The political landscape is currently echoing with a familiar, cynical tune: the sound of accusations of dishonesty. As Labour Chancellor Rachel Reeves faces a torrent of Conservative fury over her recent budget, columnist Brian Reade argues the Tory response says more about their own desperation than her actions.
A Budget Under Fire and a History of Hypocrisy
Reeves's budget has been labelled a "baffling, months-long, self-sabotaging omnishambles". The core of the Conservative attack centres on her decision to freeze tax thresholds after pledging in Labour's manifesto not to increase taxes. Senior Tories have seized on this, painting it as a brazen lie that undermines democracy.
However, Reade highlights the staggering hypocrisy of these attacks. He points to former MP Nadine Dorries, who condemned Reeves for lying while having been a staunch supporter of Boris Johnson, a figure Reade describes as "the most shameful liar in the history of political lying".
Similarly, the critique from Kemi Badenoch – that the budget shifts billions from workers to benefit claimants – is dismantled. Reade notes that three-quarters of the children lifted from poverty by scrapping the two-child benefit cap are from working families, and a significant portion of increased welfare spending will support state pensioners.
No Party Holds a Monopoly on Political Fiction
The column reaches back through political history to demonstrate that deceptive campaigning is a cross-party tradition. It recalls Margaret Thatcher's 1979 election campaign, where she denied plans to double VAT, only to raise it from 8% to 15% months after winning. The iconic "Labour Isn't Working" poster famously used Young Conservatives rather than genuine unemployed queues.
Even Labour is not immune, with Reade citing former Chancellor Alistair Darling's 2009 interview claiming unity with Gordon Brown, before later revealing in a book the "permanent chaos and crisis" and his own contemplation of a leadership coup.
The Uncomfortable Truth for Voters
The underlying conclusion, Reade asserts, is that "no one makes it to the top of politics without being a skilled weaver of fiction". Voters have long understood this reality, viewing promises with a weary scepticism. The current Tory obsession with Reeves's statements, therefore, appears as a transparent tactic born of political weakness rather than genuine outrage.
The piece closes with the enduring image of interviewer Jeremy Paxman's "pained scowl" – a look of incredulity directed at every politician, silently asking the fundamental question: "Why is this lying b****** lying to me." It is a sentiment, Reade implies, that the public may well be applying to the entire political class once again.
