Week ending 29th January

How could be have misunderstood them so ... ? All these years, and we've been accusing the BBI of something it didn't do. Former leader Peter Jordan puts us right in a letter to the local press in which he tells us that whilst the party originally "were very critical" of the idea of the road "improvements" that begin soon in Queen Street and Sleaford Road, after a long series of meetings and "robust" discussions with Lincolnshire County Council they achieved a high proportion of the many changes they wanted. We didn't know the party had so many people who were so knowledgeable on the matter of highway science. Thanks for putting us right Mr J - now if you could just remind when this damascene conversion occurred, and perhaps direct us to the minutes where we can read about it, we could be most grateful. Not, of course, that we doubt it for a minute but our memories obviously aren't as good as yours ... We were also pleased to learn that "contrary to some politicians' thinking it is very good management to be prepared to change one's opinion in the light of additional information." Another new policy that somehow passed us by.

Who ya gonna call ...? Is there a ghost at the Geoff Moulder Leisure Pool? Members of Lincolnshire Paranormal Investigators think so after spending a night there. "The changing rooms are very humid and can suddenly go icy cold," investigator Dean Grant, who founded the group, told a local paper. We've got some bad news for you, Dean. The changing rooms at Geoff Moulder are always like that!
Bringing back Sunday peace ... It may have been because it was a Sunday when we visited Oldrids last weekend but even so, we'd like to congratulate the store for turning off the annoying voice in their lift which announces "doors opening, doors closing, first floor second floor" etc, etc, etc. We've long thought that the nanny state takes things a step too far in telling us the obvious. It's a start. How about other shops in the town taking it further? For instance, we've never had a problem seeing which counter next becomes vacant when standing in a queue. Perhaps the same annoying voice that tells us this in shop after shop could also be silenced. Anything that helps restore calm to our unnecessarily noisy streets and shops would be most welcome.
Talking of standing in queues ... whoever is responsible for the mess that currently greets visitors to Boston's Post Office? Presumably refitting is underway, but it seems mostly to be to house financial advisers, at the expense of the helpful counter that sold odds and ends along with lottery tickets. Now a notice orders anyone who wants a lottery ticket to join the endless queue that takes an age to reach a point of service. Who are they kidding? There are plenty of other places in town where you can buy a ticket without the need for a ten minute wait.
Then there was one ... A begging letter from the National Lottery (now there's a change) invites the people of Boston to nominate their favourite local lottery-funded project for the 2010 National Lottery Awards. This isn't too difficult. There's only one. Boston College was given £23,770 to "take the classroom to the student," in the form of a bus fitted with computer workstations and internet access which visits village weekly for people to take courses. Apparently this helps people who are unaccustomed to a formal education environment to overcome their natural reluctance to "go back to school." Sounds great, it would probably be cheaper to bring the students in by chauffeur-driven limousine. But how disappointing that Boston could only manage one successful bid to the lottery fund in a year.
Oh Ma goodness ... We can only assume that the idea of giving the freedom of Boston to the long dead Herbert Ingram has come about because of the renewed popularity of zombies. If we were asked for our own idea, we feel that we could go one better. Ingram was well known in his day, but is a bit old hat in 2010. An unsung son of Boston is the late Arthur Lucan - better known as Old Mother Riley. Lucan was also a Victorian, which would please the Boston Victorian Cemetery Trust which wants to honour Ingram with the town freedom. Lucan left behind him a treasure trove of 16 movies which could form the core for an annual Boston Film festival which we are sure would draw enthusiasts from around the globe to see such classics as Mother Riley Meets the Vampire, Old Mother Riley's Jungle Treasure, Old Mother Riley, Headmistress, and Old Mother Riley's Circus. We think it's time to give old Herbert the heave-ho and replace him on the plinth beside the Stump by none other than ... you've guessed it ... Old Mother Riley (see our picture below.)

Were that to happen, the memorial could serve a dual purpose for the next year or so, as it's been suggested that there's a passing resemblance between Boston's grand dame of comedy and a certain Borough Council Leader.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Bids are just a waste of money ...

The other day, when we were talking about the greedy Boston Municipal Charities and the Broadfield Lane allotments, we remarked that boosting the amount of money they have to dispense from a few hundred to thousands of pounds a year would simply produce a crop of applicants who just want the money because it's there, and whose need would not be particularly great.
One day, perhaps we'll find out if we were right. In the meantime, there's a good clue in the "quality" of applications for a share in the £10,000 community fund on offer to people living in High Street South. They're set to be benefit from a neighbourhood project from Boston Borough Council called "U-Decide."
Voting packs have been delivered to all 500 homes in the area for residents to choose their top five projects devised by organisations who are pitching their projects for community cash.
So what's been selected for them to choose from?
Well, there are ten projects bidding for up to £2,000 each of the £10,000 pot.
We won't list them all, but they include:
Work with young people to design community art in metalwork with a skilled blacksmith ...
A bid from the Heritage Trust of Lincolnshire – to stage three art events centred on 116 High Street - the building which housed Boston's first bank, and which is now in danger of collapse through neglect ...
Improving the "wasteland" in front of the toilet block. We're not sure how you improve wasteland - perhaps by digging a few extra potholes or something like that.
Two projects are for money to clear litter - something that we thought was the job of the Borough Council. And we also feel obliged to ask how serious the litter problem is if bids are being made to buy tools and equipment for between 4-10 offenders to pick up litter supervised by a paid probation supervisor one day a week for 45 weeks - that's a lot of litter. Then there's a bid to help pay for a rubbish skip from time to time for use by residents, and pay for four large community litter picks. The mind boggles at the amount of rubbish apparently being dropped - in fact we can't believe that the problem warrants such sledgehammer tactics. Just better policing.
Meanwhile, a local church wants money to decorate and refurbish a meeting room used by residents. Presumably the room would have remained undecorated had not this manna from heaven suddenly been made available - and shouldn't this be the church's job in any case?
We said we wouldn't list the lot, but in summary, Lincolnshire Police want money to install 40 mini cameras and 30 voice door security devices to promote home security. Given that there are 500 residents, this just seems like bidding for the money because it's there and the cash maxes out at 70 bits of kit - and we also wonder how great the problem of crime in the area is. Again, better policing would help.
There's a bid to fund two sessions to tell people more about Pilates, exercise and Nordic walking;  a bid for an information Board telling the history of the South High Street Area and to refurbish the Bass Memorial (even though George Bass was born in Aswardby) and another bid for community noticeboards to advertise local events and a post box for responses. We can only guess at the sort of suggestions that might find their way into that.
We're not knocking the idea of helping local communities, but most of these ideas reek of "hey, there's cash up for grabs, how can we get our hands on a slice...?"
Unless things have changed, the High Street needs a used car lot for all the vehicles being sold illegally on the street.
The lucky winners will be selected at the Decision Day on Saturday 30th January, and we can't wait to hear the outcome.
As an aside, we read this information on Boston Borough Council's website a week after it was issued as a press release, and in the modern style, it is headed "Who wins? U Decide."
We may sound fuddy-duddy, but we think that in a borough where there are more 60 tongues spoken, it might be a good idea to use correct English to help those who are still learning to improve their grasp of the language - and that probably includes a chunk of the indigenous population!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

What a load of old mothballs!

It hardly seems five minutes since we mentioned the Budget Consultation survey that appeared on Boston Borough Council's website, inviting us, the great unwashed, for our views on how the borough's £10,500,000 kitty should be spent in the year ahead.
Moving with what appears to be amazing and uncharacteristic speed, the survey has now been closed, and we have been thanked for our contribution.
Tonight, the cabinet is being asked to agree the Draft Corporate Plan 2010/11 and the draft budget for the same year, to go forward for consideration by the Joint Boards (whatever they are) next Monday.
We downloaded the budget document last Friday.
The consultation survey was first publicised at the end of the first week in January, and, given that the report has taken some time to compile, we have cynically to conclude that barely any time was available to take into account the responses of the public.
More money wasted on needless surveys where public opinion is sought but ignored.
The headline is that we should expect a 3% increase in council tax, which works out at £5 a year for a band D property, a 3% increase in fees and charges, "rationalisation" of cultural service and public convenience provision (that means cuts,) "utilisation" of reserves to support specific service investment (that means robbing Peter to pay Paul,) and "rephrasing" of the capital strategy (who the hell knows what that means?)
The report says the council has already started explore the potential of a number of "themes" to cut costs and improve or sustain performance including: sharing services (didn't this fall flat on its face?) outsourcing/partnering with the private sector (this too) and controlling staff costs (presumably this means copying Lincolnshire County Council, Lincoln City Council, West Lindsey and North Kesteven's plan to freeze staff pay.
Concrete proposals include increasing the cost of an adult cremation from £417 to £430 "to support service investment," which will boost income by £14,000 a year. Critics will point out that this still further widens the cost gap between Boston and the newly opened Alford Crematorium, which charges between £360 and £390 and which is as convenient for people in the Skegness catchment area as is Boston. All it means is that you'll get your fingers burned as well as great aunt Ada if you use Boston Crem.
Other recommendations include "mothballing" the Wide Bargate toilets pending car park and "facility refurbishment" in two years' time, saving £26,000 - ironic given the fanfare surrounding the recent opening of the new, improved, Park Gate loos.
One thing that few would quibble with is "mothballing" facilities at the Haven Resources Centre "pending strategic asset review" which will save £65,000 before any redundancy and pension payments. Our vote would be to close this apology for an art gallery altogether as it's been a pathetic waste of space ever since it opened.
So, the budget is a bit like the curate's egg.
Reading through the report was - as always with Boston Borough Council documents - like wading through treacle.
But for once there were few mistakes or howlers ... just one that made us smile, as it threw the whole exercise into question ....
"Estimated BBC Resources: £1,007k. This includes team costs I think"
At this stage, it's probably safer to be sure!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com   Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Councillors can blog on - with caution

The vexed issue of blogging by Boston Borough councillors - and whether to put forward specific guidance to members - is to be discussed at tonight's meeting of the council's Standard's Committee.
The recommendation is that the Monitoring Officer arranges to remind councillors that the borough's Code of Conduct applies to all their communications, including blogs - the idea being that all members get the same advice, which hopefully helps prevent complaints of breaches of the code.
The main report says that "weblogs" - the hoi polloi call them blogs - are now frequently used by councillors to get their own views out to the electorate or to give people easy communication with the member concerned.
The report says that questions have been raised about the content of member web pages and blogs, particularly where they include comments about other
parties or members of other parties.
It says the basic points to bear in mind are that all councillors are bound by the Code of Conduct, and that councillors' blogs are open to allegations of breaches the Code.
Most of the recent complaints, both formal and informal, about councillors' blogs have been about allegations of failure to treat others with respect, and the report reminds them that whilst criticism is fine it should not descend to personal attack.
However, we recall that the bulk of these complaints have come from an over-sensitive serial objector who - whilst happy to dole out criticism, is less than pleased to receive it in return.
To contradict the report to the committee, blogs are not "frequently" used by councillors in Boston - although they are elsewhere.
Only two of the 32 borough councillors produce them, plus a third county councillor who represents a Boston ward. A third borough councillor caved in to pressure from the serial complainer that we mentioned earlier.
We believe that far more councillors should be blogging.
The reason is that Boston Borough Council is a poor communicator, and if the ruling Bypass Independents had their way we would probably be get even less information than we do at present.
Every councillor who blogs sheds more light on the democratic process - or often the lack of it - and can tell their electorate what is going on in their ward.
Of course, there was briefly one other blogger - the leader of the council Richard Austin - whose blog appeared to great fanfare last October.
It generated an immediate rash of complaints on the grounds that it was a party political polemic produced by the council's IT department and not by the leader himself, and it vanished within days of its appearance.
The report to tonight's meeting says: "Boston Borough Council does not offer individual web pages to members. Even if it did, under the rules such pages could only properly be used for general council business and certainly not for party political work."
However, visitors to the Borough's website will note a link to a "Message from the Council Leader" which at the moment comprises his New Year rant to the great unwashed which appeared in the local press.
Aside from being branded a "message" rather than a "blog" we fail to see the difference between the current offering on the borough website and the first blog that disappeared so rapidly.
Will someone please confirm to us that this is not an "individual web page" provided by the council's IT department for the leader, and that it is about "general council business and certainly not for party political work?"
We think that the answer is obvious.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Flood plans impress - but right scheme is needed

We got out of the house on Friday for a look at the plans for the £50m flood barrier to protect Boston from sea flooding.
As everyone says, this is an important development for the town, and it is essential that as many people as possible are aware of it and make their views known.
There is more than one proposal for the scheme, but the one we thought made most sense was a barrier placed of river upstream of Black Sluice Lock to just downstream of
the Maud Foster Drain is being considered.
If that were implemented, a tidal surge would be blocked before it reached the drain, but water flowing from inland could still be pumped around the barrier into the Haven.
To site the barrier upstream of the Maud Foster could still leave the town vulnerable to flooding from the western side if the gates to the drain were overwhelmed by any surge.
Boston's current flood defences offer a standard of protection equivalent to a 2% probability (one in 50 chance) of flooding from a tidal surge in any year, and a new barrier might change this to 0.33 per cent which is a one in 300 chance - not once in every 300 years as the lady from the Environment Agency told us!
The good news for the 900 businesses and 10,000 homes at risk is that the EA lady assured us that flood insurance cover would once again be available to those Bostonians presently denied it, and also at a price which those who are currently lucky enough to find it can afford.
We were promised that once the barrier is in place and working, the Environment Agency would redraw its flood maps and that Boston would have its "high risk" status removed.
Of course, with insurance companies being insurance companies, all this most probably means is that they will find another reason for loading their policies, as we cannot ever recall any policies that we have held going down.
The Environment Agency's exhibition was well attended on the day we went to Black Sluice Lock Cottages to see it. However we think that more people would have gone had the location been better signposted. We found nothing to indicate where it was until we reached the building itself (after some searching,) and then only a small billboard with the news in microscopic print. We were also disappointed to find (after all the hoo-hah about the "restoration" of the buildings) that they have been turned into soulless double-glazed office style buildings rather that being allowed to retain some semblance of their former character.
Questionnaires were being given away for completion either on site or to be sent in by post. But no matter how hard we've looked we can't seem to find an address for where to send them. Surprisingly in this electronic age, the questionnaire is not available on line.
We said at the outset that this development is most important, and in the interests of telling as many people as possible about it, could we suggest that the display boards which comprise the exhibition are put on display somewhere else for a few weeks.
We know that the library is closed for "improvements" (ie painting it a lurid pink and blue) but there must surely be some other public location where they would be displayed for a little while. Failing that, how about in the window of one of the town's empty shops, for instance?

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Week ending 22nd January

Our Friday miscellany of the week's news and events ...
Driving us mad ... We've mentioned the lack of manners among some Brylaine bus drivers on the Into Town service before, in that they tend to think that no one else on the road matters but them. The latest example of such indifference to others was spotted on Wednesday when a bus exiting Strait Bargate beside Waterstone's simply accelerated straight across the mini roundabout rather than around it (like everyone else does.) The result was confusion for other drivers and also fore pedestrian who use the roundabout as a halfway house refuge when crossing the road. Please, Mr Brylaine, tell your drivers that the phrase "Knights of the Road," which used to apply to HGV drivers because of their courtesy towards other road users, should not be misinterpreted as "Kings of the Road."
Long distance call ... A fortnight on, we have an answer for the reader who asked: "why have the public not been able to contact Kirton police office lately? Could it be that someone has vandalised the police phone?" The answer appears in Boston North West County Councillor Andrea Jenkyns's blog. She tells us that she has reported to the "local" Police Authority the fact that the telephone number has not been working since early December, and that the station was unmanned for 12 days over Christmas.
Crime, what crime ...? Perhaps avoiding contact with the public by phone or in person is why Lincolnshire Police have decided that solving crime isn't really worth the effort. We read in the paper that one in six crimes in Lincolnshire - 15 per-cent - were "screened out" by the police last year. A total of 7,849 crimes were not investigated filed as completed without the need for any further investigation instead. The term "screening out" apparently refers to those crimes which do not need any further investigation and can be filed as completed. - which is interesting give that only a cursory look is taken at the information available, after which no officer visits the scene of the
crime and no attempt is made to catch the culprit. The cops blame this on lack of resources.
Pay as you mind how you go ... Which is probably why they seem quite keen on the idea that residents pay local security firms to do their job for them, as may soon be the case in Spalding. There, a local firm plans to pilot a street patrol scheme for which residents would pay 39p a day to have their streets patrolled, and thinks that Boston could be the next town to "benefit." The company's Operations Manager, Nectario Greenfield says:" We believe as a company that Boston could benefit from this scheme due to the statistics on crime and anti-social behaviour." What a gift to Boston Police if the idea comes to fruition, and where does it all end? To add private security patrols to the existing tiers of police, PCSOs, special constables, town rangers, a council-run Community Safety team and uniformed security staff at Pescod Square, seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It also yet again dilutes the pressure on the people who are paid £120 million a year apparently to do less and less.
Good old days ... We yearned for times past when we read in the Standard's memory lane feature the decision to sentence a Boston man who stole a bicycle to a month's hard labour. More interestingly, this wasn't back in the 1800s when people were hanged for stealing a loaf of bread, but as relatively recent as 1945. What a shame that the law has become so wishy washy in such a relatively short time. The police would have a lot less to do if tough sentences rather than warnings were issued buy the town's magistrates. Far too often we read of defendants who've made repeated court appearances being told that they face prison if they offend again. Then they do ... and they get exactly the same warning. Boston magistrates please take note.
Gardeners' cash-in time ... After the debate on the Cloud Cuckoo Land allotments in Wyberton, we're privileged to be able to show you an artist's impression (below) of what they'll look like once the Bypass Independents have finished showering them with money. Who knows, with even more cash they could be made even more attractive!
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Cuckoo throws others out of the nest

It seems that the Boston Bypass Independent Party can't let a council meeting go by without a brawl with their with opposition colleagues as they ride roughshod over them.
Earlier in the week we mentioned the planned generosity to the good burghers of Wyberton - who are honoured to have Council Leader Richard Austin as one of their two borough councillors - in the form of a £25,000 cash gift to turn the controversial plot known as Cuckoo Land into allotments. This large sum of money is apparently necessary to knock the land into shape before the grow-it-yourselfers of Wyberton can dirty their stainless steel forks on it.
The decision was pushed through regardless of calls for it go before the borough's Scrutiny Committee so that the appropriateness of such a major grant in these straitened times could be more properly examined.
Not only that, but the council meeting heard that even more largesse is planned for Councillor Austin's electorate, all of which has angered one observer, who writes:
"The BBI Party (leader Richard Austin) were unwilling, as they demonstrated in their coordinated voting at the full council meeting on January 18th, to allow for a Scrutiny Committee to discuss plans for Boston Borough Council to inject £25,000 capital into new infrastructure 'needed' to provide allotments on Cuckoo Land at Wyberton.
"The solid vote in council by the BBI Party (leader Richard Austin) has also cut across the possibility of the Scrutiny Committee examining plans for the Borough to inject further funds into the provision of fencing, hedging and landscaping on the same site.
"It would seem from the report before the council that any income from the letting of allotments on the site will be gifted to a yet-to-be-formed Cuckoo Land tenants' association to take care of the future of the site maintenance.
"BUT in the same report, one reads that maybe some aspects of maintenance of wildlife features on the site may have to be met from the Council's Allotments' maintenance budget.
"So that could be tough luck on allotment holders on other borough sites when they come looking for maintenance investment from Boston Borough Council.
"One must wonder a little bit if the BBI (leader Richard Austin) had thought of this before so solidly voting away the opportunity to discuss such matters at a Scrutiny Committee.
"One should also wonder - more than a little bit - why the BBI party (leader Richard Austin) have decided to push this report through in this manner.
Explanation anyone?"
Someone else demanding answers is Conservative Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, who is particularly scathing of the Cuckoo Land decision on his blog, which you can read by clicking here.
Needless to say, our local newspapers, whilst reporting the decision, have noted none of the opposition demands to scrutinise it.
Ironically when asked, the BBI still insists that it is a group of independents linked solely by a common dream of a bypass for Boston - and that on all other matters members are free to vote as they wish. The reality is that the BBI membership is a bunch of slavish sycophants who do precisely as they are told by their leadership.
What they've clearly failed to take on board this time is that a gift of £25,000 plus to Wyberton substantially reduces the funds available to help other wards such as their own.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Culture "clubbed" in philistine Boston

We were amused to read the other day that if a commuter train arrives no more than five minutes late, or a long distance service no later than ten, for statistical purposes they can be deemed to be on time.
This is another of the ways that the country is steadily declining in that - instead of making the train service punctual - we massage the figures so that they appear to be.
A report to tonight's Overview and Scrutiny committee which purports to be a "Cultural strategy update" does something similar when it examines the development of the Boston strategy as part of a review of Lincolnshire County Council's current culture plan.
The report tells us that the word “culture” has many meanings, and reminds us that Boston's first cultural strategy back in 2002 quoted a wide-ranging definition adopted by the Local Government Association of South Australia (why?) concluded that culture was "everything that contributes to the quality of our lives…. one of the basic things that make life worth living. It gives our life meaning and enjoyment " which is probably true in Australia!
It goes on to tell us that many people assume culture is just about the "high" arts like the classics, fine paintings and sculptures, grand opera and drama.
But it adds that it is also about "everyday activities that are part of a healthy and active way of life. It is also about the distinctive and unique local factors that shape the places in which we live."
This opens the door to quote the Department for Culture, Media and Sport definition of cultural activity as not only the usual suspects such as arts, craft, and fashion museums, artifacts, archives and design libraries, literature, writing and publishing, heritage, architecture, landscape and archaeology but sports events, facilities and development parks, open spaces, wildlife habitats, water environment and countryside recreation, children's play, playgrounds and play activities, festivals and attractions and "informal leisure pursuits."
We're then reminded that (despite being so fat) Boston is a apparently a sporty place - performing slightly above the English average in terms of the percentage of people reporting participation in three 30 minute sessions a week of moderate intensity sport - like walking to the pub or chip shop.
This is then buttressed with the declaration that the percentage of adults who are very or fairly satisfied with sports provision in their local area is the highest in Lincolnshire and above the regional and national averages.
But, despite this, participation rates for sports volunteering, involvement in sports clubs, and competitive sport are all below the regional and national averages.
And back to the more accepted definition of culture, in terms of use of visits to museums/galleries in the last 12 months, Boston performs below the English and regional averages.
Boston figures for "engagement in the arts" have improved in the year to Dec 2009, with 36.1% of people in Boston involved in the arts, but well below the English average of 45.5%.
Key finding tell us that when asked what would motivate you to do more sport/physical activity, the top four factors were better footpaths for walking, cheaper admission,
safer roads for cycling, and Better facilities in parks and open spaces.
Do you see where all this is leading?
Because the normally perceived "culture" in Boston is all but absent, we fudge the debate to root it in sport and exercise - which is co-incidentally just what the Borough Council wants us to do more of.
Of course, the waffle in the report abounds, as you might imagine.
Try some of these quotes for size.
"Work in partnership to promote inclusion, mental and physical well being through greater engagement with cultural provision ...
"Develop a coordinated communication plan, to include advocacy and championship of cultural provision ...
"Collect research and evidence of the economic and social impact of cultural provision, harnessing existing measures and developing new approaches ...
"Build knowledge of communities, identity and sense of place through cultural provision as Boston’s population grows ..."
The list goes on, but we expect you get the picture.
We wonder who writes this stuff and - more importantly - how many people who read it actually understand it.
This is a classic example of cutting one's coat according to one's cloth.
Because we don't have much by way of "culture" we lower the bar until we find something we can include.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Time to think again about allotments?

Yesterday, we mentioned the Broadfield Lane allotments, and their unimportance when contrasted with the needs of the inhabitants of Wyberton.
We know that the Borough Council had no choice other than to evict the tenants of Broadfield Lane after the greedy Boston Municipal Charities demanded the return of the site that had been used since 1914 so they could sell it to Longhurst Housing.
The charity argued that - after dispensing less than £2,000 a year to local good causes - selling the site for a sum believed to be around half a million would let them do even more good work in the community.
Frankly, we believe all this would do would flush out a load of fringe money grabbers from the woodwork which would see the cash being given to a sheaf of unnecessary projects.
Then the Mayflower Housing Association stepped in to express an interest in the land, and everything fell fallow ... presumably in anticipation of a bidding war.
Since then, the economy has collapsed, and it seems that neither party is interested in buying the land and building on it.
If nothing else, we think this should mean that the land could be returned to use as allotments at least in the short term, but no one seems to have thought of this possibility.
We mentioned yesterday our recollection that Councillor Ramonde Newell, who represents Staniland South ward where the allotments lie, pledged his support for the victims of the land grab, but we had heard nothing much since.
In fact a reader has reminded us that this support was far more concrete than we recalled.
In a letter to the Boston Standard at the end of 2007, he wrote:
"In local politics few things are just right or wrong, good or bad. However, most people believe Boston's roads are both wrong and bad.
"And now another, smaller issue, falls into that category – the Broadfield Lane allotments.
"For Boston Municipal Charities to throw all the allotment holders off the land they have worked for decades, to swell the charity's
coffers, is clearly wrong.
"The allotment holders are model tenants. They ask for very little, and have done much good over a long period of time.
"They, and their fathers before them, often wounded veterans returning from both world wars, turned fallow land into a productive, ecologically-viable space.
"It is an amenity to be proud of. It is a rural, environmentally-friendly oasis nestled within the town – part of its very lungs.
"On the other side stands the Boston Municipal Charities, motivated by money – lots of it. The allotment holders have the misfortune to occupy a large piece of very valuable building land. The charity has massive advantages.
"It is apparently aided and abetted by huge, wealthy landowners, such as Longhurst Housing.
"Moral leadership against the allotment holders is provided by, of all people, the Church of England, in the form of the Lincoln Diocese.
"Charities and housing associations are not forced to behave like feudal lords.
"They have a choice to do what is right by the allotment holders and the community.
"But none of this bodes well for the defenceless allotment holders. They, on the face of it, don't stand a chance. They are just ordinary, local people like you and me. They simply have a love of the land, and enjoy working the soil.
"Faced with the brutal, uncompromising demands of powerful agencies and individuals, they seem as doomed as the weeds on their own compost heaps.
"The Boston Municipal Charities and their supporters are effectively destroying something of great local value. Something unique and very difficult, perhaps impossible to replicate, without spending large sums of money.
"Even then, they would probably never recapture the soul of what is the present Broadfield Lane allotments!
"Councillor Ray Newell - Proudly representing Staniland South Ward"
These are very fine words, but we wonder if Councillor Newell has been pursuing matters on behalf of the Broadfield Lane victims in the two years since he wrote that letter.
Certainly we think that the possibility of reopening the allotments pro tem is something that the council should consider.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Lots to talk about

There are two particularly interesting items on the agenda for tonight's full council meeting.
The first is the dissolution of BARC, the Boston Area Regeneration Company and brainchild of the gifted former Chief Executive and rainmaker Mick Gallagher (whatever happened to him?)
This is another of those cabinet decisions which the BBI mafia now want rubber stamping so that it can then tell the full council what to do next after it has had further meetings on how to spend BARC's leftover cash.
To call BARC a flop is like claiming that Hitler didn't come out of World War II quite so badly after all.
The only ray of sunshine in this otherwise occluded story is that Boston may at least benefit with possible improvements to Boston Market, town centre signage and information, investment in various business, marketing and enterprise schemes - though not necessarily all of them. Also mentioned are shop and property design and enhancement grant schemes, which is optimistically claimed could attract matched funding from English Heritage.
We think this latter hope may well be pie in the sky, for as far as we can see it is based on an item on BBC Radio Lincolnshire more than a year ago, when a spokesman for English Heritage said:"We don't invest massive amounts every year but when we're interested in a place we'll consistently invest over a period of time. It might take seven or eight years to regenerate a place. In Boston it might take longer." That certainly makes the borough's interpretation of matched funding sound somewhat fanciful.
The other big item on the agenda is the issue of a change in the council executive.
No, don't get your hopes up.
Because of national changes, the present system under which the council is run has to alter, and basically the options are to choose between an elected Mayor who is not a councillor and who appoints his cabinet from those who are, or a council run by a leader with greatly enhanced powers.
What a choice.
As we've said before, we can't think of anyone in the town who's got the stature to fill the boots of an elected mayor. They need charisma, authority, personality, charm .... the list is endless.
That leaves us with the choice of a leader with more powers.
The idea's fine if a leader is up to the task - but what we've seen of the leadership to date fills us with dread.
The only good news is that the changes take effect after the next Borough Council elections in May 2011 - so at least the BBI mob will be out on their bypasses.
We said at the start that there were two particularly interesting items on tonight's agenda for - but there are probably three if you consider the cabinet's request to rubber stamp a gift of £25,000 to the good people of Wyberton to turn the plot known as Cloud Cuckoo Land into allotments. Apparently one key reason for this is that "allotments create multi-functional benefits in terms of healthy eating and lifestyles, environmental enhancement and generating a shared sense of belonging and pride."
As we've said before: try telling that the allotment holders needlessly evicted from Broadfield Lane - a site that not only meets all the above criteria, but had the added importance of creating a "lung" in the heart of the town. We seem to recall that Councillor Ramonde Newell, who represents Staniland South ward where the allotments lie pledged his support for the victims of the land grab, but have heard nothing much since. Meanwhile, the needs of people in Wyberton must come first ... mustn't they?

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Week ending 15th January

Our Friday miscellany of the week's news and events
It's true what they say about buses ... We noted with interest the picture in the local press which showed two buses passing each other in Strait Bargate. According to Lincolnshire County Council this was a "rare occurrence" caused by a problem with radio communications. When the service started we were promised that only one bus would come through Strait Bargate at once, and we're assured that a new system will prevent this happening again. Presumably the promises about solo buses refers to them crossing in opposite directions. If not, then this is not at all rare. We've lost count of the number of times we've been forced to stand back whilst two buses drive nose to tail among the shoppers. And on more than one occasion, we've even seen three of the noisy, smelly, intruders in convoy. It's simply not good enough.
Speaking of the buses ... the recent big freeze wasn't helped by the fact that they packed the snow down even harder, making walking through Strait Bargate even more of a hazard than it was already. And we were baffled to find that by last Saturday no grit had been laid in the shopping area, but by Sunday, after the snow had thawed the whole area was made slippery by ... wet sand. Antarctica to Sahara in one fell swoop.
Grand response ... Lincolnshire Police ended their recruitment drive for 60 new officers after just two hours because a thousand people rang in, and they ran out of the limited number of forms they had at the ready. A spokesman said the force was "overwhelmed." Why the surprise? Good starting pay, a job for life with a big pension at the end of it, free uniform and a comfy warm office with little to do except fill in forms. Who wouldn't want such a cushy number? Living in hope ... Will someone please tell the failed Lib Dem candidate for the Boston North West County Council by election that the war is over. Mike Sheridan-Shinn is still proclaiming on his website "now that phase one of the campaign is complete. Its now time to launch phase two which is very exciting and i know my supporters will like it....... " Perhaps he's hanging on for the General Election campaign in the hope that his plan B might have better luck next time. That's unless the Lib Dems go for third time lucky with a new candidate.
Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious ... The new look Boston Standard continues to go from strength to strength . Now, we not only have fewer stories, but the publishers have decided to economise by removing the spaces between words in the headlines. Sounds silly? The pictures of these three headings below tell their own story. They remind us of those quizzes where you have to find other words concealed in a grid.
Woofless ... We thank the Boston Target for the best howler of the year so far - and we don't mean the dog! The advert below appears on page 30 if you want to cut it out and send it to your friends . We wondered about a possible name for the terrier. How about Alf Qaeda?

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Still time left for BBI to get act together

At the end of the year, we read of the decision to ditch a 'phone pilot which saw Boston residents ringing a Lincoln call centre with their environmental queries. The scheme ran for 16 months and wasted almost £10,000 of taxpayers' cash before it dawned on the powers that be in Boston that people in Lincoln lacked the local knowledge to answer queries from people in Boston.
Yet again, Boston has failed to grasp the obvious and abandoned a scheme which might well have worked had the people at the Lincoln end of the line been given a day or two's training.
The business of sharing does not seem to sit well with Boston Borough Council - or more specifically with the ruling Bypass Independent Party.
After a lot of gum gnashing, the council backed away from sharing back office services with South Holland and East Lindsey District Councils - a scheme that would have saved a fortune over five years.
The problem seemed to be that because of its pathetic financial situation, the council would have had to borrow the money needed to seed the scheme, whilst our more prudent neighbours had the cash in reserve.
So one financial problem generates another, the classic spiral of decline which we see so often.
So what is it about Boston Borough Council that seems to breed failure upon failure?
In recent months we have gained a steady insight into just how fractured life is in Worst Street.
We've glimpsed snatches of e-mails that show snide and patronising attitudes by the ruling Bypass Independents towards members of the opposition parties.
We've heard of the clashes that take place away from the eyes and ears of the press and public, and apparent abuses by politicians whose job is to facilitate the work of committees, not to hamstring it.
At the heart of all this is the obvious mindset of the BBI that whatever they want is right and that there is no alternative.
They refuse to debate important issues and try to control committee representation in the way that dictators like Castro or Kim Il Sung would have applauded.
If there's any humour to be found in all this, then what's so funny as the BBI seriously seem to regard themselves as politicians.
But with the exception of their Leader, who gained a smidgen of experience with Lincolnshire County Council, the rest came untried and untested to local government and by and large are still on the starting blocks after more than two and a half years.
To free Boston from the quicksand that this sorry leadership is drowning it in needs more than an Improvement Board. It requires a fundamental change of mindset by the leadership.
Majority rule should not be regarded as a licence to ride roughshod over anyone who has the temerity to disagree with you.
The BBI has 16 months to get its act together and produce a competent, listening authority that will work in the interests of the people of Boston, rather than its own narrow and rapidly failing agenda.
But somehow, we don't think that it will.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Save cash on pointless surveys

It's pointless survey time in Boston once again, and the first of the year is a "poll" of taxpayer opinion on the forthcoming borough council budget.
The council has £10.5m to invest in its services, and last year the rate of council tax remained unchanged.
Interestingly, this decision - wrongly headlined as a 0% rise in the tax - was quite widely criticised, and it will be interesting to see what happens this year.
We call the survey "pointless" and we do so because the questions it asks only scratch the surface, and the big issues, such as the overall cost of administration, are not addressed.
The other thing is the vague nature of the questions, starting with the very first.
"The Council is seeking to improve value for money. Please tell us one thing that would improve value for money at Boston Borough Council."
Our immediate reaction would be to say that the Bypass Independents should resign en-masse, and we should have the chance to elect a new council sixteen months sooner than we expected. But the fact is that this is not a reasonable question to ask the average person in the street - unless they're fully conversant with the intricacies of local government finance ... which we are sure that many councillors who should be, are not.
The survey then moves on to whether we would be willing to pay more council tax or not - and if so, whether we'd like it to be as low as 1%, or £1.66 a year or as "much" as 3% ... which works out at £5 a year. Given that these figures are for a band D property, and the bulk of Boston's houses fall in the lowest band - band A - means the rise would be even lower, we regard this question as a total waste of time.
Boston is strapped for cash, and despite the ongoing recession, we doubt that an extra fiver a year would break anyone's bank. For people who pay monthly it represents 50p per installment - little more than a penny a day.
The next question says that Boston Borough Council is considering spending more, or less money in some service areas to focus on priority services (without saying which) and asks which one particular service should benefit from more investment.
The list is exhaustive - Arts, heritage and tourism ,cemetery/crematorium, community safety and CCTV committee and electoral services, economic regeneration, ensuring buildings are safe, environmental health, fraud section, housing services, land charges and licensing (such as taxis and gaming,) leisure and sports services, parks and grounds maintenance, planning, processing and administration of council tax and housing benefits, public conveniences, recovering abandoned vehicles, refuse collection and recycling, and street cleaning.
The problem with this list is that it is too long to narrow the choices in the question down to a single answer. Most taxpayers probably don't know enough about the work of these myriad departments to come to an informed decision - and the same is true of the next question, which asks which one particular service do we feel Boston Borough Council should be spending less money on - and presents exactly the same list.
Finally, we are asked if we would be prepared to pay more for particular services when we use them, and cites parking, licensing, and planning as three examples.
Interestingly, the options for answer are yes, no or don't know - though how the latter could be an answer to such a simple question, we ... don't know.
The catch all comes in question six, when we're asked for any further comments on Boston Borough Council's annual spending?
A complex issue, reduced to six meaningless questions, which convinces us that one way for Boston Borough Council to save a few quid would be to dispense with surveys like these.
Interestingly, although the council tax issue can be summed up in a mere half a dozen questions, it takes more than that for the usual stuff and nonsense about disability, ethnicity, sexuality and whether you like to dress in clothing usually worn by whichever the sex is opposite to your own - that's if you know what sex you are.
What a waste of time and money.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Democracy should never be compromised

We normally take criticism on the chin, and tend to do no more than report it so that our readers can make up their own minds.
But in the way that our blog on democracy raised concerns with Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, his response to it (which we published yesterday) raised concerns with us.
Information often reaches Boston Eye in a fragmentary fashion, which was the case with last week's story.
Councillor Singleton-McGuire's response has thrown a little more light into some of the darker corners where information was lacking, so that we can now say with confidence that the major opposition objections to the selling-off of land for the Queen Street and Sleaford Road "improvement" scheme would have been confined to the Better Boston Group of councillors.
This is because Councillor Singleton-McGuire informs us that as a member of the Conservative Party By-Pass Action Group in 2006/7 he worked with other members, and the County Council for the Liquorpond Street Road Improvement scheme - only for the incoming Boston Bypass Party to put a stop to everything.
This puts the current Tory opposition onside with the Bypass Independents to push this project through.
He attacks critics of the Mayor's refusal to "call in " the land sale for further discussion at the eleventh hour on the grounds that "many meetings have taken place, open to all councillors and general public to raise concerns, or in fact 'call it in' for further debate. "
Yet he then goes on to disclose that perhaps the best opportunity for debate was stifled at Boston Borough Council’s Overview and Scrutiny meeting on 18th November last year by the committee chairman, Councillor Alison Austin.
He also alleges that her efforts went further - to include "a degree of unnecessary antagonistic and personal unpleasantaries to some members, which included myself being given the third degree in my attempt to ask a question."
By the sound of it, we're not talking about petty stuff here, as Councillor Singleton-McGuire is a tough customer, and for him not only to complain strongly at the time but to raise the issue with the Chief Executive the next day suggests that his patience was sorely tried.
Not only that, but apparently Better Boston Group Councillor Anne Dorrian left the meeting after "continued unnecessary interruptions" by Councillor Allison Austin.
Councillors were also invited to question County Council Highways Officers immediately before the meeting, which prompts Councillor Singleton-McGuire to claim that "if a 'call in' for further debate was required, then the appropriate time and place should have been at the above meetings or at previous Lincolnshire County Council meetings."
This is where we start to worry.
The Tories seem to have been happy to ignore successful efforts to filibuster debate on the scheme as it suited them to see their original cunning plan go through.
Furthermore, to claim that "to accept a 'call-in' at full council when there is already an overwhelming majority of 93% in favour, would not be practical and at such a late stage would waste thousands of unnecessary taxpayers money in delays, when this 'democratic process' that your article refers to could have been executed earlier at little or no waste of taxpayers' money" is very worrying indeed.
Why?
First of all the democratic process was not apparently executed earlier, which was probably why a last ditch attempt was necessary.
And if, as Councillor Singleton-McGuire insists "the problem lies with the Boston Bypass Party ... who did not give a fair and necessary exposure to the borough’s members at Boston," then surely the role of a Mayor is to put this right if the opportunity presents itself - as it did.
Secondly, we take issue with the idea that if a large majority of people support a plan, there is no need to hear from the minority which opposes it.
Extrapolate that to a courtroom scenario, and we have a situation where - if enough people think a defendant is guilty before a trial - we dispense with the judicial process in favour of a conviction.
And thirdly, the suggestion that democracy comes at a price - the assertion that high cost should preclude debate ought to be anathema to someone who is "all for the democratic process," as Councillor Singleton-McGuire says he is.
We wonder if the boot were on the other foot, and the Conservative opposition group has been denied debate, whether the attitude would be so passive.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

"BBI denied democratic debate - not Mayor"

Our piece a week ago today on the refusal by the Mayor to allow opposition discussion on the Cabinet decision to sell land to the County Council for the so-called road improvements in in Queen Street and Sleaford Road has led to us being taken to task by Conservative Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire.
"I am a keen observer of your points of view on your daily Blog," he writes.
"Sadly, I raise concerns over recent matters in your article of Monday, 4th January, for the following reasons.
"When previously a Borough Councillor in 2006/7, I was a member of the Conservative Party By-Pass Action Group, working extremely hard together with other members, and the Lincolnshire County Council for the Liquorpond Street Road Improvement scheme - only to be publicly criticised by the incoming Boston Bypass Party who put a stop to everything.
"After two years of being in power, the Boston Bypass Party have done a U-turn and resurrected the scheme, somewhat claiming the credit. Matters have progressed with the Lincolnshire County Council to forge ahead with this long awaited highway improvement for Boston. Many meetings have taken place, open to all councillors and general public to raise concerns, or in fact 'call it in' for further debate.
This could also have happened at Boston Borough Council’s Overview and Scrutiny, Policy & Project Committee meeting Chaired by Councillor Alison Austin on 18th November 2009.
"Unfortunately, the importance of this agenda item (perhaps the biggest for Boston’s future in many years) was given limited exposure with a one hour time restriction imposed on it by Councillor Alison Austin. Councillor Alison Austin also declared preference would be given to the committee members first which I felt was not a very democratic process.
"I also believe an attempt to stifle debate with a degree of unnecessary antagonistic and personal unpleasantaries were indulged upon by Councillor Alison Austin to some members, which included myself being given the third degree in my attempt to ask a question. I complained strongly at the time and to the Chief Executive the following day. Councillor Anne Dorrian eventually left the meeting after continued unnecessary interruptions by Councillor Alison Austin.
"All councillors were invited to an additional one hour cross examination of Lincolnshire County Council Highways Officers on the Highways Strategy focusing on Liquorpond Street improvements immediately before the Overview and Scrutiny meeting.
"To get to the point, if a 'call in' for further debate was required, then the appropriate time and place should have been at the above meetings or at previous Lincolnshire county Council meetings."This is a multi-million pound project for Boston which has already begun moving forward having been given permission and the green light to 'pass go!' at several processes and meetings.
"To accept a 'call-in’ at full council when there is already an overwhelming majority of 93% in favour, would not be practical and at such a late stage would waste thousands of unnecessary taxpayers money (sic) in delays, when, this 'democratic process' that your article refers to could have been executed earlier at little or no waste of taxpayers' money.
"The Mayor has the power and the right to proclaim such a motion if in the interest of the public and the borough.
"Therefore, I feel it is unfair for Boston Eye to ridicule or even refer to the Mayor of Boston in such a way, when as a non-political figurehead, the position of a Mayor (or Mayoress) does not allow them to defend themselves is such circumstances, give their point of view or reasoning.
"I am all for the democratic process but feel the problem lies with the Boston Bypass Party on this one who did not give a fair and necessary exposure to the borough’s members at Boston.
"After all, they are the ruling administration and Councillor Richard Austin (husband to Councillor Alison Austin!) is the Portfolio Holder for Transport.
"Need I say more? I rest my case!"
We thank Councilor Singleton-McGuire for his e-mail.
Firstly we would say that having re-read the blog, we can find nothing that "ridicules" the Mayor, and we strongly reject this assertion.
The e-mail also raises other points which tend to worry us, and we will discuss them in detail in tomorrow's blog.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

STOP PRESS

We understand that tomorrow's market has been cancelled due to the bad weather.

Week ending 8th January

Our Friday miscellany of the week's news and events
What a stroke of luck ... Conspiracy theorists among our readers have not been slow to point out that last month's special meeting of the full council, where the Mayor denied an application to call in for discussion the Cabinet's approval to sell land to the County Council to facilitate road "improvements" in Queen Street and Sleaford Road was held behind closed doors. The meeting was conducted under a blanket ban on public and press admission, which means that the press would not have bothered to attend. How serendipitous .... for the BBI!
Cross making ... We read with interest about a bid to get the Olympic torch carried through Lincolnshire in 2012. Apparently Lincolnshire County Council is working with the London 2012 organising committee to get the iconic flame paraded along the route of the Eleanor Crosses – the historic trail which the county says "runs from Lincoln Cathedral to Westminster Abbey, taking in sites at Lincoln, Boston, Grantham and Stamford." Sadly their version fails to tally with reality. The 12 crosses were at Lincoln, Grantham, Stamford, Geddington, Northampton, Stony Stratford, Woburn, Dunstable, St. Albans, Waltham, Westcheap, and Charing. Once again, Boston was left out - even in medieval times!
Painless cuts ... After our piece earlier in the week on Lincolnshire Police plans to redefine to role of PCSOs to that of social workers, we were interested to learn that officials are now warning that "nothing is sacred" as they try to make multi-million pound savings to meet Government demands.The force was told to cut £12.4million from its budget by the end of the 2010/11 financial year by wasting less cash and making its service more efficient. It says government plans to cut public spending will mean an "efficiency regime" will become more important for staff and it is taking action to reach the target as quickly as possible. Savings could include both service cutbacks and staff carrying
out existing jobs in less time. Two questions. 1: If it's possible to to do existing jobs quicker when pressed, why couldn't it have been done sooner? 2: Surely the force's Chief Con can now not fail to see that trying to cling on to PCSO's with a reduced, non policing role is a position that is untenable, and which could save the force and the County Council a total of £3 million.
Another police cut ... ? Talking of the police, a reader asks: " Why have the public not been able to contact Kirton police office lately? Could it be that someone has vandalised the police phone?" If anyone has an answer could they please let us know?
Smile, you're on candid webcamera ... Webcams have come into their own in the past week as internet users have been able to check on conditions on the roads and town centres. These cameras provide a look at dozens of towns an villages around the country, but at present, Boston doesn't appear on the list. There's now real reason why now. The technology is cheap and simple to set up. All we need is an enterprising Bostonian to set one up and people from all over the world could view the town from the top of the Stump or the Assembly Rooms roof. For examples, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/england/webcams/
Lies and statistics ... Given the way the figures for people in Boston wanting to improve their fitness have been massaged to make them look good, we would like to tell you that the number of signatories to the Number 10 Downing Street e-petition calling for a by-pass for Boston have increase by around 20% per-cent since last we looked. Backing in August there were 11 signatures. Today there are 13. We expect Gordon to order work to start on the bypass any day now.
Words fail them ... As regular readers will know, we love nothing better than a good pun. But among its handful of stories ( a mere seventeen if you exclude letters and strolls various down Memory Lane) the headline "Icy paths - just grit and bare it" in the week's Boston Standard (below)left us totally baffled. If it's a play on grin and bear it, then "bear" should replace "bare." If it's meant to suggest that we grit and "bare" the footpaths, it's obscure, to say the least. Whatever the answer, the suggestion that we "grit and bare it" sounds like a recipe for the risk of freezing parts of our anatomy to the shovel that we'd rather not contemplate.
Snow news ... Pity anyone whose been trying to find out the state of the local roads by surfing to BBC Radio Lincolnshire's website. It's recently been redesigned, and it's almost impossible to locate anything of importance. All you can find are score of pictures of the staff looking stupid - or as they possibly imagine, glamorous.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

What do the watchers do ...?

It came as no surprise to learn that across the country there are at least 14,793 officers in local councils who can enter private property without requiring a warrant or police officer escort.
The disclosure came in a report called "Barging In," produced by an organisation called Big Brother Watch.
What did surprise us was that Boston Borough Council has 19 such officers.
Astonishingly, there are 1,043 laws permitting state inspectors to enter people’s homes and premises.
Within councils, the officers who can barge into your home unannounced include environmental health technicians, anti-social behaviour officers, and safety control inspectors.
Big Brother Watch says that many of the laws that permit power of entry are crucial for reasons of public safety and law enforcement. But it says that the steady rise in the number of council officers able to wield these powers points to a wider failing within local authorities.
"Councils are granting powers of entry to increasing numbers of their officers for administrative ease. Entering private property is a difficult, sensitive and
sometimes dangerous exercise. As the numbers rise, the potential for abuse and the lasting damage that a poorly executed operation can do to its victims become of greater concern.
Alex Deane, Director of Big Brother Watch, said: "Once, a man’s home was his castle. Today the Big Brother state wants to inspect, regulate and standardise the inside of our homes. Councils are dishing out powers of entry to officers within their council for their own ease, without giving due thought to the public's right to privacy and the potential for abuse. There needs to be a much closer eye kept on the number of officers granted the right to barge into private premises without a warrant."
The organisation says that whilst powers of entry are not in and of themselves a bad thing, there are still examples of meaningless regulations that are "are facile and needless."
They include checking to see if pot plants have plant pests or do not have a "plant passport, " or to check the energy ratings on refrigerators as well as surveying gardens to see if hedges are too high under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.
Big Brother Watch warns that it has become possible for a local authority officer to treat any number of situations as justifying the use of a power of entry; conversely, it has become increasingly difficult for a member of the public to know their own rights and avenues to redress when such a power is used.
We'd be interested to learn which departments the 19 Boston Borough Council officers with these powers work in, and what sort of pretexts have been used to gain access to taxpayers' homes.
Of all the obscure regulations which they can quote to gain access to your house or ours, the one we like best is the power to inspect a property to ensure illegal or unregulated hypnotism is not taking place (Hypnotism Act 1952).
We suspect something of that sort may well be going on in the borough.
Otherwise, why would members of the Bypass Independents slavishly do everything they're ordered by the leadership?
They must be in some sort of trance!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Same old message...

We never cease to be entertained by Boston Borough Council leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin, and his so-called New Year Message hasn't failed to disappoint us.
"I am looking forward to a year of achievement, a year when the council turns around its performance and delivers improved value for money for residents across the borough," he tells the great unwashed.
Well so are we!
Yet again, we are reminded of the big challenges facing Boston in the years ahead.
But the mantra is to be firm.
"I firmly believe that now the council's finances are on a firmer footing and we have the necessary controls to deliver a balanced budget."
He blithely cites the setting up of an "Improvement Board" and claims that it is helping to drive forward "the improvement we need to make at Boston Borough."
Frankly, we'll believe that when we see the minutes of the meetings, which we somehow think is unlikely, and the setting up of the Board fails to note that by definition the borough must have been deeply in the mire for such action to have become necessary.
The Dear Leader reminds us that the economic downturn is having a drastic effect - an idea that he rejected a year ago, and tries to cheer us with a list of things to celebrate.
These are: improved traffic flow (agreed during the reign of the previous administration;) new bus services which have brought more shoppers into town (questionable;) the opening of the refurbished Park Gate toilets (that's a relief;) more allotments available - doubtless to replace the ones in Broadfield Lane from which scores of tenants were evicted for a housing plan that's failed to materialise; plans are being progressed to improve street parking arrangements (presumably charging people to park outside their homes when it's previously been free), green waste collection (what's happened there?) and climate change issues are being addressed (reducing hot air from the Cabinet would be a good starter;) and more people are benefiting from the healthy walks scheme (but not many!)
We're then reminded that 2010 will see the long-awaited road widening scheme to improve traffic flow on the A16 and A52. This work is due to start in February and be completed by December.
We define that as ten months of misery for what has already been declared a pointless exercise to prove that Boston still needs the by-pass that it will never get.
The Leader thanks the many who are now helping to keep the borough tidier and greener - a job previously done by the council; also to all who have given their ideas for the refurbishment of the Market Place, which will probably be ignored.
The message ends: "The integration of the many new migrants into the area is still causing concern to some people and I thank the many residents who are helping to reduce tensions, including the council's community development team.
"One of the key issues for 2010 is the Coastal Strategy Report due in March.
"Its findings are likely to have a big influence on Boston's future particularly the supply of affordable homes, regeneration projects and the timing of the building of a bypass or distributor road."
It sounds like last year all over again.
We have never understood why local civic leaders feel the need to issue messages like these.
The Queen, yes, so too the Prime Minister and church leaders.
But not the lacklustre leader of a lacklustre ruling party, whose promises will most probably never be kept.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

New PCSO plan takes them OFF the street

The new year has barely begun, and Lincolnshire Police are trying to find new ways to fund the continuance of the useless Police Community Support Officers by luring councillors into the belief that a big new cunning plan will make them look better than ever!
A report to today's Executive of Lincolnshire County Council recommends embracing a "new vision of integrated neighbourhood policing" and signing up to a new three year financial deal with Lincolnshire Police.
The alternative, says the report is
1: To stop funding this chocolate teapot army, which would see the PSCO force shrink by 50 to around a third of its present strength. Amazingly, for a group which already contributes little, if anything by way of public service, the report claims this would be "a significant backward step."
2: "Develop an alternative proposal for community support." This option would throw the baby out with the bathwater by developing "alternative" community support officers positioned around the county, without the powers PCSOs currently have but needing a money-wasting new communications infrastructure, management support systems and personnel .... for just 45 people - which the report admits is insufficient to give comprehensive coverage across the county.
As we shake our heads at these money wasting proposals, as if by magic, we are the introduced to
3:"A SUPPORT NETWORK FOR LINCOLNSHIRE COMMUNITIES."
"Working in partnership with Lincolnshire Police, an opportunity has been identified to significantly improve the feelings of trust and confidence that local residents have in their public service organisations’ ability to listen and respond to their concerns. It is believed that this will also increase levels of satisfaction with councils and the police."
"The opportunity is centred upon constructing a genuinely integrated service arrangement between the County Council and Lincolnshire Police in respect of the day to day operations of PCSOs.
"The vision is for named individuals, and PCSOs in particular, to be able to report community issues and concerns into a central hub where the matter of concern will be referred to the most appropriate service provider, partnership or local strategic partnership for a response and action. The person raising the issue will be guaranteed a response within agreed service standards and the patterns and trends arising will be used in strategic planning activities.
"In addition, it is envisaged that PCSO’s will work with the County Council in a range of different settings in order to provide greater access to the PCSOs, to increase signposting to relevant council services, to engage more consistently with local councillors and support community safety activities such as trading standards, safer schools, monitoring vulnerable people and fire safety in the home.
"These visible expressions of shared operations will serve to re-assure the public that the police and county council are working together to identify and resolve the issues that matter most to local residents – a community support network."
At this point the report reminds us that - very sensibly - District Councils pulled the plug on PCSO support for 2009 / 2010.
As a result, In 2009/10 Lincolnshire County Council went solo with a contribution of £1,748,848.95.
Now, Lincolnshire Police want £1,500,000 for 2010/11 and the next two years so that their PCSOs can be paid to do a slew of jobs currently successfully being done by other people.
It's a carrot without a stick, and it appears that enough donkeys in Looncolnshire County Council are eating it up!
The waffle in this report is beyond belief.
If you don't believe us try " Opportunities for improving community well-being outcomes through integrated working" for size.
We've ranted before about the fact that no sooner than PCSOs "hit the streets" they head for the nearest supermarket where they hang up a "suggestion box" which they empty once a week - avoiding stepping out of the nick as quickly as possible.
What happened to the idea that PCSOs would get out and about on the streets. In many areas they have never been seen, and now it seems that they plan to strike the word "police" from their responsibilities entirely.
The new big idea in today's report is for "Community Surgeries" - applying using County Council facilities such as libraries, mobile libraries and children's’ centres to provide regular community 'listening posts.' "This will improve access for local residents – they will know where and when they can talk face to face with a PCSO."
Then there's "Service Signposting," where PCSOs "will pro-actively signpost residents to an agreed range of council and other services. PCSOs will be equipped with service contact details to pass on to residents where needed.
The carrot here is to aggrandise county councillors with the promise of quarterly meetings to review trends, issues and significant community issues. "It would be for the councillor and PCSO to determine whether other people could usefully participate in such discussions. This will provide another source of local shared intelligence for our organisations to act upon."
Pass the sickbag!
This is blatant empire building.
But what's this got to do with Boston, we hear you cry.
Well, district council leaders have been consulted about these proposals and have indicated their support. And, says the report, some district councils are considering whether to chip in extra cash. Apparently, such contributions would provide additional support to recruit more Special Constables which, if doubled, "will have a significant impact on neighbourhood policing in their areas."
Just as they promised the PCSOs would be.
Please note that Specials are not PCSOs - they used to be the "volunteers" who supported the police in the way that PCSOs do now - but for just a boot and shoe-leather allowance ... not £20,000 a year for starters.
So all this boils down to is another move by the Lincolnshire's Chief Con to tickle more money from the public purse to enlarge the police empire after the signal failure to railroad millions out of us with a bogus and disastrously wasteful council tax hike a couple of years ago.
More to the point, though, it is a plan that offers us less ... for more - and it completely breaks faith with the original (and largely undelivered) concept of police community support officers.
Cash-strapped Boston needs to keep its hands in its pockets for this one. And it needs its police force on the streets, not in the libraries.

Footnote: Last year, the national press reported that Lincolnshire's PCSOs issued just four fines in 2006, one in 2007 and 10 in 2008. This cost almost £10 million for 15 fines, which means each fixed penalty notice cost more than £650,000 in public money. Read more at : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1148206/How-100-Blunkett-Bobbies-handed-15-fines-years-cost-10m.html#ixzz0bM0aBbKl

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

A bypass at last! A bypass of democracy

We hope that the New Year will not continue as the old one ended - with an assault on the democratic process by the Boston Bypass Independents.
At the last full council meeting of the year a "communication statement" was issued regarding Cabinet approval to dispose of three parcels of council land to Lincolnshire County Council to "facilitate on-line highway infrastructure improvements between the A16/A52 roundabout and the level crossing at Sleaford Road."
Now, as any fule kno, the BBI is on record as rejecting tweaking the existing road system as a quick fix, and the proposal on the agenda ran exactly counter to its manifesto pledge in this respect.
As you would imagine, the opposition in the shape of the Better Boston Group - who had been denied the chance to debate the proposal rubber stamped by the Cabinet earlier that day - sought to challenge the decision, but were denied the chance because of a ban imposed by the Conservative Mayor on any attempt to do what is known as "calling in" the agenda item.
The BBG sought to challenge because they have always thought that short term road improvements are a Lincolnshire County Council scheme, initiated and supported by the Tories.
"Calling in" is a request to discuss a matter further so that concerns can properly be aired, rather than railroading the ruling party's wishes through the council, and is one of the cornerstones of local politics.
Not any more.
Without explanation "calling in" was banned - along with any attempt at further debate.
Observers at the meeting have been staggered at such a blatant attack on democracy, and speculation is rife as to the Mayor's motivation.
The role of the Mayor is non-political, yet this decision flies in the face of that tradition.
Because debate was denied, the picture transmitted to observers is that opposition - in particular the BBG - have gone along with the proposal, which is the exact opposite of what actually happened.
A need for urgency to move forward was given as a reason for rejecting a call in, which some say suggests that officers again have either sat back until the eleventh hour, or sided with the BBI in using the Christmas break to mask yet another manifesto betrayal.
A side effect of the 12 months' of roadworks that this pointless project will generate is going to bring misery to the town's road users. It will also impinge in local businesses as people decide that battling with Boston's traffic just isn't worth the trouble.
Presumably it is too late to re-debate this decision.
But we need to be vigilant in the future to ensure that the BBI is not allow to stamp on the faces of the taxpayers in this way ever again.


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.