IF you were to ask any of your friends, family, colleagues or even yourself the question: do you think you are a good, safe driver? The answer most likely would be yes.

However, the truth is very different.

I thought of myself in exactly those terms before I plucked up courage to have my driving skills scrutinised by someone far more qualified than me. Taking the Advanced Driving Test totally changed the way I drive.

I know a lot of people reading this will be thinking: "But I am a good driver -- I haven't had an accident in years." The simple fact is that the Driving Standards Agency driving test is not good enough. The training you receive prior to your driving test has huge holes in it in terms of road safety. Critical driving skills such as: observation, identifying hazards, employing a hazard management system, advanced vehicle control techniques are all overlooked.

The police will tell you that driving training is the best way to reduce accident statistics. Speed cameras and humps don't teach you new skills or improve driving at all; they just enforce a speed limit briefly.

Ian Bell, of the Lancashire Partnership for Road Safety, is fond of quoting misleading statistics. However, here's one that proves my point -- advanced drivers are approximately 70 per cent less likely to have an accident, because they have been trained to drive to a higher standard.

So, why isn't Mr Bell advocating more driver training or radical change to the driving test? Simple -- speed cameras make lots of money.

What's more, they save money by replacing traffic police, thus reducing the amount the money needed to have a police presence on the road.

If the powers that be are really serious about road safety, driver training is the only true answer. To blame speed as the greatest single contributing factor for accidents is simplistic, inaccurate and misleading.

The inappropriate use of a vehicle due to poor training is lethal.

PETER WILSON-MAYOR, Bosley Close, Darwen.