SURPRISE, surprise. Another broken promise from David Cameron. No, not the “No VAT increase,” nor even the “No top-down reorganisation of the NHS,” but the pledge to lead “the most open and transparent government in the world.” How many weeks did that last?

The point is that this government has been so adept at making false promises and claims that it is difficult to believe anything Cameron, Osborne and co say. 

For instance, many will remember that back in May 2013, Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith was reprimanded by the UK Statistics Authority when he used incorrect figures to promote the effectiveness of the coalition’s benefits cap on getting people back into work. 

The figure of 8,000 people now employed as a result was seen as one of many ad hoc figures which was “unsupported by the official statistics published by the department,” but it didn’t prevent either the government or the media from painting a picture of feckless “scroungers,” unwilling to work until the state stopped subsidising them. 

The claim that 878,000 dropped their claims for sickness benefits rather than face the new medical assessment was also untrue. As Frances O’Grady rightly said at the time, “only people with weak arguments need to make up statistics.”

Back in 2011, London Mayor Boris Johnson was criticised by the chair of the UK Statistics Authority for misusing figures “to publicise the success” of his transport policies in London, and told, in no uncertain terms, to “comply with the code of practice as a matter of principle.” The use of dubious figures, Johnson was told, was undermining the public’s faith in data used by politicians. 

 Another arch-exponent of untrustworthy figures is former education secretary Michael Gove. Having based much of the evidence for his totally unnecessary overhaul of the school examination system on his own misuse of data, he also criticised state education standards by using the famous Pisa results, comparing educational standards across the developed world. 

The only trouble is that these are themselves flawed, not even based on a common test but on different students in different countries answering different questions. 

Having been reprimanded by OECD for the misuse of data, Gove, in March 2013, suggested that “survey after survey” had revealed “disturbing historical ignorance” amongst pupils. 

However, a freedom of information request indicated that there had been only one properly conducted poll, and the others were “amateurish and politically biased,” including one carried out by budget hotel chain Premier Inn!

As if we needed more evidence of this government’s duplicity regarding tax avoidance, a parliamentary committee’s report criticises the number of “off-payroll” arrangements in the public sector. 

These are where individuals have their salaries paid to a company in order to avoid the higher income tax, and instead pay the much lower corporation tax. 

The government promised to clamp down on the practice in May 2012, when it was disclosed that around 2,400 of these arrangements existed. Nevertheless, the National Audit Office identified 2,214 still in existence in 2013-14. So much for the clampdown. 

Of course, there are many, many examples — Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has been found wanting in terms of accuracy when it came to announcing NHS waiting times and was forced to withdraw his claim that NHS spending had risen in real terms in 2010 and 2011. 

Chancellor George Osborne has attempted to mislead the public over deficit reduction as recently as last month. In January 2013 Cameron said the coalition was “paying down Britain’s debts” when the national debt had risen from £811 billion to £1.1 trillion. 

There are too many examples for these to be judged as mistakes — it’s clear that they are obvious attempts to mislead us, and all government statistics must be viewed suspiciously. 

Unemployment is down, we are told, but how many figures omit those who are not receiving unemployment benefit because of government-imposed sanctions — not because they have found work? Thousands of new businesses have been created, but how many actually employ workers? 

Then there are the inflation figures. We know how rules were changed so that pensions rose only at CPI rates rather than the RPI rates which are usually a percentage point or so higher, because they include housing costs. A very low CPI rate of 1 per cent allows the government to claim, again falsely, that real wages are rising — but the average pay figures include the huge rises of the very high earners. 

The RPI figures raise eyebrows too. Don’t we read every week about private tenants being forced to pay massive increases in their rent or face eviction, as with the recent New Era estate case? Aren’t the rents paid to fat cat landlords — often for accommodation in appalling condition — sometimes so high that tenants spend 40 to 50 per cent of their total income on rent? If these huge increases were factored into the RPI calculations, I don’t believe the figure would be 2 per cent.

With so much data chicanery being used, it’s hard not to reach the conclusion that politicians take us all for mugs and think we’ll believe anything. Let’s hope the May result proves them wrong.