NEW rules governing the use of North-East speed cameras have been branded as ludicrous by campaigners.

The Department for Transport has relaxed legislation to allow safety camera partnerships to set up traps on roads without a history of crashes.

Until now, cameras could be used only in areas chosen by councils, based on accident data collected over a number of years.

But the change means police, who set up the traps, are allowed to spend 15 per cent of their time at roads where there have been complaints from local people.

The Northern Echo revealed on Thursday how a temporary camera at one such site, Elwick Road in Hartlepool, clocked 125 speeding drivers in three hours, bringing in £7,500 in fines.

But the new laws were criticised by the Association of British Drivers.

Spokesman Tony Vickers said: "Responding to perceived danger rather than actual danger is ludicrous."

The Cleveland Safety Camera Partnership was set up along with five others as part of a Government pilot project three years ago.

Made up of police, local councils, and magistrates' court officials, the partnerships are allowed to use revenue from the fines to fund the scheme, including buying more cameras and processing fines.

They have been criticised by motorists as being driven by making money.

In another pilot area, North Wales, Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom was accused of being more concerned about speeding than catching burglars.

But Mick Bennett, of the Cleveland Safety Camera Partnership, said: "We are not there to catch people but to slow them down and make sure the roads become safer.

"One of the criticisms people made about the camera scheme is: why wait for a given number of injury accidents to occur before they are used?

"The rules were opened up and we were told we could spend 15 per cent of our time at complaint sites - areas where local authorities, councillors or residents have said speed is a problem."

Mr Vickers said: "Effectively, every time someone complains the police will swoop on an area and prosecute as many people as possible. This is not good policing, it is pandering to hysterical local concerns."