WHEN the late Labour firebrand Barbara Castle brought in the breathalyser nearly 40 years ago, she was roundly condemned.
Back in 1967, there were many who believed they could still drive regardless of how much alcohol had been consumed.
The passage of the four decades has changed public attitudes out of all recognition.
People now accept that drinking and driving is a fatal combination. Apart from a criminally anti-social minority, most drivers now obey a law they know makes sense.
This newspaper believes that, given time, the public will come to regard speed cameras in much the same light.
We therefore welcome the news that the number of casualties has plummeted on roads where static cameras have been installed.
Indeed, we are further heartened by the fact that more drivers seem to be easing off the accelerator. Lessons - sometimes hard - are obviously being learnt.
But we are disturbed to learn that the Treasury is raking in £20m a year from the cameras.
Officials have always insisted the system is self-financing. Now it appears that the Chancellor has been getting a slice of the fiscal cake, too.
This vital safety measure must not play into the hands of its critics and be regarded as a cash-raiser rather than a life-safer.
How about donating the surplus to charity, Gordon Brown?
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article