WHY did the Chancellor choose to follow a failed policy rather than a successful one? A reduction in the equivalent rate of VAT was made in Canada recently with no discernable impact on the economy.

Reducing VAT will not increase spending and it will also cost business an estimated £300m to make the change, so it is unlikely that price reductions will be passed on to the consumer in full.

The New Deal of the 1930s, however, was a success. The Chancellor had an opportunity to increase public expenditure to fund hundreds of thousands of green collar jobs in a “carbon army” that could be trained to make every building in the UK energy efficient and increase the use of renewables.

Instead of the billions needed to make this transformation, Alistair Darling announced just a £535m green stimulus, which includes previously announced spending.

It is madness that millions will continue to struggle to heat their homes each winter when a programme to properly insulate all buildings would massively cut spiralling fuel bills.

Leslie Rowe, Yorkshire and Humber Green Party Candidate, European Union Elections, 2009, Brompton-on-Swale, North Yorkshire.

THE Chancellor reduced the VAT rate to 15 per cent from yesterday so that we will all pay less and, in theory, buy more.

We will be able to see the difference on our invoices from the plumber or the electrician when they charge us £15 VAT on a £100 bill instead of £17.50, but in reality how many retailers are going to reduce prices? Are fish and chips going to be 10p cheaper or beer 5p cheaper? I suspect not.

VAT is collected by retailers and passed to the Government. It is not their money. How many of them are going to pocket the extra 2.5 per cent profit in what will effectively be just a hidden price rise?

I think the Government was naive to think prices would fall across the board, and the public should be challenging the shops that haven’t reduced the previous standard rate (17.5 per cent) on goods.

Kathy Harris, Barnard Castle, Co Durham.