Labour MP says the chancellor set a trap for Ed Miliband which amounts to 'a very major democracy issue'
Labour MP John Mann has accused George Osborne of ‘the most serious breach of the select committee system in parliamentary history’. Speaking on the Today programme, Mann said that the chancellor’s obfuscation over the issue of VAT was a set-up designed to wrong foot Ed Miliband at Prime Minister’s Questions.
On Tuesday, George Osborne appeared before the Treasury Committee, which included Mann, and refused five times to rule out a VAT rise. He skirted the question in various ways:
“We do not need to increase VAT because our plans involve saving money on the welfare budget and government departments.”
“I have identified where the £30bn of savings I believe need to come from and they don’t involve a VAT rise,”
“[The Labour] party is proposing very substantial tax rises; I suspect that will be VAT, or jobs or income tax.”
Then, at yesterday’s PMQs, Ed Miliband challenged David Cameron directly on the issue:
“Here’s a straight question: Will he now rule out a rise in VAT?”
To Miliband’s evident dismay, the prime minister responded:
“He’s right, straight questions do deserve straight answers. And the answer is ‘yes’.”
Cue deafening crowing from the Tory benches and a floundering Miliband.
But John Mann is accusing the chancellor of going beyond standard political game playing, and says that his behaviour on Tuesday amounted to contempt of parliament. He said:
“If the governor of the Bank of England or the head of the financial regulator said that they would have to resign.
“For the chancellor to mislead the committee and then for it to be a political set up for the next day what it does it it brings into disrepute the whole committee system.”
Last night Business minister Matt Hancock appeared on BBC Newsnight, letting slip that Osborne knew about the VAT promise before the meeting of the Treasury Committee, and that the information had been deliberately withheld:
“There was obviously a decision not to announce a new policy in that forum but instead to announce it at Prime Minister’s Questions.”
Mann then immediately tweeted:
What Hancock let slip is Osborne misled Treasury Committee purely to set up political ambush. Very major democracy issue.
— John Mann MP (@JohnMannMP) March 25, 2015
Inevitably, some will discount Mann’s allegations and accuse Labour of being sore losers after yesterday’s embarrassing episode.
Ruby Stockham is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow her on Twitter
25 Responses to “Osborne accused of deliberately misleading committee on VAT”
Leon Wolfeson
Your “marker” of denial of poverty – as you call facts “irrational”. People malnourished are people malnourished, as you refuse to accept the statistics because of your ideology.
Slashing basic benefits slows the velocity of money, significantly, and it’s having a major effect on business. You are just happy with it though, and evidently happy with the poor being hungry.
Leon Wolfeson
No, the damage to the economy affects the 99%. You are claiming that less spending does not affect the general economy, which is economically nonsense.
The truth is not “naive”, it’s the truth. The Conservatives, by their own figures, will have to do so. Charity is a tiny factor and massively uneven. You *are* sitting back and watching the welfare state collapse – more is spent on punishing the jobless than on JSA.
Leon Wolfeson
No, they’ve not said so before. But facts,
Gareth Hunt
The velocity of money is from a tiny part of the economy – the welfare demographic isn’t as economically active as other more secure economic participants – like those who pay taxes, work full time and have a mortgage. The economy itself will continue to grow because of families like this.
Billions spent “to punish the poor”? And your calling me an ideologue.
I called your point irrational because it is irrational. The “facts” seem to be indicating our economy is growing fast, even with the Austerity Chancellor at the helm. It seems the facts don’t fit your argument.
Leon Wolfeson
It’s not “as active” because you keep slashing their benefits to below subsidence levels.
And the economy is NOT growing because of the rapidly shrinking middle class. It’s growing purely because of the City. That you call for turning your back on the majority of British people, writing them off, shows your agenda.