YOUR article (December 3) giving details of the number of fixed penalties for parking offences which then had to be revoked, gives a clear indication that either the operatives have not been trained to a high standard or the payment NCP receives is directly related to the number of penalties issued.

Details of the contract with NCP in relation to the level of payment they receive have never been made public and the question needs to be asked as to what is left of the whopping £740,000 when you take out the running costs, not only for NCP but the council parking manager and his 'little empire'. Incidentally if NCP are contracted to be responsible for parking and enforcing the parking restrictions, why does the council need to duplicate the management structure?

Council figures give the income from car parks and on-street parking to be in excess of £1 million, but again that is not all profit and, as I understand it, this income can only be used for improvements to the roads. If parking is so profitable why did the Executive member for resources not take this into account when setting the highways budget? To an outsider like myself, £1 million should have been taken out and transferred to social services, which everybody knew would be under-funded in 2004/5.

Since the Executive decide to cut £200,000 from the Re:d Centre grant the Bury Times has, quite rightly, been inundated with letters condemning the decision. This decision was based on a shortage of money, yet I would argue that the money is there but being spent in the wrong way.

Elected members can authorise the spending of £26,000 on consultants' fees for a 'walking policy', agree administration costs of £750,000 for the LEA, provide themselves with refreshments prior to their meetings, fund the Mayor's office to the tune of some £400,000 and pay for the 'Warwick Weekend' seminar made up of elected members and officers, but cannot find £200,000 for disabled children. Someone is not getting their priorities right, because whenever costs exceed budget it is social services and education that suffer.

We have only just found out what the grant will be from Government for the next financial year and already our chief executive is saying that education will suffer. With all due respect, I think that the time has come for elected members to tighten their own belts.

A. WITHINGTON