Manning Sir: One death caused by a police vehicle is one too many but there are several points I would like to clarify concerning your article "Training cuts behind rise in police car accident injuries" (9 May). You state that in 1994, 855 civilians were hurt in accidents involving police cars - the correct figure was, in fact, 321, a decrease of 12 per cent on the 1993 figure Sixty per cent of injuries in 1994 were to police officers. Further, in nine of the 10 civilian fatalities, the police car was not directly involved in the accident. Statistics show an 8 per cent reduction in accidents involving police vehicles since 1991.There are three classifications of driving in the Metropolitan Police: Advanced, Response and Basic. The Advanced Driver's course lasts four weeks and an important part of the course is training drivers to deal with pursuits The three-week course you refer to is for Response Drivers It teaches response and defensive driving techniques. A Response car is not a "powerful car", but is generally a 1.4 Vauxhall Astra equipped with a siren and blue light.If there is an emergency to which a police car is called, there are enough Response Drivers available to answer those calls. If the incident is a pursuit, an Advanced Driver takes over as soon as possible Driver training is provided to meet these needs.

In some areas, for example south- west London, training has increased. All possible measures are taken to maintain safety while ensuring that the people of London benefit from a speedy and reliable service.The suggestion that it is cheaper to have accidents than to train drivers is wrong, and not borne out by the figures. Driver training costs £2.4m annually, whereas the cost of repair to vehicles is £4m. Between 1991 and 1994, there has been a 40 per cent increase in mileage driven by the Metropolitan Police. The current figure is 78 million miles a year - or eight times round the world every day.Our primary concern is to maximise safety, rather than mere budgetary considerations We will not compromise on this.Yours sincerely,P. MANNINGAssistant Commissioner(South West)Metropolitan PoliceNew Scotland YardLondon, SW112 May. From Mr John Fay Sir: Seeing the veggie heroes of Generation Why (12 May) unwittingly loosing their rescued sheep on to a Ministry of Defence firing range reminded me of an Army battle camp, in 1956, on the Welsh hills, abounding with sheep.

We were told not shoot at them, though it was reputed that local farmers drove their scraggiest beasts on to the firing ranges, as the MoD paid them £5 a carcass. All was well until our plump platoon officer ordered us to charge up a hill and fall flat in a firing position. At the crest, puffed out, he saw sheep ahead, but yelled: "Oh! Bugger it. Fire!"All the flock survived our ragged fusillade.Yours faithfully,JOHN FAYCheltenham12 May. From Mr J. Tippler Sir: Regarding the begging woman in the Underground (Maggie Brown's Diary, 10 May), a few years ago I was accosted by a woman in Tottenham Court Road. Could I spare something for the children? Three of them, around four, five and seven years old, tagged along with her, looking suitably unwashed and beggarly, as she did herself I gave something.

However, coming past again a while later, I noticed the same children but this time with a different woman. She was also approaching people: could they spare something ...? I assume the children were lent around to support a regular begging activity, but suspicion is difficult when there is a genuine wish to give to those in need.Yours faithfully,J TIPPLERSpalding, Lincolnshire. From Mr Geoffrey Martin Sir: Your article "EU national veto must go, Santer warns Britain" (11 May) contains some inaccuracies which may obscure the debate on the future of UK in the European Union. Nowhere in the document [containing the European Commission's outline proposals to be tabled at next year's intergovernmental conference] or in its presentation to the press corps accredited to Brussels is it stated that the President of the Commission, Jacques Santer, called for the abolition of the national veto. He said that decisions taken by unanimity should remain for essential issues such as financing and certain elements of foreign and security policy, in order to guarantee an efficient decision process. In the meantime, it is hoped that a comprehensive public debate can begin in Britain as to what it wishes to achieve in its own interests in the 1996 negotiations. The onus is on politicians in Britain to take the lead in this country on these matters.It would be a pity if anti-European elements were allowed to dominate the debate by falsely alleging, once again, that the Commission is imposing or laying down conditions. Surprisingly for some, perhaps, it is the Commission that is calling for a broadly-based public debate.Yours faithfully,GEOFFREY MARTINHead of the Representation in the United KingdomThe European CommissionLondon, SW111 May.