WE wouldn't be surprised if the halting of a Worcester school safety project by protesters has worried hundreds of parents in the area.

Residents objecting to Safer Routes to Schools traffic-calming plans near Red Hill Primary have called in the Local Government Ombudsman as part of their campaign to keep traffic flowing as it is.

Their case is that 80 per cent of people who replied to a survey asking for views didn't want the measures but were ignored by the city council.

We can't tell you what proportion of the local population was represented by that 80 per cent.

But we do know their argument against calming - that speed humps, traffic cushions and a 20mph zone would increase noise in the area, and that there are better ways to protect children - is bemusing.

So is the claim that the measures would be so unpopular as to incite motorists to speed. How come?

In reality, Red Hill Primary is in a cul-de-sac requiring slow speed, so calming measures could not be detrimental to residents there, anyway.

Arundel Drive and Sebright Avenue are favourite parking places for parents dropping off and picking up children, and anyone who's witnessed the twice-daily chaos in both roads knows the potential for accidents is massively increased at such times.

On the face of it, you might feel that the residents of Goodwood and Battenhall avenues have a right to argue that, so far from Red Hill Primary, they should remain uncalmed.

But a brief look at an A-Z shows St Mary's Convent School and Blessed Edward Oldcorne High a square away - and the school bell sends hundreds of children to and from them as well, on foot and by car.

Let's not forget that this is a Safer Routes to Schools not a Safer Roads Next to Schools initiative. The entire area is a complex of tree and car-lined roads. Every day the project's delayed is asking for trouble.