will face a reduced ISA allowance from 2027.

Labour have managed the rare feat of taxing not just earnings, but saving itself.

Woking is a commuter town filled with hard-working people who get up early, travel long distances, save carefully, and aspire to home ownership and financial security. These are exactly the people Labour’s Budget hits hardest.

Our town deserves a government that rewards hard work, encourages saving and supports responsible homeowners. Instead, this Budget punishes them.

And the Liberal Democrats, who cannot form a government, and whose MPs always back Labour’s tax-and-spend agenda — are the gateway that lets Labour continue doing it.

Let voters in Woking judge for themselves. Do we want a government that cuts our take-home pay, penalises saving and increases the cost of commuting, pensions and property?

Or do we want a government that backs working families, commuters and prudent savers?

For Woking, the choice has never been clearer.