ON Monday you reported an alleged rise in youth crime. But the story was not really about any rise in crime by young people (which might or might not be the case) but rather of a rise in the number of young people who had been charged with five or more offences in a six-month period.

This apparent "failure" of the executive to meet its own target of reducing persistent offending by 10-per cent is actually a story about perverse measures and policy. The executive's motives are good - but their measures and their stacking of resources need to be adjusted if we are really to see a change in the numbers of young people heading for the adult courts.

Two years ago the executive introduced "fast-track" hearings for children and young people who had been convicted of five or more offences in a six-month period.

Funding was provided so that such children would be brought before a hearing much quicker than children referred as in need of care because of abuse or neglect, or other adversity. Additional monies were provided so that treatment and other resources were for the first time adequately resourced.

Not surprising that, in a children's welfare system where the hearings have become a gatekeeper to precious resources, the number of children routed into fast track for "persistent offending" has increased. These same children have usually been known to the welfare services and the hearings for years before their offending begins - as abused and neglected children living in some adversity.

But miraculously, offences such as "kicking a council-owned tree" were recorded to bring some youngsters within the ambit of the fast-track hearings and much higher cost resources. Additionally and just as worryingly, children who have come into council care without offences make up a disproportionate number of those going through fast track. There has to be concern that what should be "care" can be a route to criminalisation for young people who are on lengthy waiting lists for therapy and for specialist help. Targeting resources at the end of a child's cry for help - when abuse has become abusing, and misery become making misery for others can only have perverse effects. We believe that all children in need should be "fast-tracked" and they should not be taught that attention and help only arrive with offending.

Maggie Mellon, director, Children and Family Services, Children 1st, 83 Whitehouse Loan, Edinburgh.

WHY do the executive continue to hide their heads in the sand on youth crime? It is incredible that the first minister and his sidekicks think it is not rising as it has been steadily doing since the panel system began in 1972. That was the year I joined the police and since then, until retirement, I saw at first hand the slow erosion of the ability of the system to deal properly with youngsters involved in criminal acts. It quickly became apparent over the years that we had those going through the system knowing it was the easy option, not being dealt with properly, and going on to become adult offenders.

Many children were let down by a system unable to cope with their real needs. Society then bore the brunt of discredited theories bandied about by those who hardly came into contact with young offenders, who on the whole blight communities whose voices do not mean much to the establishment.

This myopic ideal then went on to close down special schools and introduce disturbed children into mainstream schools where funding was inadequate to deal properly with them. Ask yourself why assaults on teachers and other pupils have increased.

When it comes to dealing with problem youngsters it seems that we are being left with the cheap option. Dealing with youth crime properly will cost money if we are not to lose an ever-increasing number of children to a life of crime.

John Montgomery, 24 March Crescent, Anstruther.