I HAVE been reading the exchanges on the letters page regarding residential homes and would like to air my thoughts on the points made.

I do agree that your correspondent Mr Crossley was correct when he stated: "What is most important is the quality of the care provided" -- not the ownership of the establishment.

The fact is that a large percentage of residents are cared for by the council's Social Services department in private homes in every town in the country and, of course, where necessary pay towards the cost of such care.

The care provided from whichever source by a good, experienced staff and management is in the main a very good service.

We on occasion hear of the "bad apple in the barrel" but this occurs in every sphere of life and should not be tolerated.

So provided that the relevant department check and inspect the homes to ensure good care is provided I cannot understand what the disagreement is about.

What I do object to is the emotive rhetoric used such as "old people thrown out of their homes" etc which must have caused unnecessary worry to many people.

They were given the choice of home, looked after and the Social Services department helped with the costs.

I must say that both Mr Roscoe and Mr Bate are guilty of using emotive language. Mr Bate in particular with his somewhat vitriolic remarks must have caused real worry and concern to the residents and relations of people in care and also to the staff who look after them.

Surely it would behove all of us to show tolerance with compassion and remember the old adage, "But for the grace of God."

Retired of Fleetwood

(Name and address supplied).