Week ending 27th May

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Despite our best efforts to get the new ruling Tory elite to see some sense and share more equitably the duties of councillors representing the borough on outside organisations, it again showed itself as the BBI in blue on Wednesday night.

The Conservatives snaffled 59 appointments, plus fourteen reservations for cabinet members. The Independents gained seven appointments, and the BBI two. Labour – with just one nomination - got no appointments at all, and the English Democrats did not receive any nominations. There were also three non-council member appointments. This makes things even worse than they looked when we blogged on Wednesday. According to our maths there were a total of 73 Conservative appointments and nine from other parties. The other parties broadly represent 40% of the council’s composition, yet received only 14% of the jobs.

It seems that sorry really is the hardest word. We reported last week that former BBI leader Richard Austin had breached the council’s Code of Conduct by disclosing confidential details of a meeting with a member of the council to an officer of another council. As a result, the council’s Consideration and Hearings sub-committee censured Councillor Austin and ordered him to send a written apology to the complainant. Despite that, we hear that an apology has not been forthcoming. We wrote last week that – although the hearing took place on 20th April, we understood that the publication of the ruling was withheld until after the elections, and asked if there was one law on Boston Borough Council for Councillor Austin and another for everyone else. Given his contempt not only for a fellow councillor, but now apparently also for the judgement and ruling of his peers, we see no reason to change that view.

Our quest last week to find an appropriate collective noun for groups of leaders – as Boston Borough Council now has so many – brought a helpful response from Councillor Richard Leggott, the Independent group spokesman. “Please refer to our deputy appointments as - a new word coming up here - a  logicality of leaders,” he requested. “Logical, because group leaders/spokespersons are often accompanied to appropriate meetings by their deputies. Such deputies, unless they have been officially nominated, can be challenged. Often a single nominated deputy spokesperson will not be the group member with the most knowledge of the meeting’s theme. Therefore, to the Independents, it is logical to have a multitude of nominated deputies to overcome these problems in order to be able to serve the council best.” We are sure that Mr Spock would approve.

We scanned the local “newspapers” in vain this week for news of the plight of the Boston Chamber of Commerce, which we hear has run into difficulties – but yet again, it appears that another important local story has been missed. If what we hear is correct, then local businesses will find themselves without the useful co-ordination that such groups provide. And there may well be knock-on effects for other organisations as well …

Way back in March we reported that the borough council’s list of payments over £500 revealed how much the council’s Chief Executive earned  - sorry, was paid - between November last year and February. Richard Harbord was paid through his company, Mrf UK Ltd, rather than the normal payroll system – in which case the amount would have not been sullied by the public gaze. However, we note that all reference to Mr Harbord and his company has vanished from the payments list for March and April. Does this mean he has gone “on staff?” We somehow doubt it. But we think it is noteworthy that - when people think you don't know what a payment is for, they are happy to publish it - but once the details are exposed they are somehow made secret again. Unless, of course, Mr Harbord is doing it all for love!
A very wise letter from someone whose name has been associated with law in Boston for many years appeared in the Daily Telegraph newspaper earlier this week. The letter, from Richard Tinn, read: “The law, those who pass laws, and those who administer the law and give judgment are all servants of the people and not their masters. If the law is allowed to be manipulated by those clever enough and with money enough, it is (irrespective of the outcome for them) the reputation of the law that suffers, and with it respect for the law. Respect for the law is already low. It must not be allowed to sink lower, otherwise it is law and order itself that is at risk.” In the wake of some of our recent writings, we thought how well this summarised things if - broadly speaking – the word “council” replaced the word “law” in the letter.

In these desperate days, it seems that local estate agents will try every trick to make a house for sale look more attractive to a potential buyer. However, we thought we heard the sound of the bottom of a barrel being scraped when we read that among the owners of one delightful property was “the noted Boston historian, G.S. Bagley.” The team remembers George Bagley – even though he was in his prime half a century ago. In those days he was the “local editor” of the Lincolnshire Echo – which then produced a Boston edition. This was not an especially arduous task, involving as it did sitting in court or attending meetings of Boston Borough Council – which left plenty of time for extra-curricular activity. As a result, George produced Boston: Its Story and People (1986) – arguably his best effort, although hard going in places – plus the arcane Behind-the-scenes Story of a parish: Skirbeck Quarter, Boston (1982) Floreat Bostona : History of Boston Grammar School from 1567, (1985) and Samuel Partridge : a Lincolnshire minister and magistrate (2003.) It’s scarcely Simon Schama but if it sells the house …

Speaking of desperation, this week’s Boston Standard wins that particular award. “Look what’s packed inside” screams a front page headline. “91 LOCAL news stories, leisure reports and pictures; 235 LOCAL faces featured – is yours one? - and 57 LOCAL sports stories and pictures. We feel sorry for the sad sack who had the job of counting this lot up. But far from being something to brag about, we think that it highlights just what a poor job the paper is doing when it can come up with so little content from a borough with a population of at least 59,000. And given that most of the photos are of groups, who can they be sure there are exactly 235? We counted at least 237!

Having said that, the Standard continues to entertain – albeit unintentionally. The following items caught our beady eye. The first, headlined “Hip hip hooray for patients” tells us

"Returning home more quickly than ever, eh?  Probably because they can now run, whereas before even walking was an effort!.  And  a “… fractured neck or femur,?" We think that “neck of femur” would be more likely.
And then – this being Boston – an advertiser wisely chose to exercise caution when seeking what we assume to be toys.

Better to be safe than sorry, though. As we said, this being Boston you might end up with someone’s cuddly but unwanted rottweiler!
That’s it for this week. We wish you an enjoyable Bank Holiday weekend. We won’t be publishing on Monday, but will be back as normal on Tuesday 31st.

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