BREXIT: Figures don't match findings
In the article about Brexit (Northumberland Gazette, February 15), I was puzzled by some of the conclusions drawn by the writers.
In particular, the reference to the North East being ‘one of the worst affected’, and likely to be the ‘hardest hit’, did not seem to be borne out by the figures quoted.
I think we all understand statistics can be interpreted in several ways, but I just cannot see the arguments put forward justified by the figures supplied.
Out of the 37 regions quoted, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear ranks as being 17th worst affected, and Tees Valley, Durham, the 20th worst.
My simple mind says that puts us roughly in the middle of the whole country.
Whereas the possible Brexit effect should be of concern to all of us, the extreme comments in the article do not seem to be correct.