I DO not agree with the viewpoint in "alley 'danger' overstated" (Letters, July 19), which was summed up by the statement "The closing of this ginnel would greatly inconvenience a lot of people."

Has the writer no consideration for those who live close to and alongside it? Those who have all been broken into, suffered verbal abuse and who are too frightened to say anything for fear of reprisals? Their quality of life is poor due to the low life who use and abuse the ginnel.

I speak from experience because I live very close to a problem ginnel on Ernlouen Close at Livesey, Blackburn. We had media coverage and the matter was on the agenda of a council meeting, residents having suffered in the same way and petitioned for its closure, which, we were told, the police also wanted.

At the meeting it was stated that the police wanted it open and closure would inconvenience people who would have to walk round. We had evidence the police wanted all ginnels/escape alleys closed to make policing more effective on estates. And when timed, it took only five minutes longer to walk round.

I always thought that the Labour council listened to the voice of the people. But I am sorry for those living alongside "The worst alley in the Eastern division" because party politics have no consideration for the people who voted them in power and will never close their ginnel.

Lighting it will only encourage these villains to congregate and make things worse. Sadly, we have just had lighting installed on ours.

Name and address received.