REGARDING your front page story headlined "Big Brother's snapping You" (Evening News, Wednesday, January 21) about the arrival of more speed cameras in Worcester, it was useful to see the statistics regarding the accident rates on the new camera sites.

It was also interesting to see that the Safety Camera Partnership has essentially bent the rules to install the cameras on New Road, Bromyard Road and Hylton Road.

I would be most interested to know if the accidents on City Walls Road have been reduced since the installation of the first speed camera, and how many of the accidents reported in today's article were caused by excessive speed.

The Birmingham Evening Mail article "Just a stealth tax" (October 1, 2002) reported that the West Midlands Road Accident Review 2001 showed that just three per cent of accidents were directly caused by excessive speed.

More worryingly, the official figures provided by the Association of British Drivers showed that in 1998, the number of fatal or serious injury accidents in areas covered by speed cameras in Birmingham was 36. In 1999 it was 34 but, by 2000, it had risen to 41, suggesting the cameras may not actually improve safety.

I am also interested why the project cost is £5.3m. Of the total fines issued, how many are actually paid - and of that money, how much is spent covering operational and administration costs?

Who works for the Safety Camera Partnership, and how much are they paid?

My complaint with the decision-makers is the constant deceit that the cameras are installed to improve safety. If they were honest enough to admit that the purpose is to raise revenue, we would at least not feel cheated as we cough up the fines.

DANNY BROTHWELL,

Worcester.