Tory Chairman Grant Shapps publicly misleads about the bedroom tax – SPeye Joe

As his name tag ('Michael Green') shows, Grant Shapps is not a novice in the art of bending the facts.

As his name tag (‘Michael Green’) shows, Grant Shapps is not a novice in the art of bending the facts.

Grant Shapps, the Chairman of the Conservative Party and former Housing Minister, [has] lied about the bedroom tax policy live on air, writes Joe Halewood.

He stated that: “If you can go out and work 17 hours you are completely exempt from the policy.”

This is an untruth; it is a falsehood; it is a lie. There is no such exemption at all in the bedroom tax policy and Grant Shapps knows this only too well.

Here is the link to the LBC radio programme when Shapps made this howler of an obvious and known lie.

With IDS lying about it and other welfare reforms on a weekly basis and even the Prime Minister telling Parliament on no less than three occasions that the disabled are exempt in the bedroom tax have we become inured to these knowing lies?

For the full article – including some harsh criticism of the Labour Party that might be well-aimed – visit the SPeye Joe blog site.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

10 thoughts on “Tory Chairman Grant Shapps publicly misleads about the bedroom tax – SPeye Joe

  1. hstorm

    Shapps is a pathological liar. He is incapable of seeing it even as something shameful. He is possibly the most morally-bankrupt member of the Government, and that’s against some damned stiff competition.

    1. ,arjorie arnold

      i have never known in my 73 yrs a government who lied so blatantly. i think it is disgraceful and should be stopped. the trouble is some people actually believe them and that is what makes them so dangerous.

  2. aturtle05

    I wish there was some way to bring these liars to some form of judgement for their actions. If the Speaker of the House was not an elected MP, but a judge appointed by the House of Lords, perhaps more could be done. What’s the point of a Conservative overseeing the Conservatives? It’s like having a wolf watching over a sheep fold.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      I would not want a judge chairing Commons debates; far better to have an elected MP doing it. And remember the Speaker’s office includes deputies, all those who act as Speaker or Deputy Speaker can be from any party, and they are chosen by their fellow MPs.

  3. aussieeh

    Would it not be better for all concerned if the speaker had nothing to do with any political party. Instead of an elected MP doing it, how about someone from the public domain, say an ex CAB director, or a retired barrister. Someone experienced in reading legal documents and not bought by the political class. If a MP was pulled up immediately on falsehoods or blatant lies and punished for doing so, and justice was seen to be done would that not restore some of the trust in politics that has been eroded over the years through corruption. Honesty and Honour must be brought back into parliament for the good of this country and its people. Parliament must be held to account, even local councils must be overlooked by an independent type of ombudsman, they could even be paid a salary

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      It would lend itself to corruption, in my opinion.
      However, your idea that it should be possible to expose falsehoods is worthwhile and it would be welcome if Parliament would adapt to accommodate this.

      1. aussieeh

        It can’t be anymore corrupt than it is now Mike. I think it would be easier to control by the ordinary public, made to be more responsible as someone could be held to account

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        I don’t agree and would have serious reservations about any such move. That’s really all I have to say about it.

Comments are closed.