I FULLY accept the explanation by bosses of Burnley and Padiham Community Housing that the empty former council houses on their books are not being snatched by people from outside the area over the heads of local people on their waiting list.

After all, with 400 of their 5,200 homes unoccupied, it can hardly be a case of queue-jumping by strangers that's behind the complaints.

Rather, it seems that locals with knowledge of the vicinity and its problem estates, are being picky in their preferences -- yet miffed when outsiders seem to get fast-track treatment for tenancies even though they are in areas they are evidently eschewing.

I can, however, understand the beef about the housing company trawling London's 48,000 bed-and-breakfast tenants for potential occupants of Burnley and Padiham's unwanted ex-council houses -- with more than 70 such families being attracted to them from the capital in the past 14 months.

But the complaints about this drive bringing in additional job-seekers to East Lancashire when unemployment is allegedly high are bunkum. To start with, there are still plenty of jobs.

But the question is, are the newcomers that Burnley and Padiham Community Housing are touting for actually job-seekers, when there are plenty of jobs going begging in London where they live at present, or just benefit claimants?

It might be all well and good for the housing company to import such people to fill their homes and add to their revenue when their rents are paid by housing benefit -- like so many others in social housing in East Lancashire -- but do we really need an influx of more welfare-dependent people when we are mucked up with so many already?

It might make sense in terms of the better balancing of the housing company's books, but does it when it amounts to the dumping of more social casualties in East Lancashire?

Is it the work-hungry we are attracting or just more 'giro' drawers?