"Independents" these days are seldom what they seem.
There was a time when they were exactly what they proclaimed, but now, as at Boston Borough Council for instance, the independent controlling party has a distinct leadership structure.
At County Council level though, we are left a little bemused.
Lincolnshire Independents was established in July last year, and since last June's elections appears to have undergone some changes of membership.
But the issue of who's really who is not especially clear.
If you visit Lincolnshire County Council's website and seek the list of independent councillors,you are presented with the following:-Bill Aron (Horncastle & Tetford,) Chris Brewis (Sutton Elloe,) Michael Brookes (Boston Rural,) Graham Dark (Spalding South,) John Hicks (Stamford North,) Ramonde Newell (Boston West,) Marianne Overton (Branston & Navenby,) and Jim Swanson (Spilsby Fen.)But Lincolnshire Independents own list is a little different.
The same members listed are: Bill Aron, Chris Brewis, and Marianne Overton and Jim Swanson.
But it then goes on to name Boston Borough Council's leader Richard Austin as the member for Boston South - even though he lost the seat to the Conservative Paul Skinner -
Mike Williams (Grantham East) which the County Council says is represented by Conservative Paul Carpenter, Craig Leyland (Woodhall Spa) which the County Council says was held by Tory Denis Hoyes, at the last election.
The Lincolnshire Independents' list does not include Councillors Brookes, Newell, Dark, or Hicks.So it appears that the Lincolnshire Independents list is a mish-mash of elected councillors, some of whom claim allegiance with the formal party and some of whom do not, plus candidates who failed to make the grade at the elections in June.
As far as we are concerned, the only ones who matter are those who represent Boston.
Councillor Newell, for instance, claims to have opted to join the independents so as to get a coveted seat on the county's Highway's Committee - even though he was elected as a Boston Bypass Independent candidate.
Councillor Brookes, as far as we are aware, stood as an "independent" Independent, but appears on one list but not another.
We really would like some clarification on all of this, as Lincolnshire Independents (the group) will surely prove at some point to be a party with an agenda - and we think that it is important to know where Boston's elected representatives stand.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Wednesday, October 7
Tuesday, October 6
The audit? - it's impossible to figure it out!
We don't know about you, but balancing the books after a week's shopping is about as far as we get when it comes to financial calculations.That's why it's so depressing to find that whilst Boston Borough Council has published its unaudited statement of accounts online so that any of us can take a look, there's nothing much by way of explanation, so all we have are 78 pages of closely packed information and no key as to what it all means.
Perhaps this is deliberate.
At the weekend one of the heavyweight Sundays published a piece about how local authorities are using their own publications to stifle investigation and debate from their local papers.
And we feel sure that when the news of the audit reaches our local press, there will be little by way of explanation or interpretation about what it all means.
This cuts both ways.
If the borough wants to use an absence of information and interpretation as a way to bury bad news, the opposite is true where any good news is concerned.
Skimming the pages, the impression we take away is that there's more bad news than good...
A council with a net worth of £10.5 million should make a bigger surplus than a meagre £13,000. The net worth was down by £8 million on 2007/08. mainly because of the pension fund liability, which increased by £5.365 million to reflect the expected decline in the value of investments heldby the pension fund, due to the current economic climate.
A corporate restructure during the year, saw staff cuts and redundancy packages of almost £140,000.
So, we're employing fewer staff and paying them to leave, whilst at the same time topping up their pension pots by almost half of the council's current value.
And whilst staff numbers are being reduced, there are now two earning between £50 to £60 thousand compared with one a year ago, and a newcomer in the ranks earning between £80 and £90 thousand - two posts alone that almost equal last year's redundancy costs.
If this is called value for money, we're glad we don't have an account with the Bank of Boston Borough!
And whilst staff numbers are being reduced, there are now two earning between £50 to £60 thousand compared with one a year ago, and a newcomer in the ranks earning between £80 and £90 thousand - two posts alone that almost equal last year's redundancy costs.
If this is called value for money, we're glad we don't have an account with the Bank of Boston Borough!
Meanwhile, £1 million was used to pay off another debt incurred by the Boston Sports Initiative, whilst the mystery million pound loan is still on the books - despite promises to track it down and find out what it's for.
In his comments on the figures, the auditor raises questions about the council's relationship with Boston Sports Initiative - who run the Princess Royal Sports area - and whose funding from the council expired at the end of last month (we'll believe it when we see it!) as well as the Boston Area Regeneration Company.
He adds that, having regard to relevant criteria specified by the Audit Commission, he is not satisfied that, in all significant respects, Boston Borough Council made proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources for the year ending 31 March 2009 and did not put in place adequate arrangements for:
having a sound understanding of its costs and performance and achieving efficiencies in its activities;
the commissioning and procurement of quality services and supplies, tailored to local needs, to deliver
sustainable outcomes and value for money;
producing relevant and reliable data and information to support decision making and managing performance;
promoting and demonstrating the principles and values of good governance;
managing its risks and maintaining sound systems of internal control; and
planning, organising and developing its workforce effectively to support the achievement of its strategic priorities.
You can read the report by visiting http://www.boston.gov.uk/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=1577&Itemid
If, after doing so, you're any wiser, we'd be interested to hear your comments.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
He adds that, having regard to relevant criteria specified by the Audit Commission, he is not satisfied that, in all significant respects, Boston Borough Council made proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources for the year ending 31 March 2009 and did not put in place adequate arrangements for:
having a sound understanding of its costs and performance and achieving efficiencies in its activities;
the commissioning and procurement of quality services and supplies, tailored to local needs, to deliver
sustainable outcomes and value for money;
producing relevant and reliable data and information to support decision making and managing performance;
promoting and demonstrating the principles and values of good governance;
managing its risks and maintaining sound systems of internal control; and
planning, organising and developing its workforce effectively to support the achievement of its strategic priorities.
You can read the report by visiting http://www.boston.gov.uk/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=1577&Itemid
If, after doing so, you're any wiser, we'd be interested to hear your comments.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Monday, October 5
Two such different letters ...
Today sees our 300th blog - and we devote it to a look at two letters.
The first is an e-mail from Boston Borough Councillor David Owens to local MP Mark Simmonds MP, following that astonishing "swoop" on Witham Country Park which shocked many people when they saw the state of the "campsite" used by migrants living in the park.
Councillor Owens calls on Mr Simmonds to attend one of the many meetings that Boston Borough Council has been arranging, to add his support for and assistance in developing a strategy to resolve the ongoing issues relating to this problem.
"I am of the opinion that we, along with other local authorities should lobby government, in order to get a clear and definitive pathway that assists in the resolution of these challenges, additionally I expect you as the Member of Parliament for our area to take an active interest in this matter as assist in the resolution and successful conclusion of this situation," he writes.
Attached to the e-mail is an account of the most recent meeting following the clearing of the park involving - among others - the police, Department of Communities and Local Government and other Boston Borough councillors.
The ten moved on from the Witham Country Park were Russian, Latvian and Polish. Only one qualified for bed & breakfast accommodation. Most of the rest, whilst all here legally, had criminal records, with two on bail, and the police are looking into how bail was granted to people with no permanent address.
Meanwhile, the Department of Communities and Local Government has praised Boston's approach to the problem and supported the setting up of a bye-law to outlaw these sort of camps in the future - and given Boston Borough Council £10,000 to assist with this problem, and a series of actions is to be taken - including seeing how the council in nearby Peterborough deals with a similar situation.
The second letter also concerns immigration - albeit indirectly- and comes from our old friend Councillor Ramonde (Major retired or not, depending) Newell and takes the form of an information blitz following his claims at the last County Council meeting that Boston is the largest town in Lincolnshire - something that provoked laughter and shouts to the effect that this title was held by Grantham.
This time, Councillor Newell has added a few more arrows to his quiver of authority in his letter to the County Council chairman, adding the qualifications BA ACP FCIPD MCMI Cert Ed. after his name.
Phew!
"You may remember that when I spoke to the above amendment, I stated that the town of Boston (which I represent), was the largest town (in terms of its population), in the whole of the Administrative County of Lincolnshire – though it does not have an inch of bypass," he writes.
"There were a number of councillors present who were either unaware that the town of Boston had the largest population in their authority, or thought that Grantham, had a larger population. I was unable to demonstrate that Boston does indeed have a larger population, because of lack of time. Hence this, my letter.
"I give below seven 'proofs' that Boston does have the largest population in the Lincolnshire Authority. Only figures taken from a single source, which gives the population of both Boston and Grantham, have been used. The reference of these sources are given."The list contains seven website addresses, two of which are the same, and one of which doesn't connect.Although individually the list shows Boston as bigger than Grantham, looking across the figures, the smallest population for Boston is 34,420, and the largest for Grantham is 35,000. So really, the whole exercise is pointless.
Councillor Newell goes on to quote "other enormous increases" in Boston’s population - many of which relate to immigration, and others to birthrate and the high increases in houses in multiple occupation.
There then follows an unrelated blather about traffic flow in Boston and planned future road improvements. As if population size is in any way related to bypass provision.
Just to hammer his 'proofs' home, Councillor Newell has copied his letter to 74 Lincolnshire county councillors, 31 Boston Borough councillors, three officers and three local newspapers.
Two councillors.
Two letters.
One joins with others to seek solutions to problems, whilst the other obsesses on proving himself right rather than addressing the problem.
We also think that it's more than a little vain to claim to represent the town of Boston, when you are merely one of seven county councillors who between them represent the borough as a whole.
We are lost for words...
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
The first is an e-mail from Boston Borough Councillor David Owens to local MP Mark Simmonds MP, following that astonishing "swoop" on Witham Country Park which shocked many people when they saw the state of the "campsite" used by migrants living in the park.
Councillor Owens calls on Mr Simmonds to attend one of the many meetings that Boston Borough Council has been arranging, to add his support for and assistance in developing a strategy to resolve the ongoing issues relating to this problem.
"I am of the opinion that we, along with other local authorities should lobby government, in order to get a clear and definitive pathway that assists in the resolution of these challenges, additionally I expect you as the Member of Parliament for our area to take an active interest in this matter as assist in the resolution and successful conclusion of this situation," he writes.
Attached to the e-mail is an account of the most recent meeting following the clearing of the park involving - among others - the police, Department of Communities and Local Government and other Boston Borough councillors.
The ten moved on from the Witham Country Park were Russian, Latvian and Polish. Only one qualified for bed & breakfast accommodation. Most of the rest, whilst all here legally, had criminal records, with two on bail, and the police are looking into how bail was granted to people with no permanent address.
Meanwhile, the Department of Communities and Local Government has praised Boston's approach to the problem and supported the setting up of a bye-law to outlaw these sort of camps in the future - and given Boston Borough Council £10,000 to assist with this problem, and a series of actions is to be taken - including seeing how the council in nearby Peterborough deals with a similar situation.
The second letter also concerns immigration - albeit indirectly- and comes from our old friend Councillor Ramonde (Major retired or not, depending) Newell and takes the form of an information blitz following his claims at the last County Council meeting that Boston is the largest town in Lincolnshire - something that provoked laughter and shouts to the effect that this title was held by Grantham.
This time, Councillor Newell has added a few more arrows to his quiver of authority in his letter to the County Council chairman, adding the qualifications BA ACP FCIPD MCMI Cert Ed. after his name.
Phew!
"You may remember that when I spoke to the above amendment, I stated that the town of Boston (which I represent), was the largest town (in terms of its population), in the whole of the Administrative County of Lincolnshire – though it does not have an inch of bypass," he writes.
"There were a number of councillors present who were either unaware that the town of Boston had the largest population in their authority, or thought that Grantham, had a larger population. I was unable to demonstrate that Boston does indeed have a larger population, because of lack of time. Hence this, my letter.
"I give below seven 'proofs' that Boston does have the largest population in the Lincolnshire Authority. Only figures taken from a single source, which gives the population of both Boston and Grantham, have been used. The reference of these sources are given."The list contains seven website addresses, two of which are the same, and one of which doesn't connect.Although individually the list shows Boston as bigger than Grantham, looking across the figures, the smallest population for Boston is 34,420, and the largest for Grantham is 35,000. So really, the whole exercise is pointless.
Councillor Newell goes on to quote "other enormous increases" in Boston’s population - many of which relate to immigration, and others to birthrate and the high increases in houses in multiple occupation.
There then follows an unrelated blather about traffic flow in Boston and planned future road improvements. As if population size is in any way related to bypass provision.
Just to hammer his 'proofs' home, Councillor Newell has copied his letter to 74 Lincolnshire county councillors, 31 Boston Borough councillors, three officers and three local newspapers.
Two councillors.
Two letters.
One joins with others to seek solutions to problems, whilst the other obsesses on proving himself right rather than addressing the problem.
We also think that it's more than a little vain to claim to represent the town of Boston, when you are merely one of seven county councillors who between them represent the borough as a whole.
We are lost for words...
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Friday, October 2
Week ending 2nd October
Our Friday miscellany of the week's news and events
Wilting red rose ... We always thought that politics was not a place for the unduly sensitive - but Boston's prospective parliamentary Labour candidate Paul Kenny seems determined to prove us wrong. Not content with ousting Andrea Jenkyns as Conservative county councillor for Boston North West, he then silenced borough Tory councillor Myles Larrington's blog by formally complaining about an item he wrote. Now he's decided to take offence at remarks in another Conservative councillor's blog, and is again using the formal complaints procedure as his weapon of choice. The latest offender is Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, who, we are happy to say, seems determined not to be intimidated. Fortunately, Boston Eye is immune to formal complaints procedures, so we can say how bemused we are at the way Paul Kenny alternates between being a Labour attack dog to criticise other politicians, but adopts the injured innocence of a wounded member of the public when his victims bite back. We would expect him to be bigger than this, and hope that Boston's Standards Committee will treat these frivolous complaints with the contempt they deserve.
Video nasty ... Is Councillor Ramonde (Major retired or not, depending) alone in thinking that his performance at Lincolnshire County Council a fortnight ago was disastrous, embarrassing and a classic example of how not to deliver a speech? Apparently. Rather than keeping quiet, we hear that he read out his epistle at the last Cabinet meeting, and started to do the same at last Monday's full council meeting. Fortunately, he was prevented from going on for too long, but not before he had told the council and members of the public how he was standing up for Boston and that you could view his speech on the County Council WebCam, giving details of where to find it etc ... Even the Mayor was forced to intervene …
First off the blocks ... Boston North West Conservative candidate Andrea Jenkyns e-mails to say that her blog is now in campaign mode, after our report that said the electronic hustings seemed lacklustre rater than lustrous. That's one step ahead of the opposition, but her main campaign site is still devoted to her resignation rather than anything more positive. Still, Lib Dem wannabe Mike Sheridan-Shinn continues to regale us with news from the party conference on 22nd September ... Lloyd George knew my father etc, etc ....
Insult-ans of spin ... What is it that Lincolnshire County Council has against Boston? A press release this week trumpets the delights of two new bus services between Boston and Lincoln, and Boston and Spalding. Among the benefits, the county's Principal Transport Officer Paul Harvey, says: “These new Sunday services will provide improved access for shopping, especially during Christmas and the sales ....." As ever, Boston Eye reads between the lines, and sees this as an invitation from a Lincoln-based council to the people of Boston to spend their money in Lincoln and Spalding in the run-up to Christmas. It's all we need, isn't it? Someone going to this amount of trouble to lure spenders out of town at such a critical time of year. Once again we can thank Brylaine Travel for providing the transport. It seems they're not simply content with ruining the ambiance of Strait Bargate. Now they want to help ruin any chance the town has for prosperity as well.
Here there be tygers ... An unexpected fall-out from Boston's decision not to merge services with South Holland and East Lindsey district councils has to be the question of where the new merged office will be located. South Holland is headquartered in Spalding, and East Lindsey at Manby. The distance between the two is almost 50 miles and a drive of well over an hour. Had Boston decided to play, the borough would have provided a convenient central point for a new merged office. We will be interested to see how this geographic handicap will be overcome. We fancy Stickney as the new hub!
Top of the cops ... Lincolnshire Police go from strength to strength in topping the league tables. Not long ago they headed the list of forces in whom the public felt least confidence. Now they have recorded the highest increase in complaint cases in the country. The Independent Police Complaints Commission revealed this week that the force considered 383 complaints in the last year - a rise of 46% on the previous year. The average increase in complaint cases across the country was 8%. A total of 722 allegations - 66% up on the previous year - were recorded against the force last year. Most of the allegations - 26% - related to neglect or failure in duty, with slightly less - 21% - about incivility, impoliteness and intolerance, and another 8% related to assault. Perhaps we were wrong to criticise our police for hiding in their offices, or holding "surgeries" in local supermarkets rather than "pounding the beat." It seems that we're a lot better off when they do!
Still counting ... another week goes by, and Borough Council's Dear Leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin clings to the inaccurate claim on the Lincolnshire Independents' website that he represents Boston South on Lincolnshire County Council. It is now 17 weeks since 4th June, when he lost his former seat to Conservative Paul Skinner.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Wilting red rose ... We always thought that politics was not a place for the unduly sensitive - but Boston's prospective parliamentary Labour candidate Paul Kenny seems determined to prove us wrong. Not content with ousting Andrea Jenkyns as Conservative county councillor for Boston North West, he then silenced borough Tory councillor Myles Larrington's blog by formally complaining about an item he wrote. Now he's decided to take offence at remarks in another Conservative councillor's blog, and is again using the formal complaints procedure as his weapon of choice. The latest offender is Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, who, we are happy to say, seems determined not to be intimidated. Fortunately, Boston Eye is immune to formal complaints procedures, so we can say how bemused we are at the way Paul Kenny alternates between being a Labour attack dog to criticise other politicians, but adopts the injured innocence of a wounded member of the public when his victims bite back. We would expect him to be bigger than this, and hope that Boston's Standards Committee will treat these frivolous complaints with the contempt they deserve.
Video nasty ... Is Councillor Ramonde (Major retired or not, depending) alone in thinking that his performance at Lincolnshire County Council a fortnight ago was disastrous, embarrassing and a classic example of how not to deliver a speech? Apparently. Rather than keeping quiet, we hear that he read out his epistle at the last Cabinet meeting, and started to do the same at last Monday's full council meeting. Fortunately, he was prevented from going on for too long, but not before he had told the council and members of the public how he was standing up for Boston and that you could view his speech on the County Council WebCam, giving details of where to find it etc ... Even the Mayor was forced to intervene …
First off the blocks ... Boston North West Conservative candidate Andrea Jenkyns e-mails to say that her blog is now in campaign mode, after our report that said the electronic hustings seemed lacklustre rater than lustrous. That's one step ahead of the opposition, but her main campaign site is still devoted to her resignation rather than anything more positive. Still, Lib Dem wannabe Mike Sheridan-Shinn continues to regale us with news from the party conference on 22nd September ... Lloyd George knew my father etc, etc ....
Insult-ans of spin ... What is it that Lincolnshire County Council has against Boston? A press release this week trumpets the delights of two new bus services between Boston and Lincoln, and Boston and Spalding. Among the benefits, the county's Principal Transport Officer Paul Harvey, says: “These new Sunday services will provide improved access for shopping, especially during Christmas and the sales ....." As ever, Boston Eye reads between the lines, and sees this as an invitation from a Lincoln-based council to the people of Boston to spend their money in Lincoln and Spalding in the run-up to Christmas. It's all we need, isn't it? Someone going to this amount of trouble to lure spenders out of town at such a critical time of year. Once again we can thank Brylaine Travel for providing the transport. It seems they're not simply content with ruining the ambiance of Strait Bargate. Now they want to help ruin any chance the town has for prosperity as well.
Here there be tygers ... An unexpected fall-out from Boston's decision not to merge services with South Holland and East Lindsey district councils has to be the question of where the new merged office will be located. South Holland is headquartered in Spalding, and East Lindsey at Manby. The distance between the two is almost 50 miles and a drive of well over an hour. Had Boston decided to play, the borough would have provided a convenient central point for a new merged office. We will be interested to see how this geographic handicap will be overcome. We fancy Stickney as the new hub!
Top of the cops ... Lincolnshire Police go from strength to strength in topping the league tables. Not long ago they headed the list of forces in whom the public felt least confidence. Now they have recorded the highest increase in complaint cases in the country. The Independent Police Complaints Commission revealed this week that the force considered 383 complaints in the last year - a rise of 46% on the previous year. The average increase in complaint cases across the country was 8%. A total of 722 allegations - 66% up on the previous year - were recorded against the force last year. Most of the allegations - 26% - related to neglect or failure in duty, with slightly less - 21% - about incivility, impoliteness and intolerance, and another 8% related to assault. Perhaps we were wrong to criticise our police for hiding in their offices, or holding "surgeries" in local supermarkets rather than "pounding the beat." It seems that we're a lot better off when they do!
Still counting ... another week goes by, and Borough Council's Dear Leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin clings to the inaccurate claim on the Lincolnshire Independents' website that he represents Boston South on Lincolnshire County Council. It is now 17 weeks since 4th June, when he lost his former seat to Conservative Paul Skinner.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Thursday, October 1
"Leadership at fault for merger plan collapse"
Boston's failure to agree to merge back office services is due to a failure to communicate, says a senior member of the Better Boston Group.
Councillor Brian Rush slams "childish selective sharing of information ... " and
"The Leader`s desire for personal glory hunting and self promotion"
Dear Boston Eye,
The refusal to join the proposal for merged services has a lot to do with whether we are ready for it or not.
One would be forgiven for thinking that we as a council have been sitting around on our spongy bits, doing nothing to progress this project - and to a degree one would be right.
I'll return to this later..
It is a fact that both South Holland and East Lindsey District Councils appear to have confidence in the merged services vision.
No doubt both their groups of councillors have been able to evaluate the impact of the potential savings that can be made, and only a fool would be unable to see that there must be value in pursuing such aspiration.
Although I am hesitant to believe that one can cut staff, relocate administration, resulting in an upgrade of service level, and enhance quality of front line services, all at the same time, if it works then it really is a great trick.
A trick that is influenced by a couple of factors - one being, if existing services are over expensive and unsatisfactory, it could of course be the quality of staff that delivers the service.
So in order to rectify such a situation, a cleansing process must be carried out (this will be at a cost!) It was also logical that the first tranche of services selected by the three partners were administrative in flavour - Information Technology, Revenues and Benefits, Human Resources, Finance, and Customer Services - simply because they are the most transferable.
But bins, grass cutting, and crematoria etc ...?
All a bit physical, or constructional, so they don`t transfer too easily.
Or it could be that executive roles in management are not good enough. Maybe even perimeters and expectation are either too high or too low, or flawed in purpose and design. Maybe the best savings would be found here.
I'll vote for that.
In any case, whatever the problems, with effort, thought and proper evaluation, they can be overcome.
And I guess, or hope, that South Holland and East Lindsey, have the expertise and desire to make merged services a raging success. I am somewhat disappointed, but not surprised, that we as an authority could not be part of a project that has the potential to deliver improvements of municipal services to our 'Boroughfolk' -but the decision was the right one, and now I will tell you why.
It must be understood that if you really want to be a progressive, dynamic organisation, then it is vital that all those involved are committed, and all those committed are involved.
If a particular product or vision is to stand any hope of success then a team must be built that are capable of pursuing a clear and calculated result. That team must be based on trust.
In order to turn the vision to reality there must be a complete absence of 'private personal agendas.'
They have to want to deliver, know why they are delivering, then, how they will deliver, and embrace and utilise every skill and resource that is available to them to do so. It is a fact that discussions between the three authorities began many months ago, and regular meetings took place thereafter, options investigated, plans evaluated, course set.
So what went wrong?
The 'C' word -- communication.
The usual childish selective sharing of information was adopted.
The Leader's desire for personal glory hunting and self promotion would, as always, cloud important issues that concerned Boston in the proposal.
Star Chamber members of his ruling group would as usual, unquestioningly stand united; less important members would be fed pure rhetoric, thereby keeping all on board.
Opposition Members, huh! They would be to a large degree isolated.
And Boston would lose.
The original path of direction had been set by the former Chief Executive and Councillor Austin, and despite the warning bells ringing loud and clear, he would, as always, stay loyal to Mr Gallagher, as he did till the eleventh hour.
Then the divorce took place!
Lack of readily available finances, low performance levels, flawed decision making, and doubtful managerial skills. Lack of leadership and direction etc, etc. Audit Commission, Government Office for the East Midlands ....
Suddenly a change of Chief Executive personality and mind set, and the course of direction was re-examined.
The now misdirected Leader, became instilled by a furiosity to realign and catch up; now he wanted to communicate, but the opposing team were playing away, even some of his own Bypassers.
Now I wonder if he will be dropping in for a coffee at South Holland or East Lindsey any time soon, and will he be welcomed.
Doubt it!
Councillor Brian Rush
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)