The Tory party today attacked Labour for what it claimed is excessive spending on public relations: over £322 million / year. This includes the wages of over 3200 press officers. Things weren’t like this under the previous government, the Conservatives have pointed out.

As it was reported in a Guardian article, the Conservatives’ complaint was supported almost entirely by a comparison of current and past figures on spending. The article repeatedly contrasted the current figures with those from nine years ago, when the Tories were last in charge.

In 1997 the cost of government PR was just a third of the current £322 million at £111 million, it points out. Back then there were just 300 press officers in Whitehall, compared to around 1800 today, it continues. Tax-payers money is being wasted, it is inferred.

Now the government spending on PR does seem over-the-top. However, simply comparing current figures with previous figures doesn’t prove that.

Things have changed since 1997; the rise in 24-hour news and the increase in demand for news that it has created, for example, means that there is greater pressure on the government to provide information to the press than there was before. Other factors may also justify a rise in spending.

Besides, for all that is said in the article it may be that the Tories were guilty of under-spending on public relations. If all we have is a comparison of two sets of figures, then how are we to decide whether current spending is too high or past spending was too low?

Simply looking at the past and assuming that things should be the same now is a logical error: the appeal to history fallacy. A little more is needed to show that Labour have been over-spending on spin.