MOST of my generation remembers the day of hard-working people who kept their little terraced homes spotless, mopped doorsteps and swept out backyards. Money wasn't the criterion - it was pride.

Recently, I had to view 20 properties in Burnley for a buyer in London who had been offered them as tenanted properties. Four were occupied; the rest had dirty backyards, damaged doors and rubbish which hadn't been cleared for years.

The Government wants hundreds of houses built, mostly to accommodate single people wanting homes. If these are the same people who lived in the grotty houses I saw, surely, they would let new homes get into a similar state.

Furthermore, they could not afford the high rents, so we who pay our dues and demands would have to pay.

Burnley is top of the league for such grotty property. No doubt, Blackburn, Pendle and other towns are not far behind.

Are clearance areas the answer? The cost of pulling down all the houses in areas like Burnley Wood must be enormous and is, surely, not a viable proposition, given the number involved.

There are good, well-maintained homes in these areas and encouragement and acknowledgement should be given to those who struggle and fight to keep their homes in good order.

The lady who wrote (Letters, February 23) that it was ridiculous to spend big money on such things as the Weavers' Triangle when there were homes desperately needing repairs for damp, etc. is absolutely right.

There are those who wish to see the town flourish again, to see the neglect of previous years put right. No prospective employer wants to come to a town where apathy is rife and such bad housing stock exists. Can we not take another look at benefits and give people work to do on houses rather than encouraging them to do nothing except hang around all day? Yes, it would cost money, but it would also give people an incentive to look after their houses.

Give people a sense of purpose rather than one of indifference; employ people to police certain areas; punish properly those flouting the law in these cases; and if people are seen to care, they will learn that it pays.

All the empty homes must belong to somebody - building societies, private landlords or whatever. They should pay at least a nominal Council Tax charge for their houses. They would then take more interest in letting or selling them and be responsible for them being kept in good order.

Come on Peter Pike, Gordon Prentice and the rest of the Lancashire MPs who have this blight in their patch. Stop whining that everything can be cured by more money.

They should show some leadership and concern for all those who try hard to keep up standards against what appears to be indifference and should crack down hard on those who desecrate our Lancashire towns and people.

NAME and address received.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.