… But then I found the proof on the BBC News website.
Here’s the pre-photoshop image:
And this is how it looked after somebody had it doctored:
And this on the day when he was trying to convince us all that his strike-restricting plans were necessary with a pack of lies, too.
BBC News says Shapps has insisted that he didn’t have the imaged changed:
A source close to Mr Shapps said: “Grant wasn’t aware anyone had edited the picture.
“He removed it as soon as it was pointed out. Obviously he wouldn’t endorse anyone rewriting history by removing the former PM from a picture.
“He was proud to serve in Boris Johnson’s government.”
That’s not exactly proof that Shapps isn’t lying about it – being proud to serve in a government headed by someone widely understood to have been the biggest liar Parliament has seen in many decades.
And the big question has gone unanswered: if Shapps didn’t change the image or have it changed, then who did?
Until we know the answer to that question, he’ll always be under suspicion.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Satire? This image suggesting the Tories were lying about their Covid-19 strategy may be more accurate now than at the time it was made. Why is an inquiry into the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic being delayed? Is evidence being altered or destroyed before it becomes illegal to do so?
Families who lost loved ones in the Covid-19 crisis are preparing a court challenge against the Tory government, which they fear is delaying an inquiry into its handling of the pandemic.
Boris Johnson appointed Baroness Hallett to chair the inquiry in December 2021, and has said it would begin in spring this year. But spring is over and no terms of reference have been published nor setting-up-date specified.
Under the 2005 Inquiries Act, an inquiry “must not begin considering evidence before the setting up date” and once an inquiry is under way it is an offence under the Act to destroy or tamper with evidence.
So the longer the setting up date is delayed, the more evidence it is possible for … someone… to alter or destroy.
That’s the concern of the group Covid-19 bereaved families for justice, who are planning a judicial review into the failure.
Elkan Abrahamson, head of major inquiries at Broudie Jackson Canter, who is representing the group, said taking legal action is the “last thing” families want but they may be left with no choice. He said: “In the vast majority of inquiries a setting-up date is given within days or weeks of the chair being appointed, so this delay of over six months is both unprecedented and totally inexplicable.
“The consequences are extremely serious, as it only becomes a criminal offence to destroy or tamper with evidence after the inquiry’s start date. By failing to give one, the Prime Minister is opening the door to key evidence being destroyed.”
Not only that, but a delay like this means it will take longer, and be more difficult, to learn lessons from the pandemic and the government’s failures in handling it.
Perhaps most to the point, though, is this: Boris Johnson has claimed that he needs to stay on as prime minister to “get on” with tackling the issues that matter most to people – but instead he is delaying a vital inquiry.
He can’t say it’s because he had to deal with the challenges to his own leadership because he has already told us he considers them to have been nothing more than a time-wasting sideshow; he should have been handling the issues that matter – not diverting time and energy to his own self-preservation.
All the government has been able to say is that the inquiry’s terms of reference will be published shortly. Nothing has been said about the setting-up date.
So, what’s really going on here? And do we need a judicial review to establish what’s really going on at the heart of our government?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Not only did a Tory minister make false claims to Parliament about racism in the Labour Party, but the official record of the debate – Hansard – was doctored to make it seem that she did not.
Worse still, Victoria Atkins had already added to her party’s tally of racism by telling a fellow MP who happens not to be white to know her place and not be uppity with her betters (although she didn’t use those exact words).
Her shocking abuse of her position has sparked a demand for the Commons Speaker, Lindsay Hoyle, to take action – not just to correct the record but to save the reputation of the House of Commons.
Here’s just one complaint to Hoyle, from Twitter, with follow-up messages to show the issue:
Hi @LindsayHoyle_MP Victoria Atkins MP lied to the House yesterday during her little two-minute-hate against Corbyn. Luciana Berger had no special protection. It's a lie. When do you start taking control of the House? When is Atkins required to correct her statement?
Hansard has inserted three words into her speech that she did not say. The effect is to cover up a mistake (or deliberate falsehood) that she stated, which was to quote the remit of the EHRC as if she were quoting its conclusions. pic.twitter.com/jCWmWTdsQE
— leftworks #WeAreCorbyn #IStandWithJeremyCorbyn (@leftworks1) July 15, 2021
You can see that Leftworks is absolutely correct by watching this video (ironically posted by a fan of Atkins).
Victoria Atkins not taking any lectures from Jeremy Corbyn about online hate. pic.twitter.com/LRy2WcWeXn
She did indeed quote the EHRC’s remit as though it were that organisation’s conclusion – it was not – and Hansard did indeed insert three words to falsify the record.
The effect of Atkins’s words at the time they were said, and in that place, would have been to negate Jeremy Corbyn’s argument – she was effectively saying that he was a racist and therefore had no right to accuse others.
Furthermore, of course, her claim about Luciana Berger needing police protection was false.
Right-thinking people are up in arms about this – and rightly so:
One of the many tragic consequences of the cynical Blairite smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn is the sight of racist Tory scumbags cheering on Victoria Atkins as she berates and patronises a 72-year-old anti-racism campaigner who was opposing fascists before she was born.
— Frank Owen's Legendary Paintbrush 🟨🟥🥀🇵🇸 (@WarmongerHodges) July 14, 2021
Ms Atkins, who was standing in for her racist boss, Home Secretary Priti Patel, was in the Commons to answer an urgent question on what the government would do to stop racist abuse on the social media.
Patel had been – rightly – accused of “stoking” such abuse by Tyrone Mings of the England football team, whose teammates Marcus Rashford, Bukayo Saka and Jadon Sancho were victims of it.
When she was tackled on the racism of her own prime minister by rising Labour star Zarah Sultana, Atkins treated her as if she were a black housemaid in the pre-Civil War American south, warning her to “lower” her “tone”:
Priti Patel was too cowardly to come and answer questions. So she sent her tone police officer Victoria Atkins. Lovely flare of classist “don’t dare speak like that to me.” pic.twitter.com/SWwwESNekc
I make no apologies for adding in this tweet, which includes much of the same video material, for the sake of Seema Chandwani’s observation about the way Ms Sultana was treated:
🙄 @zarahsultana is an amazingly intelligent and articulate woman.
But she’s non-White so her confidence and assertiveness is viewed as aggression!
— Seema Chandwani #BLM (@SeemaChandwani) July 14, 2021
Shall we have a think about racism by the prime minister – that’s Boris Johnson, by the way – and by Atkins’s boss Patel?
Let’s start with Priti Patel, who locked asylum-seekers from foreign countries into filthy concentration camps where overcrowding caused hundreds of them to catch Covid-19. How many of them died? We haven’t seen the figures.
She wants to bring in a new law making it an offence to help refugees into the UK – even by saving them from drowning in the sea off the UK’s coasts.
Another Bill passing through Parliament at the moment will target the GRT community – Gypsies, Romanies and Travellers – by assuming that they are committing crimes simply because they are Gypsies, Romanies or Travellers. This is classically-defined racism.
The Home Office at which Atkins is a minister destroyed the records showing that members of the Windrush Generation were UK citizens – and then pursued an aggressive policy to deny them services they had spent decades funding, like NHS healthcare and state benefits, while taking action to deport them. One may conclude from this that Atkins is a racist herself.
Need I go on?
As for Boris Johnson, Twitter has been full of commentary on his racism:
— leftworks #WeAreCorbyn #IStandWithJeremyCorbyn (@leftworks1) July 15, 2021
The changes to Atkins’s speech change the meaning of the words and are therefore not permissible.
As Commons Speaker – the MP who chairs sessions of the House of Commons – Lindsay Hoyle needs to act to save its reputation.
How many other changes are being made to Hansard, that nobody catches because they happen surreptitiously?
And why would Hoyle – or anyone working in Parliament – wish to support or enable these Tory racists?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
We’ve made the claim before; now Scotland’s Daily Record says it has proof. The Tories have tampered with benefit claims to starve us of cash.
Think about that.
Think about all the people who have died after being denied benefits – either after being driven to despair and suicide, or by the worsening of their illnesses and disabilities, or by starvation.
How many of those happened because the Tories changed their benefit claims – lied about them?
See for yourself:
We lifted the lid on the practice over a year ago when a Scot with multiple sclerosis and mental health problems was accidentally sent before-and-after copies of his assessment for a Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claim.
The paperwork had been submitted by a health professional after a face-to-face meeting, but was then secretly audited by officials without any follow up conversation.
Both versions were sent back, showing he would have qualified for additional support until his scores were lowered.
The altered copy removed a nurse’s observation that the man needed help to prepare a simple meal. References to his top being on inside out were removed.
The original said he has regular specialist input while the audit brazenly stated he has none.
This is not the only example. Last year, according to the Record, 2,300 claims were altered or refused.
In 460 cases, the applications were said to be unacceptable. In 1,840 more, the paperwork was amended to lower or remove the claimants’ entitlements.
In the benefit system, trust has always been a lopsided concept. The DWP questions everything claimants say, while they are supposed to accept every decision the DWP makes as fair and just.
And now we know that it simply isn’t true.
I guess it just proves the old adage that a liar won’t believe anybody else.
The big question is: what is to be done about this?
And – let’s be honest – why haven’t we done it already?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
It is remarkable that the Conservative government felt the need to ‘doctor’ a BBC News article, apparently because it wasn’t complimentary enough.
The BBC, as we all know, might as well changes its name to “Conservative Party Propaganda Unit”. You only have to look at Fiona Bruce’s sickening fawning towards Brandon Lewis on Question Time to see that.
But altering a news story to present a false impression to the public is unforgivable.
This is a deliberate attempt to mislead the public.
But then, the Conservatives are led by a known liar – Boris Johnson.
Interestingly, the lie was perpetrated on Facebook, which has an ongoing drive to eliminate ‘fake news’ – headed by former Liberal Democrat leader (and Coalition collaborator with the Tories) Nick Clegg. Will he penalise his former colleagues? Will he even notice what they’ve done?
You cannot expect better from these people – but you can certainly count on matters becoming worse.
The Conservative Party has been accused of running “misleading” adverts on Facebook after appearing to manipulate a BBC News article to promote Boris Johnson’s education policy.
Adverts paid for by the party featured an article on school funding that had had its headline altered to read “£14 billion pound cash boost for schools”. The original article was headlined “School spending: Multi-billion pound cash boost announced”.
The £14bn figure used by No 10 has been criticised because it relates to the combined spending increase across several years, rather than per year.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Tories would argue for the sake of it until they were blue in the face, rather than just in political persuasion.
If there isn’t any legislation or legal case law to state that guessing a password isn’t hacking, then they’re batting on a very sticky wicket indeed.
Kemi Badenoch has admitted breaking into a website belonging to a political opponent in order to carry out unauthorised alterations.
Come to think of it, that isn’t just hacking – it’s fraud.
Let’s see it argued out in court.
A Conservative rising star has admitted “hacking” into the website of a Labour opponent to alter its content in favour of the Tories.
Newly appointed Tory vice-chair Kemi Badenoch made the startling admission when asked what was the “naughtiest” thing she had ever done.
Hacking into websites is a criminal offence which can carry a prison sentence of up to two years – but the Tories insisted guessing a password did not constitute “real hacking”.
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:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
