WORCESTERSHIRE'S rival MPs are at loggerheads over the Government's introduction of community support officers.

The row was sparked over mid-Worcestershire MP Peter Luff's description of CSOs as "two-thirds police officers" in a recent debate in Westminster Hall.

The Tory MPs' comments were picked up by Home Office Minister Hazel Blears, who later commented: "Any CSO described in such terms by his Member of Parliament would feel let down."

Worcester MP Michael Foster joined the fray yesterday, calling on Mr Luff to apologise for his remarks during the debate over West Mercia funding and for his comments to the Evening News.

Mr Luff told the Evening News that CSOs would be more effective if they were trained to the same level as police officers.

Labour's Mr Foster said: "It is disappointing to hear MPs, such as Peter Luff, making unsubstantiated criticisms of public sector workers such as Community Support Officers.

"It is also wholly wrong to describe CSOs as two-thirds of a police officer - it shows a complete lack of understanding of what a CSO actually does.

"It is a bit like calling a teaching assistant two-thirds of a teacher - the jobs are different, as a CSO is different to a police officer."

Mr Foster said it was "wholly wrong" to suggest CSOs are not properly trained and that the mid-Worcestershire MP's comments weaken the case for extra funding for CSOs in Worcestershire.

"At the very least, Peter should apologise for offending our existing CSOs by suggesting they are not up to the job. I know they are - I've seen them in action."

But Mr Luff hit back, maintaining the Government was trying to reassure people with policing on the cheap.

"It's Mike that owes them and me an apology for deliberately misrepresenting my point of view so mischievously," he said.

"I want to see more police officers. I think the Government is trying to provide a visible reassurance on the cheap but people don't realise they can't do a full job because they have limited powers. We should train them at greater length."