We are not a-moosed!

In his latest rant to the local papers, Boston Bypass Independent Councillor Ramonde Newell is trumpeting the news that the BBI has now been accepted by the Independent Network as an endorsed group, which in turn now has the power to endorse independent candidates locally, both into the BBI, and into the Independent Network.
“Recruitment of independents, in the true democratic sense of the word, has already begun,” he waffles, before lapsing into his customary rant about how marvellous the BBI is and how corrupt every other political party has become. You know the one we mean.
So what is the Independent Network?
It’s a non-profit organisation that provides support to candidates who are “not members of political parties.” Its supporters and endorsed candidates are asked to agree to the Bell Principles - a code of conduct for elected representatives formulated by Martin Bell OBE, and which includes among its aims:-
A: Abiding wholeheartedly by the spirit and letter of the Seven Principles of Public Life set out by Lord Nolan in 1995: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.
B: Being free from the control of any political party, pressure group or whip.
C: Making decisions transparently and openly at every stage of the political process, enabling people to see how decisions are made and the evidence on which they are based.
D: Listening, and consulting our communities constantly and innovatively.
E: Treating political opponents with courtesy and respect, challenging them when we believe they are wrong, and agreeing with them when we believe they are right.
F: Resisting abuses of power and patronage and promote democracy at every level.
We don’t need to spell out chapter and verse of the number of occasions these praiseworthy aims have been abused by the BBI – anyone with a memory will have no trouble recalling countless occasions when these objectives above have not been met by the BBI.
We just have to remind ourselves that the BBI is a political party; that it ignores transparency in favour of an approach that takes decisions in secret and uses the cabinet structure to ride roughshod over both its own non-cabinet members and the combined opposition parties. And we have lost count of the number of times we have heard of the rude, arrogant and ignorant treatment of non BBI members by the leadership.
Things have come to a pretty pass when in the same week that Councillor Newell’s letter is published, there is another from Better Boston Group Councillor Anne Dorrian accusing the BBI of breaching the council’s constitution at full council meetings by using their block vote to stymie calls for a suspension of standing orders - thus preventing proper debate and discussion.
As no-one from the BBI has leaped forward to denounce Councillor Dorrian’s allegations, we assume that they accept them.
This makes Councillor Newell’s latest letter even more impudent than usual, and we hope that someone within the opposition groups take the opportunity to alert the Independent Network to the BBI’s pre-existing breaches of its code, and seek to get them thrown out as soon as possible.

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

First the buses wreck Strait Bargate

surface - next threat is "silent running..."

A few days ago, under the headline “None so blind” we reported on the reaction of Brylaine buses and Lincolnshire County Council to complaints by Better Boston Group Councillor Brian Rush that damage was being caused to the surface of Strait Bargate by the intrusion of the Into Town buses.

Councillor Rush has kindly provided us with a detailed account of a meeting he had with the county council – and their reaction to his complaints.

“I was disturbed by responses of County Council Highways Officers, Anita Ruffle and Hamish McConchie, regarding my concerns about the growing damage being done to the pedestrian precinct Strait Bargate, so I arranged to meet them on site, Wednesday the 10th of November.

“I wanted to ask them also, about the blatant abuse of this area by vehicles, other than the buses, that seem to think it is a legitimate highway.

“I have tried to create a flavour of how the conversation went, so it may need a little reread every now and then.

“Mr McConchie, I have to say, is a fairly straight talking officer, but when we visited the point of most serious damage he began with the claim ‘that he is unsure how this damage is being caused.’

“I had to smile.

“While he, Anita Ruffle and myself, were inspecting this damage, two buses drove very close to us, both sets of nearside tyres ran the full length of the depression, almost like a predesignated track, which should have been a clue.

“‘Well now, after all this used to be a road,’ he said.

“When?

“'Way back`

“I must say I do remember it .... just.

“But has it been upgraded since then.

“Silence.

“He kindly offered ‘to rectify this damage, however caused,’ which was welcome.

“And the funds?

“His county highways budget!

“No... not his budget, our taxes.

“I reminded him that the consequence of his generosity means that someone somewhere, or rather many residents, will have less pothole filling done, or suffer a reduction in repairs, somewhere across the area. Yes?

“Yes, he said, but this is what happens when we repair highways.

“I told him I knew that but if it wasn’t for these d*** buses, no damage would have be done...Ahhh!

“Ok, so when would the work take place... ‘well, after Christmas to avoid disruption...nice of him... would the buses be diverted...yes. Oh! So it is possible to reroute them then ..Mmmmm!

“Ms Ruffle thought that I was wrong when I reported the continuing dissatisfaction of the majority of people regarding the ongoing INTRUSIVE INVASION.

She suggested that in her opinion people were now quite happy, in fact they had become very comfortable with the route and were no longer fearful or annoyed.

“To test her opinion, I offered to tap a few random people on the shoulder, and see if she was right. S`funny, but her response was that ‘she wasn’t here for that’ and in fact gave a definite little shrug of emphatic refusal.

“Why did she do this?

“Here was a chance to have her opinion confirmed.

“If she was right the chances are I would have picked some of her very happy shoppers, and ended up with egg all over my face....Yes? Er, no, I don’t think so!

“Do you know, that they didn’t know either, they didn’t know that other vehicles, other than buses were coming and going in the precinct as well...

“How could this be, I asked...?

“I have received numerous calls about this happening, in fact I witnessed one or two myself.

“`Well if that was the case,’ they said, ‘it is a matter for the police.’

“Oh really!

“Well maybe Boston Borough Council vehicles - i.e. stall erectors/movers had been given some police clearance or other permission to drive through? ‘No’ they said.

“So our own council are breaking the law every Saturday and Wednesday it seems.

“I pointed out that such vehicles did not have the mandatory beepers etc, ‘Ah well, Ms. Ruffle said, ‘we were thinking of trialling the buses without these, ‘cos shopkeepers are not happy with the disturbance.’ Really, so what about safety of hearing impaired pedestrians?....Mmmmm.

“I asked if some clearer signage might help at either end of the precinct to warn prohibited vehicles to keep out. Ah! This was a signs and lines issue, not their department ... budgets, as well you know.

“Do you know, I think I wasted my time, but I am looking forward to seeing just how much damage has been caused to the underlying drains, and how long it all takes.

“And I am going to ask for a full and complete breakdown of the costs involved..

Maybe Papa Dick can deliver the bill to Brylaine.. Now that’s a good idea, isn’t it? “Errrrrr!

Cllr. Brian Rush.

Editors's footnote: Whilst we fully understand that local councils not longer keep footpaths clear of snow in wintry conditions we wonder what the legal situation is on days like last Saturday. Whilst general pedestrian traffic through Strait Bargate had turned the surface to a navigable slush, the sheer weight of the Into Town buses had packed their route down to a perilous icy track. Who is responsible if anyone slips and falls as a result? It is one thing to claim that as footpaths are no longer cleared, the duty of care falls on the pedestrian user. But when the surface is made unexpectedly worse by the intervention of vehicles, is the bus company at fault ... or the county council ... or the borough council? Let's hope someone thinks about this before the next serious snowfall, and before someone falls and is injured.

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

The week in words

The words most used in Boston Eye in the last seven days

Click on the photo to enlarge it

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 26th November

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Ten out of Number Ten … Congratulations to Conservative group leader Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire for taking up cudgels on Boston’s behalf at a face-to-face meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron. Although Cameron spoke on several issues, Councillor Singleton-McGuire reports: “I felt the bigger picture for Boston was to try and promote Boston in light of the forthcoming visit by Caroline Spelman MP,  Secretary of State for DEFRA, who will be visiting Boston, accompanying our own Mark Simmonds MP to illustrate the need to establish Boston firmly on the map with regard to the Boston Flood Barrier, which in light of the Government’s comprehensive spending review we need all the support and exposure we can get.” Which reminds us …. weren’t there suggestions that a “government minister” was going to pay the Boston 200 floodfest a visit? Could it have been the same Ms Spelman, who subsequently decided it was better to keep the visit in the “family” rather than throw a publicity lifeline to the Boston Bypass Independents?

Pathe(tic) Pictorial … The BBI has splashed out on a new tin of magnesium powder and produced another video nasty on its blogsite - this one starring council leader Richard Austin. Filmed on location at the community rooms, he spends five minutes telling us how marvellous Boston 200 was. Sadly the soundtrack is so poor it is all but impossible to hear what he is saying, and one has to peer through the grain to make out the detail. The bottom line is that the video is a short, dreary presentation by a short, dreary presenter. However, we did note a passing resemblance between the leader and a far more famous star of the silver screen.

What do you think?
Yule regret it … Why is it that Lincolnshire County Council appears to have such a down on Boston? We ask, because the final issue of the year of Inside Lincolnshire – the county’s totally useless free newspaper  - devotes an entire page to Christmas markets around the county. As you would expect, Lincoln’s market is given the lion’s share of space. But the paper goes on to add: “The Lincoln Christmas Market isn’t the only event of its kind. Why not visit one of these if it’s closer to home?” Yes, why not? According to the paper there are other markets in Grantham, Sleaford, Stamford, Gainsborough, Alford, Louth and Holbeach. Can you spot an important omission?
The way we were … We’ve been talking in recent days about the restoration of Boston town centre. Co-incidentally, we stumbled across this splendid blog http://bostonpast.blogspot.com/  and recommend that you take a look if you want to see how Boston looked in days of yore (granny.) Congratulations to the blog’s creators for producing a splendid record of the town’s past – and some previously unseen photographs.
Grave matters … across the ether comes a response from the late Herbert Ingram, after we published his letter last week. “Thank you for airing some of my concerns. It was so nice to be back in ‘print’, a medium I feel very much at home in. My central concern, even after 150 years, is the state of this town and in particular the cemetery I repose in. Do the people of Boston know they have an Historic Grade 2 Listed park, garden and  cemetery of concern to English Heritage, Lincolnshire Heritage, The Victorian Society and many other Historic Conservation Groups but not, seemingly, the local Borough Council...?"
Double take … For a moment, our jaw dropped as we read the letters in this week’s Boston Standard. Under the heading “Drivers are treated like cattle – herded from jam to jam,” the writer launched a vitriolic attack on Boston Borough Council - aka the BBI - in particular, Lincolnshire County Council, and Boston police over the state of traffic in and around the town. As we glanced down at the signature, we wondered whether the BBI leader had undergone sort of Damascene conversion, and chosen to repent. Then we realised that the letter was from A R Austin of Boston – whilst the leader is R W Austin. Phew!
Vanishing act … We know that the BBI is pretty hot on abolishing democracy in Boston, but unless its our imagination two or three committee meetings have mysteriously disappeared from the council’s November list. Is this the start of a trend that will see command by cabinet, we wonder?

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

Pictures that say saving

the town centre may

already be too late

We mentioned yesterday the optimistic report on Boston Town Centre commissioned by Visit Lincolnshire.
Later, we took a stroll around the town centre to see for ourselves some of the places mentioned.
They say that every picture is worth a thousand words, and our montage below, just about says it all.

Click on the photo to enlarge it

Scruffy, neglected shop fronts.
Surely pressure could be put on national chains such as Edinburgh Woolen Mills, Timpsons, Jessops, Thornton’s and the like to keep their shopfronts decently painted.
And look at Marks and Spencer – what a disgrace.
Signage is appalling.
How can character ever be brought back to the Market Place, when shop owners can all but paint their name on a sheet and hang it out of their window?
Look at Strait Bargate. What a mess.
And everywhere, traffic travelling in every direction.
And, of course, the buses.
Two came through 30 seconds apart whilst these photos we being taken.
Boston can never thrive whilst it remains a victim to traffic.
The queues may be diminishing, but the heart of the town should be a haven for shoppers and visitors, rather than forcing them to look over their shoulders at every step in case cars or buses are dogging their heels.
The vision of the report we mentioned yesterday “is that Boston will be the best market town in England.”
These pictures show what an uphill struggle lays ahead.
In fact, we are sorry to say that on the evidence of our eyes, it may already be far too late.

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

Town centre ideas

over-egg the

Boston pudding

Amidst the reports to the cabinet regarding Boston town centre is an interesting one from a firm of consultants commissioned by Visit Lincolnshire.
As is sadly so often the case, it takes its view from the perspective of how to make the town centre more attractive to visitors as a way of enhancing the economy of the town.
Our own view is that the priority should be to make Boston more attractive to people as a place to live, which would assist with job creation – importantly the creation of jobs of a higher calibre than at present – which would attract better class shops, improve property values, and retain the money that is earned in the community, as people would have no need to leave town to do their spending.
Again, we feel that another problem is that the ingredients of the Boston pudding are often over-egged.
In its list of Boston’s “extensive and fine heritage assets” the report lists the Stump and the Guildhall, but after that the descent is r apid, including as it does the Assembly Rooms and the Exchange Buildings. The report also makes much of our “historic lanes” – more in fact than they are worth in their present form.
There is no argument about their potential, but the sort of changes that need to be made to improve the look of the centre are most probably not achievable in that they would require draconian powers over the owners and operators that do no exist in planning law.
The report also makes a lot of the Boston fishing fleet, but we think that this is such a shadow of its former self, that it is best left alone – especially the concept of an annual “shrimp festival.”
Whilst there is much that is worth reading in the report, there are also things that make us shudder.
The adoption of the name “Lanes” to bear comparison with the likes of York and Brighton would be sure to end in disappointment for the visitor – with Church Lanes, East Lanes and West Lanes suggested as forming a square with the “cultural quarter.”
This latter “quarter” should long ago have been renamed as there is little if anything “cultural” about it – especially since the demise of the useless Haven arts centre.
Similarly, the suggestion that Boston can compare with Liverpool’s “Three Graces” is disarmingly naïve when you consider the idea that the Royal Liver Building, the Cunard Building and the Port of Liverpool Building can be in any way spoken in the same breath as the Stump, the Assembly Rooms and the Exchange Buildings.
Whatever we do to try to improve Boston has to be realistic.
At the moment, a lot of people are talking the talk - but so far we have yet to find any who can walk the walk and produce sensible, realistic ideas.

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

Roll gathers

moss

The Borough Council’s Roll of Achievement – half-heartedly launched a week or so ago – now lies floundering at the top of the council’s web page …  like a goldfish won at the May Fair which was doomed never to last very long.
For such a prosaic offering, it seems to be drawing controversy like iron filings to a magnet.
Initially, the project was presented as a fait accompli, then it was returned for reconsideration before finally becoming reality. Standard BBI steamroller tactics.
Now it is emerging that the £500 a year disputed cost of maintaining the Roll will actually not be exceeded because Council Leader Richard “Papa Dick” Austin has claimed that staff would be prepared to do this in their own time “as a sense of pride for the community of Boston.”
Whilst we would never question the devotion of the staff to the borough, we have to say that this sounds like a step too far.
And even if it is the case, it is completely wrong to ask an already over-stretched workforce to do something for nothing in this way.
This Roll of Achievement is another of Councillor Austin’s back of a fag packet constructions that appear after little by way of forethought.
It was intended to be a beacon of achievers that would draw visitors to the website and by extension to the town.
It now languishes with uncorrected errors and a total absence of style – whilst elsewhere on the lamentable borough website a far more interesting group of people are listed under the headline “Famous Bostonians”
So now we have two separate sources of Boston achievers.
Sorry, make that three.
There is also the annual “Service to the Community awards” which are now being reviewed as a possible economy.
There does seem to be reasonable cause – as the event apparently costs £800 to stage … £150 for the scrolls presented to nominees, and £650 for munchies and cocktails for the councillors who attend the bash.
And even with a lure like that, many of them can’t be bothered.
This year 26 councillors attended the event, with three sending apologies and a further three not even bothering to do that, whilst in 2009 it was even worse, when just 18 turned up for the awards with nine sending apologies, and four ignoring things altogether.
Before this whole business descends into total farce, we need a serious review.
There is only enough room for one roll of Boston achievers/famous citizens/people who go that extra mile for the town.
The whole thing needs collating and properly presenting as a single list.
It might then be worth reading.
The latest addition to the roll arrived yesterday in the shape of Colour Sergeant Damian Todd, who has completed his “Gumpathon” – a 3,530-mile fundraising run across America to raise money for wounded military veterans.
Yet another sporty nominee, bringing the total to four out of seven – all of them nominated by the same member of the Borough’s communication team.
What happened to the Achievement Committee that was supposed to do this? Has it met? Was Colour Sergeant Todd the only nominee?
And although his efforts are remarkable, do they really meet the criteria set out for entry in the Roll of Achievement in that they have brought “great credit” to the borough. We think not.


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

In a hole?

Carry on

digging?

It seems that Boston Borough Council - aka the BBI - has decided that the best way out of a deep hole is to keep on digging …

Whilst we understand that the current financial position of councils across the land is pretty dire, it seems that the only way that Boston can find to ease the pain is to increase charges that will ultimately drive business away from the area.

The council needs to collect £3,292,000 as its share of next year’s council tax collection. To go towards the £9,848,000 it needs to run all services in 2011/12 – which is down from £10,614,000 this year.

Other income comes from the government and other fees and charges. This year’s government grant was £7,262,000 and it is expected that next year it will be cut by 11 per-cent to £6,463,000 - then reduced by six per cent a year for the next three years.

Savings already planned are expected to save around £328,000 in 2011/12, and by 2015/16, will need to reach £1,492,000.

No allowance is being made for inflation or staff pay rises and it’s expected that staff levels will fall from 297 to 282 next year.

So far, not so good.

Along with many other critics at the time, we argued that the Bypass Independents’ policy of what was laughingly described as a zero per-cent “rise” in council tax was a false economy – and this has proved to be the case.

A rise these past couple of years of around two-percent would not have generated a fortune, but would have made quite some difference to the council’s coffers, and not cost the taxpayers an arm and a leg. Instead, the BBI was more concerned with looking good than with financial realities.
A rise might also have made some of the proposed cuts and increased charges avoidable.
We have already donned our earplugs in anticipation of the squeals of protest that we expect will result from some of the budget proposals.
A partial reduction in grants to community support organisations has been recommended, and even though the government is giving £100 million to the voluntary sector in the short term, and a further £370 million over the remaining three years, we recall the last time how our local do-gooders reacted when told that the might not get the money they had come to take for granted as an annual stipend from the public purse, and which in some cases was not well spent.
Increases have been proposed in - among other things - charges for cremations and burials, car parking and charges at the Geoff Moulder Leisure pool.
Granted, they don’t amount to much, but as we have previously reported, the cost of dying is considerably less at Alford Crematorium than at Boston. Alford is also newer, and offers additional facilities such as the acceptance of “very large” caskets – which relatives of late lamented Boston fatties might find handy. In fact in general, its services seem aimed more at benefiting the consumer rather than the provider.
Car parking will be another burning issue, and we think that the time has come to consider refining the cumbersome system of five different fees – ranging from a one hour rate to all day parking.
At Spalding’s Springfields, for instance, the charge is £1 for the first two hours, and £2 for the whole day. Simple, straightforward and attractive.
And increasing swimming charges? The pool’s popularity is already on the wane due to the various uncertainties over its future, and all a price increase will achieve is further to drive people away.
And if all this isn’t bad enough, the borough’s head of finance, Peter Linfield, says there are tough decisions to face. His report said councillors might want to review both statutory and discretionary services and review council priorities, considering reducing the number of priorities so as to focus on what is really important to the community.
It sounds as though more cuts and price rises are on the way until borough services are the bare minimum that can be got away with at the most that can be charged.

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

The week in words

The words most used in Boston Eye in the last seven days

Click on the photo to enlarge it


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 19th November

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

None so blind- 1 … Concerns raised by Better Boston Group Councillor Brian Rush at the obvious damage to Strait Bargate caused by noisy, smelly, intrusive and unnecessary Into Town bus service have been pooh-poohed by people who ought to know better. Brylaine’s operations director says: “I wasn’t aware that there was any damage, but there used to be two-way traffic using Strait Bargate." He blames the county council, whose principal highways officer says: “It’s difficult to know what caused this.” Do these people think we’re stupid?
None so blind- 2 … The manager of the hapless and hopeless Boston Business Improvement District denies the evidence staring him in the face when he refutes a claim from an organisation called the Local Data Company that Boston has the second highest rate of empty shops in Lincolnshire. By massaging the figures in the LDC report he says that vacant floor space is among the lowest in the county by looking at a wider area and claiming that smaller shops further from the centre are the vacant ones. Again, does he think we’re stupid? And again, we ask – where has the £12,000 allocated by Boston Borough Council for art work to cover empty shop windows and minimise their visual blight gone?
No rift – but we need a letter leader … We congratulate Bypass Independent Councillor Jim Blaylock for his persistence in campaigning for a referendum on whether Boston should have an elected mayor. Whilst he tells the local press that his decision to campaign rather than seek re-election next May is not indicative of any rift with his party, we feel that it won’t have been welcomed by Council Leader Richard Austin. In the unlikely event that he and his party were re-elected. Councillor Austin will wield even more power than  at present. And we have to say that Councillor Blaylock’s quote: “I think it’s really important that people have a leader that will stand and listen to them, who will give them the policies when they vote for them, and stand or fall on those policies,” - if nothing else implies criticism of the present leadership. We wonder whether Councillor Blaylock’s days as a cabinet member and portfolio holder may well now be numbered.
Scarcely flooded out … After all the hoo-ha, banners and pre-publicity, we see that the Boston 200 flood exhibition attracted a mere 1,300 visitors during its four days in the town’s Community Rooms. Presumably that included the great and good of the town, who seemed to be cluttering the place up each time we passed by. The maths show that the exhibition attracted an average of just 54 visitors an hour. One figure that we haven’t been told is how much this exhibition cost – but we are reasonably confident that it will have been several thousand pounds. An expensive whim on the part of Council Leader Richard Austin, and there are still many who wonder why one earth he chose to celebrate this previously all but unknown event with such fervour.
Get it right! … Another of Councillor Austin’s pet projects is the Roll of Achievement, which was launched with scarcely any fanfare last week. Until last night, it was presented incorrectly

But as of this morning, the correct spelling was in place

Which is a good, if slow start. However, in the way that we often do, we pointed out a couple of factual errors in the text. Presumably out of a combination of pique and sheer bloody-mindedness, these errors have remained uncorrected. A project such as the Roll of Achievement - if it is to have any value at all - should at least be accurate. Otherwise it simply makes its publisher look disinterested and ignorant.
What’s the hitch? …. What is going on with the takeover of Boston’s Princess Royal Sports Arena and Geoff Moulder Leisure Pool by the much criticised Leisure Connection? Despite a deal being announced in February an essential document called a certificate of pension board compliance has still not been provided. Given the amount of business that Leisure Connection does with other local authorities we would have expected this to have been no more than a formality. So has something gone wrong that we should know about?
Cop out … Lincolnshire Police seems to have been disproportionately affected by the proposed government expenditure cuts. More than 1,000 civilian workers have been sent emails about voluntary redundancy as the force aims to cut sixty staff. And now Lincolnshire County Council has refused to guarantee that £3 million of funding will continue to be available to be spent on police community support officers. Perhaps the fact that such large cuts can be considered both within and outside the force is sending a message that the county cops have been too well cushioned for too long and now need to learn to live in the real world. And we wonder whether it is mere co-incidence that the pro-establishment Boston Standard should choose this week to devote an entire page to telling us how wonderful the borough’s all-but-invisible PCSOs are.
Snap unhappy … Still with the Standard, we loved this week’s deliberate mistake which saw two of Boston’s great and good reduced to Chadlike figures and two vanish completely without trace in a photograph. See below, and click on the photo to enlarge it.

Had Centrepoint Outreach Chief Executive John Marshall been a few inches shorter, the photo would have resembled little more than one of a coconut shy! Does no one read a newspaper before publication these days?
Any clues? … Finally, does anyone know what the Chinook helicopter that’s been buzzing Boston for the past few days is up to? All answer are welcome.

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

Market Place plan

puts ex-MP in a spin

We like a writer with a sense of humour – which is why we like the e-mail below, one that has purportedly arrived from beyond the grave.
The writer may be long dead – but the points he makes are still very much live issues.
Read and enjoy….

 “Dearest Boston Eye,
“I have, over many years, seen much happen in Boston that shames and shocks me. Much of the historic town has been destroyed by local government decisions. The centre of my home town was ripped out with the building of the 'bypass' through the heart of the town in the 1960s, and in that era many of my old haunts have been demolished to provide boxlike structures ... the Peacock and Royal, Red Lion, New Theatre, the Livestock Market, much of High Street and West Street have gone..
“I understand from my supporters that the Market Place is yet to have another 'makeover' (a current phrase I'm told.)
“I have stood on my pedestal now for 148 years looking at the gradual destruction of this once thriving industrious market town, and I am saddened.
“The proposal being discussed appears, I am led to believe, to warrant turning me into a traffic island!
“It has been enough to have had to watch the lowering of standards in my resting place at the Victorian Cemetery (why are birds considered so important in this era instead of people - and council officials who are RSPB members allowed to slew management decisions?)
“But to now have further 'improvements' imposed on the heart of the town horrifies me.
“I know that it may seem selfish of me, but in my day the purpose of the council and its MP (as I once was...and did a grand job I believe) was to firstly listen to all the people, and not just those who have a financial interest (tho' I was sometimes a little guilty of this myself in business) and secondly to have the good of the town as its aims.
“There appears these days to be little 'people power' and a lot of power wielded by council officials who are, of course, unelected; in particular the imposition of 'regulations' designed (by someone?) to keep people safe - the Health and Safety and Environment (it meant something very different in my day) Industry.
“I would hang them if I still had influence but I do not! (I have just been informed that capital punishment has been abolished.....ye gods!!)
“Do the people of Boston have no interest in using their franchise to vote? Are they so lazy as to allow these politicians to get away with these decisions? I am shocked. We Liberals fought long and hard for these rights and now I see them being abused or ignored.
“Wake up citizens of Boston.
“Herbert Ingram Esq (Deceased)”


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested. Unfortunately, we are unable to conduct séances due to health and safety considerations.

Could cuts threaten

Market Place plans?

As we reported yesterday, the £2 million refurbishment of Boston’s Market Place is on the agenda at tonight’s borough council cabinet meeting.
A year ago, this looked like a bright opportunity to make a major improvement to Boston in one fell swoop.
But, reading between the lines, it looks as though the government cuts may well rein in some of the ambitions.
English Heritage, whilst apparently fully supportive of the scheme, is facing a 32% cut in its £136 million grant.
It has decided to protect its planning advice services, the maintenance and conservation of its properties, and “all existing grant commitments.”
As far as we can see, English Heritage has not yet committed funds, and if it does not, then money for the Market Place could dramatically be reduced.
English Heritage says that as a result of government cuts it will reduce grants by around one third and will shortly publish a corporate plan providing greater detail. There are also problems with support from Lincolnshire County Council, which recently decided to divert £250,000 of its £450,000 matched funding for the Market Place, to buy the listed former bank at 116 High Street Boston to bring it back to its former glory and to seek to use the investment as a “regeneration catalyst” for the High Street area.
Whilst this is a separate issue, it is one which nonetheless causes us concern. The restoration of the building has been handed over to Heritage Lincolnshire, in a similar way that the St John's workhouse on Skirbeck Road was – for restoration. It is now owned by Lincolnshire County Council and is a resource centre for adults with physical disabilities.
The High Street project has an ominous ring to it. We are told that it will provide a base to deliver adult social care (through a third sector deliverer) and “social enterprise incubator units” – which we take to mean accommodation for problem tenants.
The report goes so far as to point out, that “it would be difficult to find another purchaser of the building and almost certainly impossible to find one prepared to accept the risks associated with the proposed end use,” which we are sure is news that will not be welcomed by local residents who are trying to drag the area up by its bootstraps under the worthless but costly Placecheck scheme.
But the core problem here is that restoring a listed building for the purpose stated is infinitely more costly than purpose building from scratch – and at the end of the day, public money is being spent on a project to which the public will be denied access … which hardly seems fair.
Nonetheless, the report overall remains optimistic, seeking to reaffirm the council’s commitment to support the development and implementation of the Market Place Heritage Regeneration Scheme
It also asks the cabinet to consider entering into a Conservation Area Partnership Scheme with English Heritage to secure up to £500,000 external funding to offer financial assistance towards the cost of traditional repair/reinstatement of buildings and premises within the Boston Conservation Area, and asks the cabinet formally to consider the allocation of the Boston Area Regeneration ‘legacy’ monies to support the implementation of the Market Place project - and if not all used to provide part match funding to maximise the amount of English Heritage cash being made available.
On paper it all looks very good – but in our heart of hearts we fear that things may well not go according to plan.
As Burns reminded us:
The best laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!

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

Learn planning lessons

and get Market Place right

There is a timely item on the agenda of tonight’s planning committee meeting – the decision by a government inspector to uphold an appeal to allow a smoothie bar to continue operating in Dolphin Lane.
The shop owner went ahead because he didn’t think he required permission as his shop had previously been … a shop.
He was told to apply for retrospective permission, which piqued planners then refused.
In support of this daft decision, the development was described as “detrimental to the viability and vitality of the town centre.” This, from a department which allowed three wall-to-wall mobile phone shops in a line covering hundreds of feet in Strait Bargate!
Fortunately, the government saw through the pathetic bluff and declared that the development “sits comfortably with other retail outlets, and is likely to benefit the vitality of the town centre because of the site’s positioning.”
The rejection of the appeal was bad news for a department that has a “target” for dismissed appeals of 25%, but had 37% go against it.
Why is this timely?
Because tomorrow sees the return to the agenda of the refurbishment of the Market Place, which is due to be discussed by the borough’s politburo – the cabinet.
It is no understatement to say that the future of Boston will stand or fall on the success of this project.
A well planned, attractive Market Place – which by definition needs to been a traffic free area – will give the heart back to Boston, which has suffered badly in recent years through bad planning decisions.
Historically, Boston has a pathetic track record in its approach to local heritage.
The council’s actions back in the 1960’s saw the demolition of many fine old buildings in the name of progress – not least among them the Red Lion coaching inn that stood in the town from the Middle Ages – but which was demolished to make way for Woolworths.
Now, everyone is throwing their hats in the air and hailing Boston as the next York, with the Market Place as a key magnet for visitors.
The cabinet already made one remarkably bad decision with the proposed Merchants Quay development.
We hope that – after presiding over the disastrous paving slab invasion to carve a path for the hapless and hopeless Into Town bus service - they will treat the Market Place as though they are walking on eggshells and not be blinded by big ideas or the concept of some sort of political monument.
This is one decision that is bigger than all the others put together, and failure to get it right could make the beginning of the end for Boston.

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

Iron fist in iron glove

and

stark warning for

financial future

Tonight’s full meeting of Boston Borough Council has a few more things than usual for the members to get their teeth into.
For once, the gang of eight – aka the cabinet – has allowed the rest of its yes men and women plus the opposition to actually have a vote or two.
Given exceptional prominence is the vote on the change to executive arrangements – which gets a “special” meeting all of its own ... but as it is allocated just 30 minutes, clearly, not much debate is anticipated by the cabinet aristocracy.
In fact the outcome was a foregone conclusion ever since the option of an elected leader with a tighter stranglehold versus an elected mayor was first mooted.
Council members may also get the chance to debate the confirmed minutes of the meeting of the Audit Committee held on September 20th.
Aside from the almost supernatural ability of one councillor to be present and absent at the same time, these contain some interesting titbits.
The meeting was attended by two representatives from the Audit Commission, which we are told recently declared Boston Borough Council to be among the most improved in the country.
Given that when you’re at the bottom, the only way is up, there was no other direction that the council could really travel – but it is interesting to note that the Audit Commission’s man at the meeting back in September (the time the announcement was made) gave certain qualifications.
Whilst he described the report as “positive,” he said the council still had a long way to go.
He was also less generous that was thought with his assessment of the council’s “most improved” status – simply saying that moving from a position where the council was failing in six areas to its present situation was “highly creditable.”
The council was told that a short-term financial plan was “crucial” and to ensure that it had to have a robust medium term financial plan – which implies that it doesn’t at present - and clear funding for the capital programme.
The meeting heard that there might be “real implications” in individual wards, which would be difficult for members, and that the council would have to reduce services down to those it had a legal obligation to provide and other services that it could afford that were important to the public.
Unfortunately, the preferred suggestion to assessing these was to engage the public through consultation – and we all know what that means in Boston, don’t we?
But it was with a sigh of relief that we read that the current coloured strategic risk chart may in future carry an orange section, “to indicate increased likelihood and impact than the medium blue section.”
We can all sleep easier in our beds once that happens, can’t we?

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

The week in words

The words most used in Boston Eye in the last seven days

Click on the photo to enlarge it


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

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Worth waiting for? …The report we mentioned yesterday – the one marked “to follow” – finally arrived at around lunchtime. Time will tell whether it was worth the wait – but the recommendation that caught our eye said “Additionally it was noted that the funding agreement between the Council and BSI remains unsigned and this should be resolved at the earliest opportunity.” If only that was the same agreement that has seen millions in taxpayers’ hard earned cash poured into the bottomless money pit they call the Princess Royal Sports Arena? If  that had remained unsigned – could we get our money back?
Burning issue … As the cuts begin to bite, there’s been a fall in number of cremations, where income has fallen by £17,000 for “reasons unknown as it does not follow usual death trends.” We think we know the answer to this one, as warnings were sounded in the past about the possible effects of raising Boston Crematorium and cemetery charges at the same time as a new crematorium opened in Alford. The rising cost of dying these days makes people shop around – just as they do with any big item of expenditure, and we’d bet that Alford’s business has improved at Boston’s expense.
Message not received … After we raised an eyebrow last week about the eerie alliance between the Lincolnshire Independents led by County Councillor Marianne Overton and the Boston Bypass Independents, one reader got in touch to tell us: “I have taken Councillor Overton to task about the content of her messages which continue to extol the 'accomplishments' of Bypass Party in Boston and found her to be unwilling to challenge such. In fact I gathered from her reply that she was a total 'believer.’ This being the case I have told her that I will continue to look forward to her missives only as the comedy item of council communications --unless of course I get crossed off the circulation list due to my differing point of view. We shall see what happens!” We think we can guess.
Sallying forth … In our observations on the Roll of Achievement the other day, we noted with some disappointment that the name of one contributor was spelt incorrectly. We also note that in the late Ernest Bowser was said to be chairman of the Witham Forth Internal Drainage Board. Unless the board’s range extended as far as Scotland, could we suggest amending the spelling to Fourth .
A star is born … Are there no limits to the talents of county and Boston borough councillor Ramonde Newell? The council’s most prolific newspaper letter writer and blogger has now added television to his quiver. And quiver you will if you visit You Tube by clicking here. Councillor Newell’s début is as a sort of poster boy for Brylaine’s Into Town bus service. But far from presenting his case in a bright and bouncy way calculated to get us all rushing to apply for a free bus pass, he labours through his script with eyes downcast - like a man standing at a public urinal. Perhaps he’ll improve with practice … but given his record to date, we somehow doubt it..

With his apparent enthusiasm for bringing “On the Buses” back to the small screen we wonder – given a passing likeness – whether he is thinking of auditioning for the part of the demented inspector, Blakey (see picture above.)
Kick from the Shinns … Talking of letter writing, it seems that the new challengers for pride of place in our local “newspapers” are the Boston Liberal Democratic Party – aka Mike and Helen Sheridan-Shinn, who dominate the papers this week. For some peculiar reason, Ms Sheridan-Shinn was determined to tell us that this year she favoured a white poppy rather than a red one – and seizes the opportunity to name drop Lord Davies of Stamford – the former Stamford MP who defected from the Conservatives to Labour, and who found fame for a £20,000 expenses claim for repairs to the bell tower on his £5 million home, Frampton Hall. Why has she done this?
Pass the sal volatile! … We were surprised to learn that the council department with the third highest level of absenteeism through sickness is Cultural Services, behind Environmental Operations, and Revenue, Benefits and Customer Services. A helpful pie chart of causes for absences lists: “Infections, flu, cold related, stomach, liver, kidney , digestion, gastroenteritis, sickness nausea, neurological, headaches, migraine, genitor, urinary, menstrual , eye, ear, nose, throat, dental, sinusitis, back or neck problems, chest, respiratory, chest infections, other musculo-skeletal problems, stress, depression, anxiety, neurasthenia, mental health, fatigue, pregnancy related, heart, blood pressure, circulation, sick certificate required.” And that still left 15.9% of reasons for absence listed as “other.” What on earth was wrong with them, we wonder? Beri beri, plague, dengue fever....

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

Bell doesn’t toll for us

There was a time when the word “report” meant a provision of information and that to “answer a question” meant … exactly that.
But now – appropriately given that the context is a sporting one - the goalposts have been moved as far as these definitions are concerned.
At tonight’s meeting of Boston Borough Council’s Performance Review Committee
One agenda item is entitled “Boston Sports Initiative/Princess Royal Sports Arena Report by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman,” and another “Answers to Members' questions by the BSI's Managing Director.”
In theory, the public can access both of these reports online via the council’s website.
But in practice the first item – the Chairman and Vice Chairman’s report – “will follow.”
We don’t know what it is following on, but it’s been arriving for some days now, so it’s probably on foot, and as of 11-30am today had still to arrive – so it looks as though the public interest is again being done a disservice.
Meanwhile, the “answers” by Managing Director Dennis Bell mostly strive to appear helpful whilst doing precisely the opposite.
In "answer" to the question: “How much money was in the "sinking fund" prior to it being used elsewhere?” Mr Bell says: “Records prior to 2006 are archived, if some idea of the time could be identified it may be possible to find the answer.”
Well, then:”Since the opening of the arena, how much has been spent on repairs and maintenance?” Reply: “I have asked Bladerunner to calculate this and forward to you separately.”
Moving on: “The receipt of the Sport England grant of £790k is referred to as ‘thereby reducing BBC's loan to £1.3m.’ Was this truly the case? If not, why not?”
Answer: “I have been unable to find any documentary evidence relating to this statement, again I assume it is prior to 2006 and archived?”
As only six questions were posed, it would have been courteous if Mr Bell could have made a little more effort to be helpful.
What we do learn is that his “understanding” is that Boston Borough Council has written off its £1.9m loan to BSI; and that whilst each of the resident clubs was due to raise £50k towards the capital costs, his “understanding” is that the rugby club paid £20,000 for catering equipment and that was all that has been received; and that between October 2006 and the financial year 2009-10 of the revenue costs provided by Boston Borough Council, £1,811,482 was spent on direct operating costs and £422,659 on paying off loan interest.
When he does actually answer a question, we can appreciate why Mr Bell - clearly a man of great understanding - prefers obfuscation to co-operation.
THE BSI and the PRSA are linked problems that hopefully won’t go away until the truth is out, and we find this latest pantomime unfunny, to say the least.

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

 Oven fresh  -

so why is this

roll so crumby?

Not for the first time, we’re baffled at the way Boston Borough Council goes about turning what on the surface is a good idea into a regular mish mash.
The latest hodgepodge is the Roll of Achievement, which has appeared without pre-publicity or fanfare on the borough website.
The thinking behind the idea is to create a permanent and accessible record for individuals with a connection with Boston and who have contributed to it, and the idea of putting it on the website is to attract more visitors.
It is claimed that this will cost as little as £500, although sceptics have their doubts - particularly as a Roll of Achievement Group and an Achievement Controller are required to make it work.
So far so good, but on Monday night, the roll – containing just six names - appeared as the late Tommy Cooper would say … “just like that” with an appeal to the punters to send in more nominations.
Why Monday 8th November?
Would it not have been better to have announced a public appeal for nominations, done a little more homework, then published with a more representative list in a pre-Christmas flourish - or better still launched as a New Year feature
Of the six names  half are sporting figures selected by a member of the council’s communications team.
Two of the remaining three appear to have been nominated by relatives, and the third by an American gentleman named as Warren Winkelsteiner, an epidemiologist and professor emeritus in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley, and whose name is actually Winklestein.
Given that he – and probably some of the others, too – must have been approached to make their nominations ahead of the launch, why were not more names assembled?
What about those people listed elsewhere on the borough website under “Famous Bostonians” – don’t they deserve an entry as well?
And the starter for ten list is open to a question or two.
If war hero and former councillor Alan Day is worth a mention- and he surely is - then why were the details of the Staniland family ... whose sacrifices in the First World War, and whose public service are so eloquently described in “A Town Remembers,” omitted at this early stage? And where is Lynn Ellis?
We get the feeling that the starter list was cobbled together on the back of a fag packet and rushed into print – like so many BBI schemes.
More thought, more time and better timing would have seen an impressive list that Bostonians could feel proud of – not this shonky offering.
Fortunately,  submissions may not include current serving or prospective elected members, which at least spares us from a list of BBI also rans who think they might be worth a mention - though we expect they'll be queuing for a place after May's elections.


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

Voters told: Blog off!

You're not welcome here

Yesterday we heard of the rebuff to members of the Boston North West Action Group who - before they have even renewed a request for an order to control drinking in public – have been told that they are wasting their time.
The decision was first announced in the Boston Bypass Independents’ blog, followed by a letter in a local newspaper.
The campaign is championed by the area’s county councillor, Andrea Jenkyns - and a dedicated website exists to promote it.
Unfortunately, the site appears to have lain dormant almost since it was created – and this brings us to the wider issue of internet communication between councillors and their electorate.
Well over a year ago, we were delighted to praise the establishment of a number of blogs by local councillors – but sadly, instead of their appearance being a spur to others, the reverse has been the case.
One blogger, Conservative Myles Larrington, was driven to cease publication by the actions of a serial complainer.
Another blog, by BNP/Independent borough councillor David Owens, last saw an entry on Monday 10th May, noting the result of his performance at the general election.
Blog entries by Conservative county and district councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire have gone from being an almost daily affair to appearing intermittently.
The BBI has two websites, one of which is years out of date, and the other merely an outlet for the occasional political rant.
Councillor Jenkyns, meanwhile,  has  two websites and a blogsite.
What appears to be the primary website may well leave a visitor confused – as it is unclear whether it's a musical equivalent of The Spectator or a political equivalent of The Stage ....
Certainly it has more of a showbiz flavour than a political one, with its album of photos of Miss Jenkyns cosying up to the likes of John Major, David Cameron, Ken Clark (sic) and Eric Pickles.
But the blog is the most mysterious thing of all, in that it appears to be run as if it were a private club. Although voters are invited “To keep upto (sic) date please visit my news blog,” the picture below shows what greets them.

Yes, to join Miss Jenkyns’s glee club you apparently have to be vetted and approved.
And even if you offer up your name and password details ...  that’s still not enough, as you then get this message.

Does this mean that Labour supporters are not admitted? What about local voters who simply want to keep “upto” date with what their councillor is doing? Well, they can just go away. We suspect that the reason for this public access ban is to avoid any possible criticism – but it is also terribly “old Tory” and we would have hoped for better from a young, aspiring councillor.
All along, the issue of blogs and websites run by local politicians has sat uneasily with their authorities.
Boston banned links from its website for a while, and then selectively re-introduced them.
The County Council used to publish website/blog links but now does not.
Frankly, it scarcely seems to matter when you look at most of what’s now on offer - and more importantly the number of councillors who choose not to communicate at all. It's almost as though the councillors have no interest in the voters.
Surely not!

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

"P.O." in DPPO means

something else entirely

It seems as though there is one law for the rich and one for the poor as far as tackling drinking on the streets of Boston is concerned.
For some time a group called Boston North West Action Group has been pressing for a Designated Public Protection Order to curb public drinking in their part of town - Witham Bank West - and have already been told there was not enough evidence that the DPPO in force in the town centre had caused "displacement of the problem to other areas" – so there was no case for extending the DPPO to their particular ward.
That was despite five of them collecting more than fifty bags of alcohol based litter from the West Bank of the Witham alone during this year’s Big Boston Clean Up.
However, they appear to have been undeterred, and have been pursuing their campaign.
Now, in clear sign that democracy in Boston is long dead, a posting on the Boston Bypass Independents’ blog, reinforced by a letter in the Boston Standard, has told them to go and boil their heads.
Councillor Ramonde Newell, the borough’s portfolio holder for community safety, tells campaigners that whilst drinking and rowdiness is a continuing issue on Witham Bank West and other areas, he understands that there may be a request to extend Boston’s DPPO to this area and others.
He says that while the council will examine and consider any further formal requests there will be a significant cost to budget for.
When an extension to cover the Witham Bank area was first considered over two years ago, the police indicated then that they did not have the officers and resources, to effectively enforce a larger area – and that was it.
We wonder whether the council would be so supine if the cops suddenly turned round and said they didn’t have the cash to investigate crime … and we think not.
Councillor Newell then treats us to a lecture on what a DPPO is and is not.
In a nutshell it is not worth the paper it is written on.
“Those drinking alcohol in the street are NOT committing an offence, unless they have been asked to stop doing so by an officer, and do not comply. The DPPO does NOT create an alcohol free zone,” Councillor Newell tells us.
Contrast that with his silence when one of our local papers trumpeted:- “IT'S OFFICIAL – the sight of people boozing on Boston's park benches and street corners will soon be consigned to the history books. At a meeting of Boston Borough Council's cabinet, members voted to introduce new laws banning the drinking of alcohol outside licensed premises throughout Boston's town centre.”
Councillor Newell was quoted in that report, and made no mention of the toothlessness of the DPPO at the time.
Clearly, it now suits him to tell us, because it means saving money at the expense of the feelings of the taxpayers.
We propose a DPPO of our own.
The acronym stands for “Daft Politicians Prohibition Order,” and would apply to all the wards in the borough currently represented by the BBI.
It would make it an offence to spout nonsense or ride roughshod over the electorate, punishable by loss of office. As a result, we would expect the BBI to vanish from the local political scene in very short order.


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

The week in words

The words  most used in Boston Eye in the last seven days

Click on the photo to enlarge it

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 5th November

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Neighbour’s view on independence issue … Tuesday’s blog about the need for truly independent councillors in Boston come next May’s elections brought a dissenting voice from Councillor Gary Porter – leader of South Holland District Council, who wrote: “Having just read today's blog (as I do most mornings) I feel the need to raise my disagreement (unusually) with your comments about next May’s election. Having led the Conservative group on South Holland District Council for almost eight years I would take issue with your comments about group members being 'whipped' into line. The only time our group applies the party whip is on issues that are related to commitments we made in our local manifesto and I believe that it is right to stick to the promises we make in May and that anyone who breaks that trust should fall foul of group pressure. I know that this may not necessarily have been your recent experience in Boston, but that doesn't mean to say that that is the norm.
“Truly 'Independent' candidates should be encouraged to stand, but they should do so on an accountable basis and be honest with the electorate on what they can achieve in that role. That is the biggest advantage that party candidates have, we make promises and then deliver on them or suffer at the ballot box as a consequence. I hope that the people of Boston see the benefits that have been brought to the other districts that do have coherent political control, and contrast this with their own.”
Will flood fest hold water? … We see that the Boston 200 "event" again heads the list of news on Boston Borough council’s website, and we really hope the exhibition will be worth it. Boston’s famous historian, Pishey Thompson, devotes just a few lines of his 824 page book to the event and whilst the exhibition is apparently celebrating our flood defences, Thompson is at pains to point out that “In all probability, the sea-banks giving way saved the town of Boston from almost entire destruction” We still can’t see how much of an “event” can be mounted in the hopeless community rooms, and trust that anyone lured to visit by the publicity doesn’t leave disappointed. Incidentally, whilst there’s still time, it might be an idea to list the event on the Borough website what’s on diary.

As of this morning, it made no mention of Boston 200 whatsoever – preferring instead to concentrate on the Alford Christmas Market at the end of the month.
Not their business … It may well be that Boston  Borough Council was not being as generous as we thought when it launched yesterday’s “business breakfast” to about business rates. A reader tells us: "Business Rates" is a safe topic for the BBI. Start by giving business rates their "proper" name (the clue is in the first word) National non-domestic rates (NNDR). The valuation office is not a function of Boston Borough Council or the BBI - and the rates are not set by BBC/BBI. - Therefore: ‘Not our fault, guv.’ “The system is that the local council collects NNDR based on the Valuation Office's rateable value multiplied by the nationally set rate in the pound. The local council pays these monies to the treasury. NNDR is then re-distributed back to councils as part of the grant process - NOT amounts collected within any area.
Letters hope not … The latest piece of nonsense on the Bostonninnies blog – and there are many more than one - appears beneath the headline: “Cllr Lenton's unpublished letter to the Standard.” There then appears what purports to be a letter to the local paper continuing the rant over the independence of councillors. If even the BBI-loving Standard felt that enough was enough on this occasion, and decided not to publish the letter, why on earth did the BBI feel the need? And how do we know that this letter was ever even sent – let alone unpublished? However, Councillor Lenton had more luck in this week’s Standard – and also the Boston Target - with a mind numbing lecture on public spending which we are sure will have delighted and illuminated the readership. We do hope that Councillor Lenton is not in some sort of competition with fellow BBI Councillor and “Mouth of the Haven” Ramonde Newell, who is also writing in the Standard this week. Between them these two men could bore for England.
Not me, guv … However, they are not alone. Serial letter writer and council complainer Paul Kenny is again putting crayon to paper and has more or less the same missive in both the Standard and Target - taking great pains to establish his lack of involvement in any unpopular decisions whilst he was a borough councillor. What we can never understand is why he seldom - if ever – tells readers of his political party allegiance. Is he ashamed or something?
Poor taste … Back to the Bostoninnies’ blog. Is it by accident or design that they are again attempting to offend as we approach Remembrance Day? Back in June, we highlighted their hijacking of the memorable phrase “Lest we Forget” to promote their “achievements.” Now they’re at it again – this time with a pastiche of the famous Kitchener First World War recruiting poster “Your country needs YOU.”

Considering how many innocent young men went to their deaths after responding to the poster, we find neither the timing of the BBI send up nor the choice of spoof at all funny! Perhaps someone at the BBI would care to explain?

Whose side are they on? … Not for the first time, the Boston Target gives the lie to its slogan – “at the heart of all things local.” Boston businesses are struggling as it is, without the need for a two-page spread promoting “Louth – in the area – supporting your town.”

That's it for today. Thanks for reading Boston Eye during the week - and don't miss "The week in words" on 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.

Giving the LI to independence

If an examination candidate was given a blank piece of paper and an hour to list the achievements of the Boston Bypass Independents, most observers of the local political scene would expect that when the paper was handed in it would still be … blank.
Not so, apparently.
A draft list apparently intended for inclusion in the December Newsletter of the Lincolnshire Independents – the County Council group led by Councillor Marianne Overton – goes on … and on … and on.
Admitting that the BBI’s rise to power “was the first time a newly formed party consisting of members with little or no district council experience took control” the writer at least has the decency to acknowledge that the party’s achievements have been made “in association with our partners.”
However, as the list expands, the claims become increasingly nebulous.
“There has been vigorous promotion for a bypass for Boston. Our dramatic election victory immediately achieved this. It has been promoted in several other ways including a parliamentary debate. In association with Lincolnshire County Council we have promoted traffic flow improvements through Boston on the existing main roads.”
It’s not exactly the bypass we were promised, and the subsequent booby prize of a “distributor road” now looks no more than pie in the sky due to government cuts.
Again, the claim of “more cycle tracks in the Borough” and the promise of more to come is little consolation to voters who elected the BBI on the single issue of a bypass for Boston.
As we said, the list is long, and claims credit for just about everything except the sunrise over Boston every morning.
But what we can’t understand is why the Boston Bypass Independents are hitching a lift on the Lincolnshire Independents wagon.
The group’s claim to individual independence was given the lie when one politician who recently parted company with them complained that the “independent” group had formed a shadow cabinet as the official opposition to the Conservative administration.
And the eerie association between the BBI and LI continues in the draft newsletter itself which in its lead item headed “Achievements” goes on to congratulate BBI leader Councillor Richard and his team “for the fantastic success turning round Boston Borough Council from a small unviable business to one of the most improved councils in England, with a clean bill of health at the recent inspection.”
Councillor Austin was, or course, briefly a member of the Lincolnshire Independents, which boasts only seven members and is a county council group - but his association ended when voters booted him off Lincolnshire County Council on 4th June.
So where does the BBI really stand?
Is it an independent party representing Boston, or an offshoot of a smaller county council group?
Despite the claims of independence and an absence of whipped votes, the evidence increasingly points to the contrary.

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

A new look BAP

for Boston?

There was a time when  the Boston Area Partnership was the only BAP in town  - but now, the borough's come up with another - with  food in it. For some unknown reason, Boston Borough Council suddenly appears to have noticed that the borough has a business community – and has decided to throw it a sausage.
Businessmen and women are being invited to a breakfast meeting tomorrow morning to hear about business rates “and have a chance to express their views.”
The meeting starts at 7-30am at the White Hart Hotel, and will be over by 9-30am.
There’s just time enough to down a bacon and sausage bap and a cuppa before the presentations begin at 8am
Speakers include “experts” from the Valuation Office Agency, “free” business support advice from Boston-based business advisers, a council tax budget presentation and a general question-and-answer session.
Better make sure that the coffee is good and strong.
Boston Borough Council’s upbeat preview to the event says: “Every penny counts, whether you’re earning it, spending it or investing it and in these financially difficult times it has never been more important for councils to listen to the views of all.
“Boston Borough Council is most concerned that its business ratepayers get the full picture and have an opportunity for all their questions to be answered.”
We hope that as many local business people as possible go along and ask questions about the Boston Business Improvement District – which aside from failing to deliver anything much by way of improvement so far is now giving its reluctant members the finger and refusing to bow to their calls for it to be disbanded.
The council – which has a somewhat over-cosy relationship with the BID in the view of many people – has set up a Task and Finish Group to look into how the bid is run … but we don’t expect that to achieve much more than a rearrangement of the deckchairs on the Titanic.
Businesspeople might also like to ask about the way the Empty Shops Project is being run in Boston – particularly as more than £20,000 which was supposed to be allocated to improving the look of empty shops and aiding new business start-ups does not appear to have been used for that purpose.
Somehow we doubt that “the full picture” will ever go on show as far as these questions are concerned.
And whilst it is easy to shed crocodile tears of concern and promise to answer each and every question, in the case of the issues we have raised, no answers have been forthcoming – and nor do we expect that they ever will.
But it looks good on paper, doesn’t it?

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