SO Chief Superintendent Short thinks we are mean-spirited if we oppose or even question the provision of luxury cars for senior police officers (Letters, July 9).

As a person fighting to meet spiralling demands on my fixed income any hint of profligacy with my contributions attracts my attention, and I reserve the right to be mean-spirited if I so choose.

Anyone can effectively provide a service if someone else foots the bill. It takes imagination and flair to survive on the same budget year after year, as thousands of older people have to.

Perhaps Mr Short can satisfy this simple mind with plain answers to some simple questions.

What is the point of paying premium rates and incentives to attract the best when we end up with senior officers who are so poorly organised that they are spending up to a quarter of their working time simply driving? On Mr Short's figures, 2,000 miles @ 50mph = 40 hours = one working week.

Why do we pay any person top rates simply to drive?

Since no one can be superintending or even chief superintending while they are driving, we must therefore need four superintendents or chief superintendents for every three posts of each rank. Otherwise there would be a 25 per cent gap in coverage while these special people are paid premium rates to drive their luxury, freely provided, vehicle (which is not a perk) from front line to front line.

What are the poor foot soldiers at the front line doing while they await the arrival of their senior officers?

Colin Simpson,

Orchard Paddock,

Haxby, York.

Updated: 11:10 Wednesday, July 21, 2004