POLITICIANS constantly complain that the public do not trust them.

Perhaps this lack of trust could be linked to the astonishing abilities they have to utter total claptrap. Two examples spring to mind this week alone.

Cathy Jamieson, the justice minister, in defending herself against completely incredible allegations that she assisted a "criminal on the run" has a statement issued by a "spokesman". She admits that she gave a relative pounds-100. So far, no problem. Had the statement stopped there, no-one could even begin to question it. We have all helped family members. Some of us have pretty unsavoury relatives.

However, the statement goes on to say that she arranged for it to be paid into the relative's bank account to "ensure that it actually went to help that (relative's) newborn son and not as cash to be wasted on drink or drugs". Ms Jamieson surely cannot believe that to be true? In what way does putting money into someone's bank account ensure that it is spent in a particular fashion? Did Ms Jamieson believe that the bank would only release the funds by issuing vouchers to be spent in Mothercare?

That level of "we can tell the mugs anything and they'll believe it" was exceeded by Peter Hain. In a Commons debate on Monday, he was questioned about the Government's plans to introduce its new Anti Terrorism Bill. Mr. Robert MarshallAndrews suggested to him that the measures likely to be contained in the bill represented the greatest attack on the liberty of the British people for 300 years. Mr Hain rejected that notion.

"The greatest attack on civil liberties in Britain in 300 years would be a suicide terrorist attack right at the heart of our communities", opined the leader of the house.

Once again, how can any semiintelligent person begin to believe such utter rubbish? Does Mr Hain really expect us to believe that a single suicide bomber represents the greatest threat to our civil liberties in the last 300 years? Presumably when he was at school he did some history lessons.

Surely he might have remembered the Second World War. Britain under attack by nightly bombing raids from the Luftwaffe. Hitler's troops poised to invade. Are we really meant to believe that a suicide bomber represents a greater threat to our way of life than the Third Reich?

We might start trusting our political masters when they start living in the real world and stop trying to feed us a diet of fantasy and fairy-tales.

James Bauld, 12 Kingshill Drive, Glasgow.