YOUR article on “life saving cameras” (September 8) gives statistics of the number of fatal accidents saved by the installation of average-speed cameras on the A14. This would be true if the cameras were the only things that were installed.

YOUR article on "life saving cameras" (September 8) gives statistics of the number of fatal accidents saved by the installation of average-speed cameras on the A14. This would be true if the cameras were the only things that were installed.

Don't forget that a number of lay-bys were also closed. A considerable number of accidents were caused by lorries pulling out of the lay-bys and vehicle drivers not recognising that the lorry in front was not up to speed and either ran into the back of the lorry or swerved to avoid it and caused an accident. It's an over-simplification to say all accidents are caused by speeding.

Julie Spence is correct when she says that fixed cameras are a 'tax that people can choose to pay'. But what about the average speed cameras? I have never heard of anyone being sent a fine for speeding through the average speed cameras. I would call them 'intelligence gathering devices': they must be logging every vehicle that travels along that stretch of the A14.

I wonder if the council will follow the example of other councils in other parts of the country and switch them off, because the revenue collected goes to central Government and not to the councils that administer the schemes.

FRED KING

Station Road

Bluntisham