Osborne’s sugar tax is a money-making gimmick that will do nothing to combat child obesity

SIR – As a specialist in childhood eating disorders, I can tell you that obese children eat sweets, crisps, chips, chocolate, biscuits, burgers and many other high-calorie foods.

Adding a few pence to sweet drinks (report, March 17) may be a wonderful way to raise £532 million, but it will have no effect on childhood obesity.

Dr Dee Dawson

London N20

SIR – Rather than introducing a sugar tax, a better approach would be to focus on educating the nation about how to maintain a balanced diet in which sugar can be enjoyed in moderation.

The Chancellor’s plan simply means people will be charged more for their drinks, rather than being able make an informed decision on what they buy.

Jonathan Hart Chief Executive, Automatic Vending Association High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

SIR – Should the sugar tax achieve its objective, then we will be faced with thousands of fit, slim youngsters with nowhere to exercise.

If it doesn’t, then the obese will be unlikely to make the most of the additional sports facilities.

Roger Fowle

Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire

SIR – The effect of taxing full-sugar varieties of soft drinks will be to increase consumption of the “diet” varieties.

How confident can we be that the artificial sweeteners used in these drinks will not themselves be injurious to public health?

Chris Scott

Netherne-on-the-Hill, Surrey

SIR – George Osborne’s prediction that he will turn what is now a £55 billion black hole in the public finances into a £10 billion surplus by the end of this parliament is clearly based more on hope than expectation.

He has made what some have described as excessively optimistic assumptions about Britain’s economy. The Office for Budget Responsibility puts the possibility of him meeting his target at no more than 50 per cent. As the Chancellor showed on the

Today programme yesterday, the convenient get-out card is turbulence in the world economy.

John Barker

Prestbury, Cheshire

SIR – Oh, for a Chancellor who would concentrate on his plans for the coming financial year and, perhaps, the year after. He has no reliable way to look further ahead than this.

Winston Churchill said it was a good thing to look ahead – but not further than one can see.

Terence Stones

Cobham, Surrey

SIR – If improving productivity and growth really matters, could the Chancellor allow businesses to borrow at more favourable rates?

He needs to lighten the load of extra taxes and regulation that seem to

SIR – The Chancellor has once again overlooked disabled people in his Budget. Rather than taking the chance to help some of the most vulnerable people in the country, the Government has chosen to brush aside the urgent need for investment in social care.

Alongside recent cuts to Employment and Support Allowance and expected changes to Personal Insurance Payment funding, this Budget heralds a bleak future for disabled people. There is still no longterm solution for the knock-on effects of these cuts, which will inevitably increase the strain on other services, such as the NHS.

Without adequate social care, we are at risk of leaving disabled people isolated and unable to play an active part in their community.

Richard Kramer Deputy CEO, Sense London N1