PETER Mullen was off target in his latest column (Echo, Oct 26).

He complained that the Government was guilty of a “massive campaign of spin”

regarding the coming spending cuts and that the official “lurid statistics” were nothing more than “smoke and mirrors”.

He said that in 2009 total public expenditure was £669bn and that in 2015 it would be £686bn. That is “an increase”, he said, and that there would therefore be no cuts.

The “elephant in the room” is the interest the Government is paying on our colossal debts – £43bn in 2010 rising to £63bn in 2014-15, an increase of almost 50 per cent.

The Government is rightly making big cuts in the public services, but overall debt repayments are increasing at the same time as the cuts are being implemented.

It is clear Government spending will have to be reduced over the next four years, but care is needed to ensure the cuts do not tip the economy back into another recession.

It is a difficult task and will not be made easier if the unions disrupt the economy by going on strike in protest at the cuts. That would only weaken the economy just when we should be attempting to increase our output of goods and services, particularly in export markets.

Jim Allan, Hartlepool.

THE Government is constantly asking the Labour Party to say what it would do to reduce the deficit. Well, I have an idea that would reduce the deficit without impacting as hard on the poorest people in our society.

Instead of taking £7bn off the poor and only £2.5bn off the banks per year, why not reverse the amounts and take the largest amount off the banks which, as we all know, started the financial meltdown in the first place.

The deficit will still be reduced and the poor and sick in society will be given some protection.

Now, how is that for fairness?

Paul Trippett, Trimdon, Trimdon Station, Co Durham.