I found it amazing that John Tanner thinks that the coalition Government “seems so against children and families” (Oxford Mail, October 13).

Cuts are now being implemented due to the fact that by the last budget, the nation’s debt had reached £903bn through the incompetence of Labour, Mr Tanner’s own party.

This is equivalent to 62.2 per cent of GDP, the highest since records began in 1993, underlining the task faced by the coalition Government in cutting the debt burden.

To state that “surely we should be helping families, rich and poor, to bring up their children,” is ludicrous.

Why do rich people need state hand-outs? I do not think that family allowance should be given to rich people, however. The Government has made a mistake in its guidelines, and capping level should include the wages of both partners (not a single earner) and be raised slightly.

He then has the audacity to target the rich – “especially those who don’t have the expense of bringing up children”.

Make up your mind Mr Tanner, you seem to confuse yourself. This problem was caused by Labour, which happened to help out the banks.

Why wasn’t this made as a loan with interest? Why wasn’t Lloyds broken up as promised? The only bank which can hold its head high is Barclays, which had nothing from Labour and continued to show a profit.

Labour says one thing and does another.

John J Monaghan Cotman Close Abingdon