Whilst we don't doubt Boston Borough Council Leader's faith in the town, we do believe that from time to time he lets enthusiasm triumph over realism.
In his State of the Union New Year message, he quotes some exciting key future plans for the town.
Top of the list is Merchant's Quay - slated for completion in three years even though permission for planning is not expected for a few more months.
According to Councillor Austin it will bring Boston into the top 200 shopping destinations in the UK (we seem to recall that this is a line from the developer's press release.)
As we have already pointed out, whilst this sounds great, according to the UK Webstart site which lists such things, there are only 238 all together, so to get in the top 200 with a development of the type proposed here shouldn't be that hard.
Councillor Austin goes on to claim that English Heritage is to treat Boston as "one of its highest priorities" bringing substantial grant funding to preserve many of our fine and interesting buildings.
Hang on a sec!
The piece we heard on the wireless (see our blog of December 17th - "Market Place is wonderful - Slumb") had an English Heritage spokesman talking about patching up a few roofs, repainting some shopfronts and perhaps converting some of the space above them into accommodation.
And he emphasised: "We don't invest massive amounts every year but when we're interested in a place we'll consistently invest over a period of time. It might take seven or eight years to regenerate a place. In Boston it might take longer."
Finally on the vexed issue of the PRSA, Councillor Austin cites the fact that 600 schoolchildren a week now use it and that this will soon be doubled.
At the same time he tells us, the cost to the Boston council taxpayer has been roughly halved.
But surely, when schools use a facility the bill is met from the budget of the school concerned .... which comes from the Education budget ... which comes from .... you've guessed it .... the County Council tax.
It's a rose by any other name. Virement is one of the closest that springs to mind.
None of this is to say that there aren't good things happening in Boston, but it is wrong of Councillor Austin to over egg the pudding in the belief that we'll all fall over and believe what is essentially what we would expect a politician to say.
Some realism would be helpful - particularly in these difficult times.
We're off to lay down in a darkened room now, and will be back on New Year's Day.
Enjoy your celebrations.
New Year's greetings to all our readers - and thanks for visiting our blog in record numbers.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Wednesday, December 31
Tuesday, December 30
Consultation? We call it insult-ation!
It was either Benjamin Disraeli or Mark Twain who popularised the phrase "there are lies, damn lies and statistics."
Had either man been alive today, we feel sure that they would add Boston Borough Council questionnaires to the list.
Take the latest 23-question epic on the borough's budget proposals for the next financial year.
Well, actually only around half that number since the rest pose important questions as to age, disability, ethnicity and sexuality.
But as we have often complained in the past, many of the questions posed are pitched in such a way as to create an answer of the sort required.
Take your starter for 1:
"The Council is proposing the suspension of Party in the Park 2009, with its possible reinstatement in 2010 subject to review. This will offer a substantial saving of £82,000. However, if Party in the Park is going to be available in future years there will have to be an entry fee."Please indicate whether you agree with the following two statements.
"A. I would pay £10 adult entry and £7.50 child entry
"B. I would pay more than £10 adult entry and £7.50 child entry"
The result of collecting answers to this question is to be able to claim that people either wish to do 1 or 2, or are not willing to pay as much as 1.
Nowhere is there the chance to cast a vote saying that the Party in the Park is really as Party in the Ark. It is out of date and an impossible luxury in today's spending climate.
Other questions include voting on whether or not improvements to the Geoff Moulder Leisure pool will or will not encourage the responder to take part in regular exercise. The question ignores the possibility that there are categories of people who will not use it because they cannot, even if they would wish to.
The issue of opening hours at the Haven and Guildhall and the transfer of the Tourist Information Centre are neatly fudged into a single question, when there are actually three distinct issues there.
The list of silly questions is as long as the number of questions in a pointless exercise that is largely constructed to produce the sort of answers required.
Read the whole thing on the borough council's website.
And they call this consultation.
At least the "con" syllable has a ring of truth about it!!
Write to us a boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.
Had either man been alive today, we feel sure that they would add Boston Borough Council questionnaires to the list.
Take the latest 23-question epic on the borough's budget proposals for the next financial year.
Well, actually only around half that number since the rest pose important questions as to age, disability, ethnicity and sexuality.
But as we have often complained in the past, many of the questions posed are pitched in such a way as to create an answer of the sort required.
Take your starter for 1:
"The Council is proposing the suspension of Party in the Park 2009, with its possible reinstatement in 2010 subject to review. This will offer a substantial saving of £82,000. However, if Party in the Park is going to be available in future years there will have to be an entry fee."Please indicate whether you agree with the following two statements.
"A. I would pay £10 adult entry and £7.50 child entry
"B. I would pay more than £10 adult entry and £7.50 child entry"
The result of collecting answers to this question is to be able to claim that people either wish to do 1 or 2, or are not willing to pay as much as 1.
Nowhere is there the chance to cast a vote saying that the Party in the Park is really as Party in the Ark. It is out of date and an impossible luxury in today's spending climate.
Other questions include voting on whether or not improvements to the Geoff Moulder Leisure pool will or will not encourage the responder to take part in regular exercise. The question ignores the possibility that there are categories of people who will not use it because they cannot, even if they would wish to.
The issue of opening hours at the Haven and Guildhall and the transfer of the Tourist Information Centre are neatly fudged into a single question, when there are actually three distinct issues there.
The list of silly questions is as long as the number of questions in a pointless exercise that is largely constructed to produce the sort of answers required.
Read the whole thing on the borough council's website.
And they call this consultation.
At least the "con" syllable has a ring of truth about it!!
Write to us a boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.
Monday, December 29
Look out for the tumbleweed!
As we remarked on the departure of Woolworths, the names of other high street names thought to be under threat were emerging.
Names such as Jessops, and Clinton Cards joined Adams and Whittards, the Officer's Club, Zavvi, MFI and others.
It's said that as many as 15 big name shops could vanish in the next few weeks, and looking at the list so far, large areas of Boston could soon resemble a ghost town.
In the midst of all this we recalled that a large number of developments for the town have failed to materialise.
Remember the "mini mall" proposed alongside ASDA - and what about ADSA's plan to enlarge the store? Another "mini mall" was mooted for the far end of West Street, and council cash was used to help pave the way for a development that has got no further than a run of hoardings shielding a wasteland. And weren't we supposed to be getting some more shops on the car park behind Woolworth's?
Very quietly, these leaps forward that were trumpeted so enthusiastically seem to have died the death.
The other day we mentioned the silence surrounding the planned development called Merchant's Quay.
Still scheduled to be completed in 2012 according to the publicity, no realistic plans have yet been filed - although there are some very pretty artist's impressions knocking around.
Given how long it to to approve and create Pescod Square - which still has empty units, as does the redeveloped former ASDA site - we think there must be a serious question to be asked about whether this will still go ahead.
Write to us a boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.
Names such as Jessops, and Clinton Cards joined Adams and Whittards, the Officer's Club, Zavvi, MFI and others.
It's said that as many as 15 big name shops could vanish in the next few weeks, and looking at the list so far, large areas of Boston could soon resemble a ghost town.
In the midst of all this we recalled that a large number of developments for the town have failed to materialise.
Remember the "mini mall" proposed alongside ASDA - and what about ADSA's plan to enlarge the store? Another "mini mall" was mooted for the far end of West Street, and council cash was used to help pave the way for a development that has got no further than a run of hoardings shielding a wasteland. And weren't we supposed to be getting some more shops on the car park behind Woolworth's?
Very quietly, these leaps forward that were trumpeted so enthusiastically seem to have died the death.
The other day we mentioned the silence surrounding the planned development called Merchant's Quay.
Still scheduled to be completed in 2012 according to the publicity, no realistic plans have yet been filed - although there are some very pretty artist's impressions knocking around.
Given how long it to to approve and create Pescod Square - which still has empty units, as does the redeveloped former ASDA site - we think there must be a serious question to be asked about whether this will still go ahead.
Write to us a boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.
Saturday, December 27
History repeats itself
Today's the day that the Boston branch of Woolworth's closes down.
Although the demise of the store nationally has long been considered inevitable it represents some worrying writing on the wall for the town.
We've lost count of how many other shops have closed in Boston in the past year - among them local names that have been associated with the town for generations and which recalled its enterprising and innovating spirit.
Doubtless many more people will mourn the departure of Woolies than did the demolition of the Red Lion coaching that stood on its site from the Middle Ages.
In hindsight, what a waste it was to destroy a building that had existed for more than 500 years to replace it with one that has survived little more than 50.
Write to us a boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Although the demise of the store nationally has long been considered inevitable it represents some worrying writing on the wall for the town.
We've lost count of how many other shops have closed in Boston in the past year - among them local names that have been associated with the town for generations and which recalled its enterprising and innovating spirit.
Doubtless many more people will mourn the departure of Woolies than did the demolition of the Red Lion coaching that stood on its site from the Middle Ages.
In hindsight, what a waste it was to destroy a building that had existed for more than 500 years to replace it with one that has survived little more than 50.
Write to us a boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Friday, December 19
Only 12? We could find many more than that!
Our parting shot for Christmas is a seasonal one - Boston Eye's very own version of "The 12 days of Christmas"
On the first day of Christmas the council promised me
a by-pass eventual-ly
On the second day of Christmas the council gave to me
two drivers drinking
On the third day of Christmas the council gave to me
three In-Town buses meeping
On the fourth day of Christmas the council gave to me
an old cabinet creaking
On the fifth day of Christmas the council gave to me
a dwindling maj-or-it-ee
On the sixth day of Christmas the council gave to me
no hope in sight for anyone to see
On the seventh day of Christmas the council gave to me
huge debts a-mounting
On the eighth day of Christmas the council gave to me
a sports stadium a-wasting lots of muh-uh-huh-ney
On the ninth day of Christmas the council gave to me
the Guildhall always shut ... near-ly
On the tenth day of Christmas the council gave to me
an ever mobile TIC
On the eleventh day of Christmas the council gave to me
less loos to spend a pee
On the twelfth day of Christmas the council gave to me
a chance to vote 'em out ... eventual-ly
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be printed in confidence if requested.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Thursday, December 18
Plea over allowances confusion
There's still a lot of debate about the issue of councillors' allowances, and a complex question posed by one of our readers.
He tells us:- "There is a further issue which you may care to take forward in the wider interests of democracy, concerning the supposition that community cohesion is based on a system of laws and rules which society changes from time to time in accordance with its needs.
"If you care to examine the recommendations of central government and the formulae which are available to calculate councillors' allowances, whatever the arguments for or against a Boston increase at the present time, I believe it to be a matter for huge concern that an influential committee can sit in secret session, throw the rule book out of the window, ignore official guidelines and finally arrive at a decision which cannot be confirmed using published data.
"The glaring example which comes to mind is the panel's notional 25% deduction to take account of Boston being a 'low pay' area , which is applied on top of the 33.3% further deduction for what it quaintly calls a public service discount.
"Two questions arise from this. Why does the national average wage difference based on Boston versus national advertised vacancies peak at minus 9%? And are these calculations applied to all Boston Borough Council wages and allowances ?
"The questions are, of course, rhetorical!"
Whilst we like a challenge, we could find nothing clear and simple by way of government recommendations and formulae to calculate allowances, so if any other of our readers can help shed light on the matter we would be please to hear from them.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
He tells us:- "There is a further issue which you may care to take forward in the wider interests of democracy, concerning the supposition that community cohesion is based on a system of laws and rules which society changes from time to time in accordance with its needs.
"If you care to examine the recommendations of central government and the formulae which are available to calculate councillors' allowances, whatever the arguments for or against a Boston increase at the present time, I believe it to be a matter for huge concern that an influential committee can sit in secret session, throw the rule book out of the window, ignore official guidelines and finally arrive at a decision which cannot be confirmed using published data.
"The glaring example which comes to mind is the panel's notional 25% deduction to take account of Boston being a 'low pay' area , which is applied on top of the 33.3% further deduction for what it quaintly calls a public service discount.
"Two questions arise from this. Why does the national average wage difference based on Boston versus national advertised vacancies peak at minus 9%? And are these calculations applied to all Boston Borough Council wages and allowances ?
"The questions are, of course, rhetorical!"
Whilst we like a challenge, we could find nothing clear and simple by way of government recommendations and formulae to calculate allowances, so if any other of our readers can help shed light on the matter we would be please to hear from them.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Wednesday, December 17
Market Place is wonderful - Slumb
Apparently, Boston looks like benefiting from a small sum of money over a long period of time if English Heritage decides to help with the refurbishment and revamping of the town centre.
The oft-told Boston story of jam tomorrow ... rather than jams today.
According to an item on BBC Radio Lincolnshire EH officials fear that Boston risks losing some of its great heritage and considers the town one of the most significant market towns in the country "heritagewise." (sic)
All contributions gratefully received as they say, but what depresses us is the way that people talk when they speak about the town.
Assistant Chief Executive Steve Lumb told the wireless:- "Having a market place, an open square that we have right alongside St Botolph's is actually wonderful, but at the moment as we look at it, it does look rather tired; the street furniture is looking rather tired and essentially it's not much more than perhaps a large car park. So we need to make much more of that - we need to redesign it. We need to keep what's special about it and we need to make it a place that people really enjoy coming to."
So what are you saying Mr Lumb? If it's so wonderful why do we need to redesign it? And if it does look rather tired, whose fault it that? And why are we waiting for English Heritage to come along with a few quid when the council is spending willy nilly on things such as the PRSA and probably another Party in the Park.
Later in his interview, Mr Lumb described Boston's heritage as: ..... "really second to none. Sometimes we smile when we compare it to York, but really it is very comparable to York ... except York has had its money and in terms of listed buildings, in terms of its archaeology. Really there is nothing much else to beat it (Boston) in the East Midlands."
Hmmm.
English Heritage Historic Areas Advisor Clive Fletcher was interviewed as well, and spouted similar guff:- "Boston is one of the most important market towns in the country, but it's more important than that even - partially because of its past. It was a very important port in the medieval period - busier than London at times - so it was a very, very important medieval town and because of that it's got a great heritage of medieval building and also medieval archaeology. "But unfortunately it's fallen on harder times. Over the past number of years it hasn't really had a great deal of investment in a lot of its historic properties so a lot of them are in danger of not collapse necessarily, though there are one or two like that, but certainly they're not being used because they can't be - holes in roofs and things like that - and also general decline in the quality of repairs to things like shop fronts and windows which we think we could possibly help with.
"I know the council is actually looking at a package themselves from the regional development agency but we do this sort of thing up and down the country. We don't invest massive amounts every year but when we're interested in a place we'll consistently invest over a period of time. It might take seven or eight years to regenerate a place. In Boston it might take longer" (it almost certainly will, as it usually does!)
In one town they spent 15 years helping shop owners do their places up and convert space over shops for residential use.
The whole broadcast piece was linked by Radio Lincolnshire's very own Boston-born star Scott Dalton, whom one might expect to speak English as he works for the BBC.
He tore himself away from the York Street locker rooms to tell us:- "Boston Borough Council are rubbing their hands with glee. They see this as an open goal and they must score and put the ball in the back of the net because this all ties in with Merchants Quay and making more of the river feature."
To drive home the point, he told us that this could really make Boston a gem "and even a tourist attraction possibly in the future."
And he added that "English Heritage have started talking with Boston Borough working up this plan to potentially refurbish the whole of the town centre and work on a long term plan. People at the council are very excited about this . They feel that this, tied in with some of the other developments going on, could finally possibly realise Boston's potential which its felt hasn't possibly made the most of what they've got in the past."
We don't know what it is these chaps are smoking, but we wish we could get hold of some.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
The oft-told Boston story of jam tomorrow ... rather than jams today.
According to an item on BBC Radio Lincolnshire EH officials fear that Boston risks losing some of its great heritage and considers the town one of the most significant market towns in the country "heritagewise." (sic)
All contributions gratefully received as they say, but what depresses us is the way that people talk when they speak about the town.
Assistant Chief Executive Steve Lumb told the wireless:- "Having a market place, an open square that we have right alongside St Botolph's is actually wonderful, but at the moment as we look at it, it does look rather tired; the street furniture is looking rather tired and essentially it's not much more than perhaps a large car park. So we need to make much more of that - we need to redesign it. We need to keep what's special about it and we need to make it a place that people really enjoy coming to."
So what are you saying Mr Lumb? If it's so wonderful why do we need to redesign it? And if it does look rather tired, whose fault it that? And why are we waiting for English Heritage to come along with a few quid when the council is spending willy nilly on things such as the PRSA and probably another Party in the Park.
Later in his interview, Mr Lumb described Boston's heritage as: ..... "really second to none. Sometimes we smile when we compare it to York, but really it is very comparable to York ... except York has had its money and in terms of listed buildings, in terms of its archaeology. Really there is nothing much else to beat it (Boston) in the East Midlands."
Hmmm.
English Heritage Historic Areas Advisor Clive Fletcher was interviewed as well, and spouted similar guff:- "Boston is one of the most important market towns in the country, but it's more important than that even - partially because of its past. It was a very important port in the medieval period - busier than London at times - so it was a very, very important medieval town and because of that it's got a great heritage of medieval building and also medieval archaeology. "But unfortunately it's fallen on harder times. Over the past number of years it hasn't really had a great deal of investment in a lot of its historic properties so a lot of them are in danger of not collapse necessarily, though there are one or two like that, but certainly they're not being used because they can't be - holes in roofs and things like that - and also general decline in the quality of repairs to things like shop fronts and windows which we think we could possibly help with.
"I know the council is actually looking at a package themselves from the regional development agency but we do this sort of thing up and down the country. We don't invest massive amounts every year but when we're interested in a place we'll consistently invest over a period of time. It might take seven or eight years to regenerate a place. In Boston it might take longer" (it almost certainly will, as it usually does!)
In one town they spent 15 years helping shop owners do their places up and convert space over shops for residential use.
The whole broadcast piece was linked by Radio Lincolnshire's very own Boston-born star Scott Dalton, whom one might expect to speak English as he works for the BBC.
He tore himself away from the York Street locker rooms to tell us:- "Boston Borough Council are rubbing their hands with glee. They see this as an open goal and they must score and put the ball in the back of the net because this all ties in with Merchants Quay and making more of the river feature."
To drive home the point, he told us that this could really make Boston a gem "and even a tourist attraction possibly in the future."
And he added that "English Heritage have started talking with Boston Borough working up this plan to potentially refurbish the whole of the town centre and work on a long term plan. People at the council are very excited about this . They feel that this, tied in with some of the other developments going on, could finally possibly realise Boston's potential which its felt hasn't possibly made the most of what they've got in the past."
We don't know what it is these chaps are smoking, but we wish we could get hold of some.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Tuesday, December 16
Look after the pennies ...
It's probably not a bad idea to avoid giving money away before you start looking here, there and everywhere for cuts in the budget.
It seems that whilst Boston Borough Council is grubbing around shaving a few thousand from one place or another that it overpaid benefits to the tune of £21,700 in the last financial year.
Admittedly the sum is a drop in the ocean compared with the likes of neighbouring East Lindsey, which overpaid by £80,000 - but if it matters, it matters.
In most cases the overpayments were discovered after residents revealed changes in their circumstances, and across the county they totalled £2.9m.
Matthew Sinclair, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said the loss of the money was "of a significant scale" but added it was expensive to pay the costs of "clawing back" the funds.
He called the process of recovering the money "an unpleasant task for everyone concerned".
So is paying unnecessary council tax.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
It seems that whilst Boston Borough Council is grubbing around shaving a few thousand from one place or another that it overpaid benefits to the tune of £21,700 in the last financial year.
Admittedly the sum is a drop in the ocean compared with the likes of neighbouring East Lindsey, which overpaid by £80,000 - but if it matters, it matters.
In most cases the overpayments were discovered after residents revealed changes in their circumstances, and across the county they totalled £2.9m.
Matthew Sinclair, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said the loss of the money was "of a significant scale" but added it was expensive to pay the costs of "clawing back" the funds.
He called the process of recovering the money "an unpleasant task for everyone concerned".
So is paying unnecessary council tax.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Monday, December 15
Need for better opposition led to Storry resignation
There's clarification of the reasoning behind Councillor John Storry's decision to quit the Bypass Independents and operate as a purely independent councillor.
He tells another website: "Whatever the press may make of my resignation from the Boston Bypass Independents Party, Wyberton residents made the choice for me.
"The majority party decided to continue PRSA funding after the original agreement ended, but two months later the rules changed again!
"Local opinion polls show that 90% of residents wish to end the subsidy but council agreed new deal this week without any guarantee as to 'how much' or for 'how long'!
"In Wyberton everyone I spoke to said 'NO MORE' so, as their councillor, I had no other honourable choice but to vote against the motion.
"My subsequent resignation is based on the belief that, at present, the opposition is too weak to fully represent the will of the people, so joining them as an Independent councillor is all I can do to protect Wyberton’s interests.
"I hope you will agree with my decision and can accept my assurance that I shall continue to faithfully represent your views in council to the best of my ability."
Later, Councillor Storry told Boston Eye:-
"My reference to the PRSA issue was meant to explain to the electorate why I voted the way I did at the end of the council debate.
"The remainder of the comment was intended to portray why I resigned from the BBI Party. "Perhaps I did not make it as clear as I might have done that two entirely separate issues are involved; hence the comment :- 'My subsequent resignation is based on the belief that, at present, the opposition is too weak to fully represent the will of the people, so joining them as an Independent councillor is all I can do to protect Wyberton's interests.'
"I trust this clarifies the situation.
"With Kind regards
"Councillor John G Storry"
Boston Eye salutes Councillor Storry for his candour, and heartily endorses his comments about the weakness of opposition to the BBI juggernaut - in fact we expressed the wish for more independent councillors only a few days ago.
Maybe other councillors will now grasp the nettle....
Perhaps a letter to Santa.......?
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
He tells another website: "Whatever the press may make of my resignation from the Boston Bypass Independents Party, Wyberton residents made the choice for me.
"The majority party decided to continue PRSA funding after the original agreement ended, but two months later the rules changed again!
"Local opinion polls show that 90% of residents wish to end the subsidy but council agreed new deal this week without any guarantee as to 'how much' or for 'how long'!
"In Wyberton everyone I spoke to said 'NO MORE' so, as their councillor, I had no other honourable choice but to vote against the motion.
"My subsequent resignation is based on the belief that, at present, the opposition is too weak to fully represent the will of the people, so joining them as an Independent councillor is all I can do to protect Wyberton’s interests.
"I hope you will agree with my decision and can accept my assurance that I shall continue to faithfully represent your views in council to the best of my ability."
Later, Councillor Storry told Boston Eye:-
"My reference to the PRSA issue was meant to explain to the electorate why I voted the way I did at the end of the council debate.
"The remainder of the comment was intended to portray why I resigned from the BBI Party. "Perhaps I did not make it as clear as I might have done that two entirely separate issues are involved; hence the comment :- 'My subsequent resignation is based on the belief that, at present, the opposition is too weak to fully represent the will of the people, so joining them as an Independent councillor is all I can do to protect Wyberton's interests.'
"I trust this clarifies the situation.
"With Kind regards
"Councillor John G Storry"
Boston Eye salutes Councillor Storry for his candour, and heartily endorses his comments about the weakness of opposition to the BBI juggernaut - in fact we expressed the wish for more independent councillors only a few days ago.
Maybe other councillors will now grasp the nettle....
Perhaps a letter to Santa.......?
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Friday, December 12
Councillor Storry ..... "a free spirit"
This afternoon, Councillor Austin issued the following statement regarding Councillor Storry's departure from the Boston Bypass Independents:-
"I have enjoyed working closely with Councillor John Storry. There will always be differing shades of opinion in a group and I appreciate John's need to be a free spirit.
"I am particularly grateful for his help with the landmark election victory of the Boston Bypass Independents that created political history last year. It did much to re-invigorate democracy in the Borough.
"I am sure that we will continue to work closely together to serve the needs of the electorate of the area in general and that of our joint ward Wyberton, in particular."
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested
"I have enjoyed working closely with Councillor John Storry. There will always be differing shades of opinion in a group and I appreciate John's need to be a free spirit.
"I am particularly grateful for his help with the landmark election victory of the Boston Bypass Independents that created political history last year. It did much to re-invigorate democracy in the Borough.
"I am sure that we will continue to work closely together to serve the needs of the electorate of the area in general and that of our joint ward Wyberton, in particular."
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested
A Storry that may never be told
There has been an unpublicised change to the balance of membership on Boston Borough Council.
As of Wednesday, the council's website reported the breakdown as:-
Bypass Independents 18
Conservative 6
Better Boston "Group" 4
Independents 3
BNP 1
This time last week there were 19 BBI councillors and two independents.
Scrutiny of the list shows that Councillor John Storry has changed affiliation from the BBI and now represents Wyberton as a stand-alone Independent.
Wyberton is represented by two members on Boston Borough Council - and ironically the other councillor for the ward is none other that the BBI and Council leader Richard Austin.
Councillor Storry politely referred us to councillor Austin for any comment on what he called this "sensitive" issue.
Councillor Austin has so far been unable to locate the "reply" key on his computer, but rest assured that we will let you know if he manages to find it.
Don't hold your breath!
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
As of Wednesday, the council's website reported the breakdown as:-
Bypass Independents 18
Conservative 6
Better Boston "Group" 4
Independents 3
BNP 1
This time last week there were 19 BBI councillors and two independents.
Scrutiny of the list shows that Councillor John Storry has changed affiliation from the BBI and now represents Wyberton as a stand-alone Independent.
Wyberton is represented by two members on Boston Borough Council - and ironically the other councillor for the ward is none other that the BBI and Council leader Richard Austin.
Councillor Storry politely referred us to councillor Austin for any comment on what he called this "sensitive" issue.
Councillor Austin has so far been unable to locate the "reply" key on his computer, but rest assured that we will let you know if he manages to find it.
Don't hold your breath!
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Thursday, December 11
Council seems confused over allowances
On the one hand, we can applaud the decision by Boston councillors not to award themselves a bumper "pay" rise in these current straitened times.
However, the debate leading up to the vote raised some interesting points - not least the attitude of some councillors to the raison d'etre for seeking office.
Councillor leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin reportedly told the meeting: "In my view, democracy is suffering from these low allowances because it limits the people who can put themselves forward to be a councillor.
"It is only retired people or those with a private income that can afford to be a councillor and the vast majority of the public are therefore excluded."
We're not so sure about this.
Local government history shows numerous examples of people who seek the vote then do the job in tandem with their own daily jobs.
The payments under debate are allowances to compensate councillors for their additional time and trouble - not a wage for doing the job.
The reason most people don't bother seeking election is because they lack motivation or enthusiasm.
The reason many others seek election is usually biased by some motive or another.
We exclude truly independent councillors from that description, as they are the only people whose reason to want to serve is truly transparent, and we wish that there were more of them.
We had to smile at the naivety of Councillor Jim Blaylock, who is quoted as saying that a way to resolve the issue would be to vote in favour of the increases so that members had the option to take it or not.
We can think of a handful of current members of the council who have contributed little if anything to its work whom we believe would be first in line to accept the extra cash if it were offered, so we're glad that this suggestion never made it past the starting post.
And after smiling, we had to laugh out loud at the suggestion by Councillor Richard Lenton, who was reportedly in favour of the increase, when he was quoted as saying that if councillors didn't get any extra money neither should council staff.
Is this man truly portfolio holder for finance?
If so, someone should explain the difference between allowances and salaries to him sooner rather than later.
And finally, we salute the suggestion from Councillor Anne Dorrian for a results-based remuneration system.
"If you come up with a manifesto and in six months time do a U-turn then you wouldn't get paid," she is reported as saying.
Great suggestion, councillor - and one made by Boston Eye several days before the meeting.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
However, the debate leading up to the vote raised some interesting points - not least the attitude of some councillors to the raison d'etre for seeking office.
Councillor leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin reportedly told the meeting: "In my view, democracy is suffering from these low allowances because it limits the people who can put themselves forward to be a councillor.
"It is only retired people or those with a private income that can afford to be a councillor and the vast majority of the public are therefore excluded."
We're not so sure about this.
Local government history shows numerous examples of people who seek the vote then do the job in tandem with their own daily jobs.
The payments under debate are allowances to compensate councillors for their additional time and trouble - not a wage for doing the job.
The reason most people don't bother seeking election is because they lack motivation or enthusiasm.
The reason many others seek election is usually biased by some motive or another.
We exclude truly independent councillors from that description, as they are the only people whose reason to want to serve is truly transparent, and we wish that there were more of them.
We had to smile at the naivety of Councillor Jim Blaylock, who is quoted as saying that a way to resolve the issue would be to vote in favour of the increases so that members had the option to take it or not.
We can think of a handful of current members of the council who have contributed little if anything to its work whom we believe would be first in line to accept the extra cash if it were offered, so we're glad that this suggestion never made it past the starting post.
And after smiling, we had to laugh out loud at the suggestion by Councillor Richard Lenton, who was reportedly in favour of the increase, when he was quoted as saying that if councillors didn't get any extra money neither should council staff.
Is this man truly portfolio holder for finance?
If so, someone should explain the difference between allowances and salaries to him sooner rather than later.
And finally, we salute the suggestion from Councillor Anne Dorrian for a results-based remuneration system.
"If you come up with a manifesto and in six months time do a U-turn then you wouldn't get paid," she is reported as saying.
Great suggestion, councillor - and one made by Boston Eye several days before the meeting.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Wednesday, December 10
Yule not believe this!
We're sure that it's not our imagination, but seem to think that the top item on Boston Borough Council's website extolling the delights of the town's Christmas Market did not appear until after the event.
Certainly, its modification date was on the Monday morning after the weekend before.
Can anyone enlighten us?
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Certainly, its modification date was on the Monday morning after the weekend before.
Can anyone enlighten us?
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
More debate on BNP
The war of words over the role of the BNP in our political society rumbles on..
Last week Boston Borough councillor Richard Lenton had letters published in both local papers in which he said:
"Regardless of the sinister past of the BNP, the electorate would be wise to think twice before voting for this party particularly at national level purely on the grounds that Britain is for the Brits.
"As beguiling a notion this might be it may not be entirely practical as beside the fact that the Portuguese and Poles are long standing allies of the UK, in one case going back centuries, the fact is our agricultural industry can hardly function without them.
"Furthermore and perhaps more to the point is that our basic state pension for the future is under great threat should these people fail to settle in this country and pay taxes like the rest of us."The state pension works very simply; it's those in work pay the pensions (and benefits) of those in retirement. It's an inescapable fact we, like many of our European neighbours, have an aging population so as the baby boomers (those born just after the war) start to retire in their droves and given the fact we are on average living longer we will soon be in a position that we don't have enough people working to pay for our state pensions. Bearing in mind most of the private sector have not made enough pension provisions to look after their old age we have a disastrous situation staring us in the face.
"Before therefore you run with the idea the BNP may be the saviour of the British nation potentially the opposite may be true. It could be a better option in the long run to look after our foreign friends and encourage them to stay for a number of reasons, not least your own state pension and benefits."
This morning - assuming the letter is published - the papers will carry the following response from Boston's recently elected BNP councillor for Fenside, David Owens, who says in reply:
"Whatever cheap snipe that Cllr Lenton and others may attempt about the British National Party, the reality remains the same.
"This country is full. The vast majority of people realise this and are looking for change."In making that statement does not mean that we 'hate' anyone. It simply means that politicians at borough, county and national level need to start listening to their electorate, as it they, who are directly affected by un-controlled, un-relenting massive scales of immigration into our town and our country.
"Long standing historical allegiances with people from another country and culture simply will not wash when it comes to housing waiting lists, strains on NHS services and the in ability to get a job and pay the bills!
"Who does Councillor Lenton think were doing the low paid agricultural jobs in the past? The very same jobs we keep being told 'Brit’s won’t do'?
"Tricky one that!
"The agricultural industry managed in the past and will have to adapt and manage in the future.
"The real challenge is making these jobs available and indeed attractive to those whom successive governments have ignored and forgotten about, the people who they have thrown welfare payments at to shut up and keep sat in front of the T.V. It is these very same people they failed to give any hope of a prosperous future too.
"In case some did not notice … we are in a recession…. people are losing their jobs…. unemployment is on the rise, and that means we have lots of our very own home grown people desperate for work.
"Ah, but then again it’s easier to keep bringing in cheap labour from other countries, treat them like slaves, tell the public that we need them, and keep paying our own people to sit at home on benefits!! Now I’ve got it!
"As a word of caution however, let us not forget, that this year's cheap migrant worker will become next year's benefit claimant when some other impoverished nation joins the E.U. (and its highly likely that the current entry restrictions will be lifted on Bulgarian and Romanian nationals) and undercuts the current workforce’s wage.
"But not to worry, at least someone is paying for our pension."
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Last week Boston Borough councillor Richard Lenton had letters published in both local papers in which he said:
"Regardless of the sinister past of the BNP, the electorate would be wise to think twice before voting for this party particularly at national level purely on the grounds that Britain is for the Brits.
"As beguiling a notion this might be it may not be entirely practical as beside the fact that the Portuguese and Poles are long standing allies of the UK, in one case going back centuries, the fact is our agricultural industry can hardly function without them.
"Furthermore and perhaps more to the point is that our basic state pension for the future is under great threat should these people fail to settle in this country and pay taxes like the rest of us."The state pension works very simply; it's those in work pay the pensions (and benefits) of those in retirement. It's an inescapable fact we, like many of our European neighbours, have an aging population so as the baby boomers (those born just after the war) start to retire in their droves and given the fact we are on average living longer we will soon be in a position that we don't have enough people working to pay for our state pensions. Bearing in mind most of the private sector have not made enough pension provisions to look after their old age we have a disastrous situation staring us in the face.
"Before therefore you run with the idea the BNP may be the saviour of the British nation potentially the opposite may be true. It could be a better option in the long run to look after our foreign friends and encourage them to stay for a number of reasons, not least your own state pension and benefits."
This morning - assuming the letter is published - the papers will carry the following response from Boston's recently elected BNP councillor for Fenside, David Owens, who says in reply:
"Whatever cheap snipe that Cllr Lenton and others may attempt about the British National Party, the reality remains the same.
"This country is full. The vast majority of people realise this and are looking for change."In making that statement does not mean that we 'hate' anyone. It simply means that politicians at borough, county and national level need to start listening to their electorate, as it they, who are directly affected by un-controlled, un-relenting massive scales of immigration into our town and our country.
"Long standing historical allegiances with people from another country and culture simply will not wash when it comes to housing waiting lists, strains on NHS services and the in ability to get a job and pay the bills!
"Who does Councillor Lenton think were doing the low paid agricultural jobs in the past? The very same jobs we keep being told 'Brit’s won’t do'?
"Tricky one that!
"The agricultural industry managed in the past and will have to adapt and manage in the future.
"The real challenge is making these jobs available and indeed attractive to those whom successive governments have ignored and forgotten about, the people who they have thrown welfare payments at to shut up and keep sat in front of the T.V. It is these very same people they failed to give any hope of a prosperous future too.
"In case some did not notice … we are in a recession…. people are losing their jobs…. unemployment is on the rise, and that means we have lots of our very own home grown people desperate for work.
"Ah, but then again it’s easier to keep bringing in cheap labour from other countries, treat them like slaves, tell the public that we need them, and keep paying our own people to sit at home on benefits!! Now I’ve got it!
"As a word of caution however, let us not forget, that this year's cheap migrant worker will become next year's benefit claimant when some other impoverished nation joins the E.U. (and its highly likely that the current entry restrictions will be lifted on Bulgarian and Romanian nationals) and undercuts the current workforce’s wage.
"But not to worry, at least someone is paying for our pension."
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Tuesday, December 9
Why do the police hate Boston so much?
Once again the great and the good are making Boston look bad.
This time it's the local police, who've announced a "multi-agency project" to "safeguard" people enjoying a night out in Boston in the run up to Christmas - to "deter alcohol-related disorder and other anti-social and criminal activity."
A press release says the town will see more high visibility foot patrols by the neighbourhood policing teams, response and patrol officers, special constabulary, street wardens and Boston Borough Council's community safety team.
"We're really going to be out there on the run up to Christmas, engaging with people enjoying the festive spirit and working with our partner agencies and licensees to ensure that everyone remains safe and is sensible," said Inspector Terry Ball, the man in charge of Boston police.
"We're not out to ruin the fun, but we will deal robustly with anyone who ignores our advice and over-indulges," he said.
The police activity will include so-called "safer zones" to "educate" festive revelers, on issues such as personal safety, substance misuse, and health issues including safe sex and alcohol misuse.
Flip-flops, safety packs and condoms are among items being handed out to those enjoying a night out.
In case you're wondering about the flip-flops, Boston Police have nicked the idea from their brothers in blue in Torquay, who hand them out to drunken women in the resort so that they can't hurt themselves when they fall over as they would if they were wearing high heeled shoes.
What a pity that the police can't be more visible and proactive all year round - their Christmas campaign echoes the attention paid to the homeless at this time of year .... by people who then ignore them for the rest of the time.
There's scarcely any need to read between the lines of the police handout to see what they are saying about the people of Boston.
They're a feckless promiscuous bunch who - when they're not having drunken unprotected sex on the pavement - are fighting among themselves or robbing each other.
Boston police are all but invisible in and around the town for 49 weeks of the year, and then decide to insult and nanny us for the remaining three by doing a job that is completely outside their remit.
And how about the implied menace to "deal robustly with anyone who ignores our advice."
And why is Boston Borough Council allying itself with this exercise?
Boston appears to be the only town in the county singled out for this treatment, and we wonder what it is that the police hate about us so much.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
This time it's the local police, who've announced a "multi-agency project" to "safeguard" people enjoying a night out in Boston in the run up to Christmas - to "deter alcohol-related disorder and other anti-social and criminal activity."
A press release says the town will see more high visibility foot patrols by the neighbourhood policing teams, response and patrol officers, special constabulary, street wardens and Boston Borough Council's community safety team.
"We're really going to be out there on the run up to Christmas, engaging with people enjoying the festive spirit and working with our partner agencies and licensees to ensure that everyone remains safe and is sensible," said Inspector Terry Ball, the man in charge of Boston police.
"We're not out to ruin the fun, but we will deal robustly with anyone who ignores our advice and over-indulges," he said.
The police activity will include so-called "safer zones" to "educate" festive revelers, on issues such as personal safety, substance misuse, and health issues including safe sex and alcohol misuse.
Flip-flops, safety packs and condoms are among items being handed out to those enjoying a night out.
In case you're wondering about the flip-flops, Boston Police have nicked the idea from their brothers in blue in Torquay, who hand them out to drunken women in the resort so that they can't hurt themselves when they fall over as they would if they were wearing high heeled shoes.
What a pity that the police can't be more visible and proactive all year round - their Christmas campaign echoes the attention paid to the homeless at this time of year .... by people who then ignore them for the rest of the time.
There's scarcely any need to read between the lines of the police handout to see what they are saying about the people of Boston.
They're a feckless promiscuous bunch who - when they're not having drunken unprotected sex on the pavement - are fighting among themselves or robbing each other.
Boston police are all but invisible in and around the town for 49 weeks of the year, and then decide to insult and nanny us for the remaining three by doing a job that is completely outside their remit.
And how about the implied menace to "deal robustly with anyone who ignores our advice."
And why is Boston Borough Council allying itself with this exercise?
Boston appears to be the only town in the county singled out for this treatment, and we wonder what it is that the police hate about us so much.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Monday, December 8
Road rage over schools move
Mike Borrill points out that our comment on "Landing Boston in a mess" should read: "No one will be able to get into Boston soon because of the mess!"
He writes to say: "I have said time and time again that before our 'leaders' mess any more with the layout of the town, a better infrastructure with the roads should be put in place. It does not require a university degree to understand this but sheer commonsense.
"The decision to move the High School to the Grammar school site, leaving the financial situation aside, is madness once again.
"They are to move nearly twice as many pupils (give or take a few hundred) to a central part of our clogged up road network.
"Many more buses will have to drop and pick up at this new school together with all the extra cars involved."
Add into this equation that John Adams Way will have an increase of traffic (a total both ways) by 2015 of 10.1% from the 2005 Census figures and you can see why I am angry.
"Let us bring some sanity back to Boston, it deserves it."
We cannot help but share Mike's anger.
Factor in some of the other plans we mentioned - a minimum of 60 new starter homes in the Broadfield Lane area (and by the sound of it the likelihood of at least twice that) which is at the very heart of Boston's congestion problem; a major redevelopment of Boston College and the Merchants Quay project - which as well as all the shops promises 100 "city style apartments" and parking for 700 cars, and the scene is set for traffic chaos of catastrophic proportions.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
He writes to say: "I have said time and time again that before our 'leaders' mess any more with the layout of the town, a better infrastructure with the roads should be put in place. It does not require a university degree to understand this but sheer commonsense.
"The decision to move the High School to the Grammar school site, leaving the financial situation aside, is madness once again.
"They are to move nearly twice as many pupils (give or take a few hundred) to a central part of our clogged up road network.
"Many more buses will have to drop and pick up at this new school together with all the extra cars involved."
Add into this equation that John Adams Way will have an increase of traffic (a total both ways) by 2015 of 10.1% from the 2005 Census figures and you can see why I am angry.
"Let us bring some sanity back to Boston, it deserves it."
We cannot help but share Mike's anger.
Factor in some of the other plans we mentioned - a minimum of 60 new starter homes in the Broadfield Lane area (and by the sound of it the likelihood of at least twice that) which is at the very heart of Boston's congestion problem; a major redevelopment of Boston College and the Merchants Quay project - which as well as all the shops promises 100 "city style apartments" and parking for 700 cars, and the scene is set for traffic chaos of catastrophic proportions.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Friday, December 5
Wrong time for big "pay" rise
You might expect us to start foaming at the mouth at the report of the Independent Remuneration Panel review of councillors' allowances for the next financial year to be considered Monday's full council meeting - which proposes some enormous increases.
However the panel is independent and it points out that the allowance is the lowest in Lincolnshire and that the gap with other authorities has grown over the years.
But, whatever a councillor's service may be worth, it seems daft to talk about increases of such magnitude at a time of real hardship and recession, and also when the council is grubbing around to make savings of far less than the total it would take to bring allowances up to date.
At any time a rise of 72.5% for the leader - from £6,487 to £11,193 - and 56.8% for all members ... from £2,378 to 3,731 ... would generate a deep intake of breath.
But in the present desperate climate, it could not be justified.
Sensibly, the council rejected big increases last year, and we hope that they will do so again this time around.
How about this for an idea?
Pay the BBI by results - then they wouldn't cost us a penny.
Now there's a thought!
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
However the panel is independent and it points out that the allowance is the lowest in Lincolnshire and that the gap with other authorities has grown over the years.
But, whatever a councillor's service may be worth, it seems daft to talk about increases of such magnitude at a time of real hardship and recession, and also when the council is grubbing around to make savings of far less than the total it would take to bring allowances up to date.
At any time a rise of 72.5% for the leader - from £6,487 to £11,193 - and 56.8% for all members ... from £2,378 to 3,731 ... would generate a deep intake of breath.
But in the present desperate climate, it could not be justified.
Sensibly, the council rejected big increases last year, and we hope that they will do so again this time around.
How about this for an idea?
Pay the BBI by results - then they wouldn't cost us a penny.
Now there's a thought!
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Thursday, December 4
Landing Boston in a mess
The news for Boston this week is the £20 million new school for the Boston Grammar Schools Federation.
Last week it was the £79 million revamp of Boston College.
And in between came the plans to concrete the entire Broadfield Lane allotment site instead of just one third of it.
And back in days of yore, we had the multil-multi-multi million pound plan to turn most of West Street into "Merchants Quay" a retail led, mixed use scheme comprising 350,000 sq ft including a 60,000 sq ft department store, a 60,000 sq ft food store, five major space units and 17 additional units of various sizes.
Building site Boston for years to come.
At the heart of all these plans - regardless of their size - is land, and the money it makes.
The grammar school project for instance will largely be funded by the sale of the High School site.
However, in case anyone hasn't noticed, we're in a recession.
Building firms have closed.
The value of land banks has slumped.
And as well as that, there is little if any movement in the house buying market, and little is anticipated for years to come.
We fear that the sort of schemes we have mentioned could be under threat because of all that.
Boston already suffers from being on the edge of nowhere with a higher than average number of low paid jobs. It is not a convenient dormitory town for more expensive areas.
So assuming - not unreasonably - that the land thrown into the melting pot by these various proposed developments is turned into housing, who on earth is going to come to live here?
We think that it's time to reconsider the town's development future sooner rather than later, or a right royal mess will result.
Also, given the lack of information regarding Merchants Quay and its scheduled completion date of 2012 - just three years away - we wonder if this project has already quietly slipped from the drawing board and into the waste paper basket.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Last week it was the £79 million revamp of Boston College.
And in between came the plans to concrete the entire Broadfield Lane allotment site instead of just one third of it.
And back in days of yore, we had the multil-multi-multi million pound plan to turn most of West Street into "Merchants Quay" a retail led, mixed use scheme comprising 350,000 sq ft including a 60,000 sq ft department store, a 60,000 sq ft food store, five major space units and 17 additional units of various sizes.
Building site Boston for years to come.
At the heart of all these plans - regardless of their size - is land, and the money it makes.
The grammar school project for instance will largely be funded by the sale of the High School site.
However, in case anyone hasn't noticed, we're in a recession.
Building firms have closed.
The value of land banks has slumped.
And as well as that, there is little if any movement in the house buying market, and little is anticipated for years to come.
We fear that the sort of schemes we have mentioned could be under threat because of all that.
Boston already suffers from being on the edge of nowhere with a higher than average number of low paid jobs. It is not a convenient dormitory town for more expensive areas.
So assuming - not unreasonably - that the land thrown into the melting pot by these various proposed developments is turned into housing, who on earth is going to come to live here?
We think that it's time to reconsider the town's development future sooner rather than later, or a right royal mess will result.
Also, given the lack of information regarding Merchants Quay and its scheduled completion date of 2012 - just three years away - we wonder if this project has already quietly slipped from the drawing board and into the waste paper basket.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Wednesday, December 3
Surprise, surprise - there's no surprise
It comes as no surprise to hear that the Into Town bus service has been a resounding success. We would not have expected any other verdict.
We doubt that so much money has been spent in our part of the world for very many years on something that we have been repeatedly told was subject to evaluation (with the implied suggestion that it might not go ahead.)
Look around the town at all the raised kerbs and try to imagine that anyone would say that the scheme was not absolutely marvellous.
We are sure that the service is attracting more users - although we doubt that many of them are people who previously travelled by car ... and we thought that part of the idea was to reduce traffic flows around the town.
Tonight's meeting of the wooden box is being asked to endorse the draft resolution of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to support the Into Town bus consultation process and endorse the decision to involve both Boston and Lincolnshire County Councils in the exercise to ensure maximum comprehension of the strategy.
Whilst we agree that the town has long needed improvements to its local bus services, we still question the invasion of the town centre shopping experience by intrusive, noisy coaches herding shoppers aside to deliver their cargo of free-travelling pensioners.
Is there no possible compromise that would keep the route away from Strait Bargate?
And where are the vocal activists of the Better Boston Group now that there seems to be no publicity to be gained from opposing the Into Town service?
Surely a little commonsense can prevail and allow the townsfolk to shop in peace and quiet.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested
We doubt that so much money has been spent in our part of the world for very many years on something that we have been repeatedly told was subject to evaluation (with the implied suggestion that it might not go ahead.)
Look around the town at all the raised kerbs and try to imagine that anyone would say that the scheme was not absolutely marvellous.
We are sure that the service is attracting more users - although we doubt that many of them are people who previously travelled by car ... and we thought that part of the idea was to reduce traffic flows around the town.
Tonight's meeting of the wooden box is being asked to endorse the draft resolution of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to support the Into Town bus consultation process and endorse the decision to involve both Boston and Lincolnshire County Councils in the exercise to ensure maximum comprehension of the strategy.
Whilst we agree that the town has long needed improvements to its local bus services, we still question the invasion of the town centre shopping experience by intrusive, noisy coaches herding shoppers aside to deliver their cargo of free-travelling pensioners.
Is there no possible compromise that would keep the route away from Strait Bargate?
And where are the vocal activists of the Better Boston Group now that there seems to be no publicity to be gained from opposing the Into Town service?
Surely a little commonsense can prevail and allow the townsfolk to shop in peace and quiet.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested
Tuesday, December 2
Hypocrisy in spades at allotment site!
A report to tomorrow's Boston Town Area Committee rekindles memories of the long-forgotten (doubtless the intention) Broadfield Lane allotment site.
In May last year, the Boston Standard reported that disgruntled allotment-holders attended a special meeting to hear the secretary of the charity which owns their allotments outline detailed plans to sell off a "large chunk" of the site to Longhurst Homes.
The charity hoped to make more than half-a-million pounds from the land sale, to devote to worthy causes around the Boston area.
The bidders, Longhurst, hoped to buy around a third of the site from Boston Municipal Charities to build 60 new affordable houses.
At the meeting, Councillor Ray Newell, who represents Staniland South ward where the allotments lie, warned: "The system that often operates with these 'land grabs' is that first the developer takes one third, then they come back for another third, and in the end they take the lot."
But the charity's secretary, Katherine Bunting, said they would 'never' sell the rest of the land for development, and it was suggested that all existing allotment-holders could be given plots on the remainder of the Broadfield Lane site.
Fast forward to Wednesday night's BTAC meeting.
After summarising the events leading up to the eviction notices being served on the Broadfield Lane allotment holders, a report adds: "In February 2008 Boston Municipal Charities informed us that they required possession of the whole site and that tenants would no longer be able to move to the area not designated for the proposed development. All Broadfield Lane tenants are now relocated on five different sites around the borough."
Whilst the charity has apparently indicated that land may still be available on the site to use as allotments the trustees of the charity are currently unable to make a long term commitment regarding the rest of the site until they know the outcome of Longhurst’s planning application or the extent of the proposed development.
The committee is being recommended to pay to clear the Broadfield Lane site and "to avoid any adverse or damaging publicity with regard to the state of the site" - which has an amount of asbestos that requires disposal.
We highlighted the problems of locating so many starter homes in one place, as well as in the heartland of the town's traffic problems at the time of the initial debate.
Now it looks as though the number of homes might increase almost threefold.
Let us hope that if only to highlight such a spectacular piece of hypocrisy by a so-called "charity" (whose members fought successfully to remain anonymous) that as much manure descends on this allotment scheme as is possible.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
In May last year, the Boston Standard reported that disgruntled allotment-holders attended a special meeting to hear the secretary of the charity which owns their allotments outline detailed plans to sell off a "large chunk" of the site to Longhurst Homes.
The charity hoped to make more than half-a-million pounds from the land sale, to devote to worthy causes around the Boston area.
The bidders, Longhurst, hoped to buy around a third of the site from Boston Municipal Charities to build 60 new affordable houses.
At the meeting, Councillor Ray Newell, who represents Staniland South ward where the allotments lie, warned: "The system that often operates with these 'land grabs' is that first the developer takes one third, then they come back for another third, and in the end they take the lot."
But the charity's secretary, Katherine Bunting, said they would 'never' sell the rest of the land for development, and it was suggested that all existing allotment-holders could be given plots on the remainder of the Broadfield Lane site.
Fast forward to Wednesday night's BTAC meeting.
After summarising the events leading up to the eviction notices being served on the Broadfield Lane allotment holders, a report adds: "In February 2008 Boston Municipal Charities informed us that they required possession of the whole site and that tenants would no longer be able to move to the area not designated for the proposed development. All Broadfield Lane tenants are now relocated on five different sites around the borough."
Whilst the charity has apparently indicated that land may still be available on the site to use as allotments the trustees of the charity are currently unable to make a long term commitment regarding the rest of the site until they know the outcome of Longhurst’s planning application or the extent of the proposed development.
The committee is being recommended to pay to clear the Broadfield Lane site and "to avoid any adverse or damaging publicity with regard to the state of the site" - which has an amount of asbestos that requires disposal.
We highlighted the problems of locating so many starter homes in one place, as well as in the heartland of the town's traffic problems at the time of the initial debate.
Now it looks as though the number of homes might increase almost threefold.
Let us hope that if only to highlight such a spectacular piece of hypocrisy by a so-called "charity" (whose members fought successfully to remain anonymous) that as much manure descends on this allotment scheme as is possible.
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.
Monday, December 1
Mr Bean would applaud Boston antics
By-pass campaigner Michael Borrill of the Boston Bypass & Economic Growth Pressure Group (BBEG) writes to us to say:-
"Many thanks for your continued highlighting of the facts that concern all of us Bostonians and in fact, the wider public. "Your daily 'news' articles are indeed what the local press should be dwelling on from time to time but, sadly, over recent months, there seems to be a lack of deep reporting.
"Boston is ideally situated from history to reap the tourism benefits from both UK and indeed, the USA. The moving of the tourism office from the Assembly Rooms was an act of great folly and anyone involved in that industry would have gasped in astonishment when the news was first brokered to move it to the Haven Centre when it is a known fact that hardly any visitors to the town venture that way. To now move it to the Museum when the opening hours seem to be "closed for most of the time" beggars belief.
"The antics of this town seem to present Mr Bean with a new theme for a movie!
"We all know that Boston Borough has large debts which have to be taken care of, partly a self inflicted wound, which, if treated properly, would be starting the healing process by now! There is, however, something good they could do which would give them a bit of credence once again which does now involve a cash layout at this time.
"First and foremost, put a stop to the road widening planned to take place (after the County elections in May- I wonder why!) This work which will take many months, will cripple businesses and drive more shoppers away from Boston in this troubled time.
"Secondly, press home to Lincolnshire County Council, the need to re-commence work on the route of a Boston distributor road. The smoke screen of the Local Development Framework should not be used. Lincolnshire County Council do not take account of this requirement when planning for two by-passes for Lincoln City, which incidentally, were turned down by a government inspector.
"Both these two points will not involve Boston Borough Council in placing cash but it will give them some 'brownie points' which have been missing for some time.
"There is no excuse for not doing this."
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested
"Many thanks for your continued highlighting of the facts that concern all of us Bostonians and in fact, the wider public. "Your daily 'news' articles are indeed what the local press should be dwelling on from time to time but, sadly, over recent months, there seems to be a lack of deep reporting.
"Boston is ideally situated from history to reap the tourism benefits from both UK and indeed, the USA. The moving of the tourism office from the Assembly Rooms was an act of great folly and anyone involved in that industry would have gasped in astonishment when the news was first brokered to move it to the Haven Centre when it is a known fact that hardly any visitors to the town venture that way. To now move it to the Museum when the opening hours seem to be "closed for most of the time" beggars belief.
"The antics of this town seem to present Mr Bean with a new theme for a movie!
"We all know that Boston Borough has large debts which have to be taken care of, partly a self inflicted wound, which, if treated properly, would be starting the healing process by now! There is, however, something good they could do which would give them a bit of credence once again which does now involve a cash layout at this time.
"First and foremost, put a stop to the road widening planned to take place (after the County elections in May- I wonder why!) This work which will take many months, will cripple businesses and drive more shoppers away from Boston in this troubled time.
"Secondly, press home to Lincolnshire County Council, the need to re-commence work on the route of a Boston distributor road. The smoke screen of the Local Development Framework should not be used. Lincolnshire County Council do not take account of this requirement when planning for two by-passes for Lincoln City, which incidentally, were turned down by a government inspector.
"Both these two points will not involve Boston Borough Council in placing cash but it will give them some 'brownie points' which have been missing for some time.
"There is no excuse for not doing this."
Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
