Will Into Town buses drive May Fair to its doom?

“Roll up, roll up! All the fun of the fair!” is the traditional cry .... though should it be: “Good evening all! Pay Up, Pay Up! Who's been a naughty council then? This is a HOLD UP Give us yer money”
What’s going wrong with the police?
Are they being forced to abandon “policing for all”?
Is the time coming when our ID card will show if we have paid our Council Tax? Only if it does, will they help us.I can understand their wish to charge for their services at "private events" such as at football matches.
But will clubs have to pay if the bobbies decide to protect public order and escort fans from, say, the railway station to the ground?
And from my past observations, there is rarely a huge police presence at the May Fair anyway.
Their main difficulty is lack of manpower. The good burghers of Boston would be horrified if they knew how thin the thin blue line can be, especially at weekends.
Even if the police win their case, is there any guarantee that we will see any improvement in the service? Will the payments just pay for police overtime?But back to the May Fair.
Several years ago, when the council pulled the funding and closed the increasingly successful Christmas Market, a cartoon of a council meeting appeared in the Standard.
The caption was, I think, “And next year we could cancel Christmas altogether – humbug anyone?”
All we need to do is change ‘Christmas’ to ‘the May Fair’ to make it relevant again. Have we a council of Scrooges? Is Boston council reverting to its Puritan roots?
I cannot, though, understand why the council needs to increase their charges by over 35% to break even. Previous councils always aimed to break even, so fairground rents were based on loss of car parking revenue, the cost of providing refuse collection and other services to the fair and their caravans and the officer time spent in administration.
The showmen even took on the task of collecting the rents to save council expenses.
I know that the first two services cannot have increased their charges by that amount so does this mean there was an increase in officer time to the tune of 35% - over £10,000 - in one year? Or is there a hidden agenda? Please read on.One very important matter has not even been mentioned.
How are our Into Town services going to cope with a town centre and Bargate filled with fairground stalls?
We lost our Continental Market because no one took into account the IT buses. Have they considered that the Market Place and Wide Bargate are closed to vehicular traffic for much of the time?
Even our "small" coaches, when trying to make their way through the crowds, would pose a danger.
Part of West Street, too, is closed to accommodate market stalls.
What happens to the services that use this stretch?
Will the bus service be used as an excuse to close the May Fair too?
Will Scrooge make a comeback in May? Is the bus mightier than the Fair?
What do you think?
Let’s have another public consultation – I promise no one will take any notice!

- SCANNER

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.

Wild Dorrian raps borough's ineptitude

We are grateful to the Boston Standard for this week's insight into life behind the closed doors of Boston Borough Council.
Unfortunately, the picture painted is that of Oscar Wilde's Dorian Gray, whose appearance remained unchanged over time, but whose portrait hidden in the attic became increasingly hideous.
The Standard was "mistakenly" sent copies of reports to the council's standard's committee concerning former councillor Guy Curley and Better Boston Group representative Anne Dorrian.
We recommend that your read the newspaper to get the full story.
The case of Mr Curley exposes an interesting (to say the least) attitude to members of staff and fellow councillors.
Councillor Dorrian, meanwhile, heaps opprobrium on the council staff after the Standard report and discloses some worrying information about the reliability of the borough machine.
"Our officers are paid very good salaries, comparatively speaking, and I'm not impressed by this catalogue of cock-ups. I think that the Chief Executive has some explaining to do," she complains.
" I have already been to two meetings in the last week where councillors have discovered that they have been given the wrong information by officers - and we're not talking about spelling mistakes or typing errors, we are talking about important information that councillors rely on to help them make the right decisions for the people of Boston."
Eighteen months ago, the Boston Eye was on the receiving end of Councillor Dorrian's wrath in the shape of a stern e-mail from a senior member of the borough's legal department following a lighthearted comment by one of our contributors.
We would like to be a fly on the wall when Councillor Dorrian pays the Chief Executive a call!.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.

Never mind the inconvenience ... the book must be obeyed!

It's a miserable day out there, and as it's a market day, parking spaces in the town are at a premium as usual.
So three out of ten to whoever failed to use his or her initiative when it came to declaring the Green available for parking.
Only a handful of stallholders have turned up and around 80% of the car park is empty.
But that doesn't impinge on the jobsworth mindset one iota.
A mobile skip is blocking the car park entrance and notices are in place elsewhere telling people to keep out - forcing them to park even further away for no reason other than "that's what it says in the book."

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested

Does council fear Stump will take money and run?

Tonight's cabinet meeting has to grasp the poisoned chalice of which voluntary groups to help with grants. The council already funds Boston Citizens Advice Bureau and the South Lincolnshire Community Volunteer Service and has been helping Boston Community Transport, better known as dial-a-ride ... but this latter contribution is not ongoing, and at an earlier debate it was declared poor value for money. Also on the table are bids from three other organisations - Blackfriars, Boston Stump and Centrepoint. It is being recommended to fund an appeal by Centrepoint in full because of its vital role in the current financial climate.

And the cabinet is being offered the following options:

1: Part fund more than one of the other schemes and suggest a split. 2: Cease funding Boston Community Transport and fund other bids.

3: Cease funding all other schemes making a revenue saving. The Blackfriars bid is for £50,000, but even this level of help will leave them in deficit. Centrepoint needs £6,000 to help cover rising costs.

And the Stump is appealing for £12,000 to enhance the Church’s tourism work in line with the 2009 celebration of 700th anniversary.

Recently we were told that Blackfriars would be offering townsfolk everything from "warbling to wrestling" and we question whether hurling money into this bottomless bit to provide such cultural gems is really worth it. And don't be fooled by the results of a so-called "survey" which showed a majority favouring giving cash to Blackfriars. These surveys usually total few participants, and, as we saw when a website petition was started on the theatre's behalf a year ago a small number of luvvies make a lot of noise.

Centrepoint provides a regrettably necessary lifeline in these troubled times, and doubtless eases some of the responsibilities for helping the homeless that would otherwise fall upon the borough council at a much higher cost.

Granting the appeal by St Botolph's would be a good thing to do in its significant anniversary year, and the church has also withdrawn an ongoing appeal for £11,000 towards its insurance cover for this year.

Interestingly, the council is legally obliged to give the church £30,000 per year for the chancel upkeep. - a requirement which goes back to medieval times, and which the borough is trying to wriggle out of.

The decision facing the cabinet is a classic judgement of Solomon.

For what it's worth, we think that dial-a-ride - whilst a useful service - is becoming unaffordably expensive. To part fund it would mean more reductions in the service which would make it even less cost effective.

We have no problems funding the Centrepoint appeal, and the organisation does not routinely put its hand out for cash - this is its first appeal for a couple of years.
Blackfriars is another money pit like the PRSA and should be avoided.

We feel that not to help the stump would be bad PR in this special year, and the net increase being sought is only £1,000. Not only that, but we suspect that the council will seize the opportunity to withdraw funding towards insurance costs in future years as it has not been sought this year.

But could the council fear that the church plans to do a runner with the money?

If not, why else does it refer to St Boltophs in every one of the seven references in the report?This is clearly lack of knowledge rather than a one off typo - and reminds us of the recent website naming of Sir Thomas Meddlecott rather than Middlecott.

More seriously it makes us wonder what hope is there for a council whose staff cannot even spell the name of its most famous landmark correctly.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Your chance to say "Into Town bus service is great"

What is probably the penultimate step in the move to turn Strait Bargate from a pedestrianised area into a bus route has just been announced by Lincolnshire County Council
A so-called review of the service, by "independent" consultants, has already begun, to look at all aspects of the service, including operational efficiency, route suitability, passenger feedback and the views of the public, businesses and other groups. They have also carried out "mystery shopper-style" exercises.
The public consultation runs from 9th February, to 8th March. Surveys will be handed out in Boston and can also be picked up at the borough council offices and the town's library. It will also be available on the Boston Transport Strategy website at www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/bts
The county council press release quotes the ever-growing passenger figures as a clear spin to show the benefit of the service to people, but even without that, we doubt that the "consultations" will be declared anything other than resoundingly in favour of the Into Town bus service.
It has to in order to save political faces in Boston and Lincoln.
We have said before, and we will say again, we are not opposed to the Into Town bus service.
What are are wholeheartedly against is the way that buses run through Strait Bargate six times an hour, herding humans aside as if they were sheep or cattle, and polluting what should be a pleasant shopping ambiance with noise and fumes.
Surely there must be a way to run the service and leave Strait Bargate alone.

There was, of course, a protest by a handful of councillors last June (see photo above.) But after achieving their fifteen minutes of fame via local TV footage, a sound bite or two and a piece in the local papers, they lost interest, fell silent, and have never been heard from again.

It's very sad.
So far the news has not broken on the borough council website, which was unavailable for most of Sunday due to maintenance, but we hope that it appears there as soon as possible to give people their chance of a say in what is laughingly claimed to be local democracy.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Why independent-run councils will not work

On Friday we commented on the ethos of the (relatively) newly formed political group Lincolnshire Independents.
As expressed on its website, the new group claims: "Independents are interested in what their electorate is seeking and that forms their manifesto. Their first loyalty is to the people they represent, regardless of party politics.
"We believe that all local councillors should be independent with local voters our only masters and local improvements our aim. Independents cooperate (sic) with good decision-making but have no time for the party whip and block voting, which is effective in "gagging" your local representatives who have party allegiances and resulted in some very well known very poor decisions in this county.
"Independents tend to bring a cleaner ethos, concentrating on issues and voting for what they believe is right for our communities."
Elsewhere on the website, Marianne Overton, "chairman" of the new movement, says the group intends to re-write the political landscape in Lincolnshire.
Have you spotted an early flaw in this cunning plan?
Even at this stage, the group already has a "chairman."
In the event that Lincolnshire Independents fielded a candidate for every one of the 77 county council seats and won a majority, it would replicate the Boston microcosm.
As chairman of the group - which currently appears to number around five - we assume that Councillor Overton would become the leader of the County Council, and there would have to be a deputy, a cabinet, portfolio holders, chairman et al.
Immediately, this would create a "them and us" structure, which would be unequal by definition in that most of its members would be subordinate to a select few.
We've seen the selfsame thing happen in Boston.
A few "independents" were appointed to positions of power, and started throwing their weight around if the lesser mortals on the council dared to disagree with them.
As a result we witnessed a number of defections and the formation of yet another group which, sadly, has been noteworthy only for its silence and inactivity.
The only true independents on Boston Borough Council are those that think independently and vote accordingly - and there are only three of them out of 32.
The BBI is not an independent council, however much it may protest to the contrary ... and nor will Lincolnshire County Council become one if the new party were to sweep the board as happened in Boston. Just imagine 77 individuals all fighting to get the best for their particular patch in a county as vast as ours. It would make our local fallings-out seem amicable by comparison.
We have seen the chaos that has ensued here in Boston during the past twenty months.
We just hope that the county as a whole avoids the same mistake on June 4th.
As George Orwell so accurately noted in Animal Farm - "all animals are equal - but some animals are more equal than others."

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

If a party of Independents is the answer ... what is the question?

Remember our rabies alert after a letter in a local paper from the acting chairman of the Boston and Skegness Conservative Association, Colin Davie? ("Telling it how it isn't!" - Monday 19th January)
After a rant which blamed the government and the Bypass Independents for every disaster since the Great Flood, he offered us salvation in just ten words - "only Conservatives offer a vision for Boston in the future."
Now Mr Davie is taken to task by fellow Lincolnshire County Councillor Chris Brewis, who slags off the Tories mightily and lauds the "real change" that Boston was "fortunate" enough to enjoy when it elected the BBI.
Mr Brewis is the deputy leader of something called Lincolnshire Independents - a new party created on 18th July last year.
In a mission statement Lincolnshire Independents (let's call them LI for short) say:
"Independents are interested in what their electorate is seeking and that forms their manifesto. Their first loyalty is to the people they represent, regardless of party politics."We believe that all local councillors should be independent with local voters our only masters and local improvements our aim.Independents cooperate* (sic) with good decision-making but have no time for the party whip and block voting, which is effective in "gagging" your local representatives who have party allegiances and resulted in some very well known very poor decisions in this county.
"Independents tend to bring a cleaner ethos, concentrating on issues and voting for what they believe is right for our communities."
For those not in the know, the treasurer of LI is none other than our own council leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin, who - apparently not content with founding one party - is now involved with yet another.
Does this mean that the BBI will (or will not) be fielding candidates for the Boston seats on the county council that come up for grabs on Thursday 4 June? We seem to recall there was some suggestion that it might not bother if the County Council promised a by-pass. Or will a separate tranche of independents present themselves to the electorate for consideration?
Councillor Austin is a man of few words at the best of times, and to date, his contribution to his space in the LI website comprises two test messages posted in the wee small hours of the morning quite some time ago... in one case apparently almost two and a half years ago! You can view it by clicking here .
Having read the LI manifesto, we find its claims have already been contradicted by a number of actions already taken by the BBI - which include "gagging" some local representatives and also ignoring the wishes of the people they claim to represent.
Party allegiances may have their faults, but at least politics provides a common bond which helps members sing from the same hymnbook - unlike the BBI, most of whose members are not politicians (whatever they may think) and who have probably spent more time bickering than decision-making.
Once again, the forthcoming local elections look as though they might become interesting.

*cooperate - in our book, this is the charge made by a craftsman to manufacture a barrel!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Remote control means recipe for disaster

Headline poses
same question
we ask about
the Standard

A few days ago we regretted the decline in the quality and coverage of the Boston Standard - a piece which prompted one reader to comment: "I don't know why you're having a pop at the Standard now, for the last ten years it's been an embarrassment of a publication, shoddily put together in some print shop miles away from the town.
"Sadly though, it is the best of a very poor bunch of local papers."
Damning with faint praise indeed, but given the latest news, we wonder how much longer even that dubious laurel is likely to survive.
The Standard's parent company Johnston Press - deep in debt and with a market value of a fraction of what it once was - plans to cut almost 50 editorial jobs at its Midlands operation by creating three regional sub editing hubs to produce papers for its six existing Midlands publishing operations.
One report claims that a number of weekly newspaper editor and deputy editor posts could also be at risk, and the company also recently imposed a pay freeze on staff.However, Johnston Press said all local centres would retain local reporting staff and local heads of content.
How generous!

Nick Mills, the Johnston Press Midlands division managing director, said the proposed changes were "to ensure continued delivery of high quality, local content across the group's various titles."

He's obviously not read our local recently.

"In the event that the proposals go ahead, we anticipate there will be up to 49 potential redundancies."
Under the proposal, sub editing for titles in the company's Lincolnshire Newspapers would be reorganised into a new hub in Peterborough, from where the publisher runs its East Midlands Newspapers division.

We feel very sorry for the staff who might be affected.
But, having said that, the Standard has become the victim of a vicious downward spiral of its own making.
Less news has meant fewer readers - in August, the Standard's circulation was 11,305 ... a year-on-year fall of 6.9% which continues a long decline.

Meanwhile the company continues to insult our intelligence by stuffing the totally useless Lincolnshire Citizen through our letterboxes every week.
The Citizen is the ultimate example of business indifference towards the customers it claims to serve. A couple of stories (if you're lucky - although seldom local to us) then advertising from Grimsby to Stamford - it doesn't matter what - so long as it fills the space and turns in a few quid.
We all know the geography of Lincolnshire, but it seems that advertisers simply don't realise the futility of trying to sell their wares to a customer who lives fifty miles away or more.
The Standard originally thrived on the tenet that local was best, and advertisers and readers responded accordingly.
Becoming even more remote is a solution of sorts - a recipe for disaster!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com. Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Funfair? No - Unfair!

It looks like Boston's oldest attraction is under threat.
The town's May Fair has been on the go since 1135 ad - 106 years before the inception of Boston Market.

But a report before tonight's meeting of the council's Policy Development Committee is being asked to consider the following recommendations:

1. That members put forward their favoured option for this year's fair of either an eight day fair with a rent increase of 5% or a six day fair with a 35% rent increase.

2. To recommend the cabinet to tell officers to invite bids from showmen for “floating plots” in Central Park as an extension of the Mayfair* (sic) on an annual basis.

3. That the cabinet confirms that if the police charge for their services during the Mayfair* (sic), these costs will be passed on to the tenants of the fair so there will be no cost to the council . Money, money, money!

This council, which can hurl millions at a sports facility that no-one wants or uses, is balking at paying less than £10,000 towards an event that for many years has turned it a profit.

In so doing it risks losing one of the few remaining street fairs in the country.

The Showmen's Guild of Great Britain has said it is willing to pay a 5% increase, and adds "it was forcibly felt that the May Fair tenants are being asked to subsidise other council activities."

Only recently, the town's Continental Market fell by the wayside - principally because the powers that be felt that its proposed location might interfere with the smooth running of the Into Town bus service.

Perhaps this is at the back of their minds with the May Fair, and the idea of pricing the showmen into packing it all in would make it look like their decision.

Ominously, the Policy Development Committee is being asked for their views on cancellation of the event if full cost recovery is not achievable, so we feel that the writing is already on the wall.
Bit by bit the things that make Boston a different and distinctive place are being destroyed.
What's next, we wonder?
*Footnote: May Fair is written this way because it is a fair that is held in May, and not Mayfair, which is how it is wrongly spelt in council documents

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Once again, PRSA is being fast and loose with OUR money!

Once again that famous local money pit - aka the Princess Royal Sports Arena - is advertising discount rates for its health and fitness club.
"Beat the credit crunch," says the flyer, "and save up to £300."
It goes on to offer the mouthwatering bonus of no joining fee (for the first 100 new members only) up to four months free (depending on the type of membership) and no long term contract.
You'll need to act quickly, because the offer is only open until the end of the month.
And despite the obvious caveats mentioned in the offer, there is also that deadly subtext "terms and conditions apply."
We've said it before, and we'll say it again.
Any fitness club that can afford to knock as much as £300 off its prices is charging too much! We also note that the full cost is never disclosed in promotions like these, which also makes us wonder just how high the charges are.
And why on earth are we, the council taxpayers, subsidising such a luxury?
The reason that the PRSA can afford such a generous offer is that it is effectively underpinning it with other people's money - and we saw where that can lead during the recent banking crisis.
The PRSA started life as a business and has spectacularly failed.
In the real world (the one inhabited by the ordinary townsfolk of Boston) if a business isn't viable then drastic action is taken. Talk to the staff who until recently had what they thought was a secure job at the Boston branch of Woolworth's.
The PRSA has not only failed financially.
It has failed in its basic statement of purpose - to provide a facility for use by both disabled and able bodied athletes.
It has evicted the only organisation that gave it some sort of credibility - the Boston and District Athletic Club, and it would now appear that its income depends mainly on bussing in six hundred schoolchildren a week - a figure which is set to double. What great news for adults who fancy a quiet swim!
In contrast to the outrageous fees sought by the PRSA, membership of BADAC is £15 a year for adults, £8 for children and pensioners and a mere £35 for families.
Those are the sort of prices that are tailor made to attract people to pursue a healthy lifestyle.
BADAC also has a simple philosophy - "Access for all - no barriers."
There's a lesson to be learned by the PRSA there, surely.
It's high time we declared the PRSA UNfit, and looked at ways to make it affordable and accessible to all.
To add insult to injury the shadowy Boston Sports "Initiative" has a letter in the local press this week patronisingly saying that it is "willing to accept" BADAC members (to whom they offer "sympathy" as paying visitors.)
The word snide springs to mind.
In the letter, the BSI complains of "numerous inaccuracies in the public domain" regarding BADAC and the use of facilities at the PRSA.
However, given their secretiveness, and use of taxpayers' money as a hammer to crack a nut, we have little sympathy with this complaint, and feel that the BSI pledge that it is "committed to ensuring that the athletics facilities at the PRSA are used and available for all" has a hollow and meaningless ring about it.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Telling it how it isn't!

Do you ever encounter someone or something that makes you feel as though you need a rabies shot just to be on the safe side?
That's how we felt after reading a letter in last week's Standard from Councillor Colin Davie, the acting chairman of the Boston and Skegness Conservative Association.
There's nothing ambiguous about this fella.
"The recession will clearly deepen and it will cause pain, hardship and fear for families and business alike.
He then says the recession will be worse in the UK because of government actions, which he claims will drive our "youngest and most talented" to emigrate.
Needless to say, the Tories have the medicine to recover from the "sickness" of Gordon Brown with which we are all "afflicted."
Mr Davie then aims his photon torpedoes at Boston Borough Council.
It has a worsening financial position, has no sense of purpose or direction, and will "undoubtedly" make many serious mistakes in its budget for the coming year.
As if that's not enough, the council "has no vision for the future other than power for its own sake."
And guess what?
"Only Conservatives offer a vision for Boston in the future."
We don't know appreciate the minutiae of the economic crisis. But we do know that it is global, and if asked would say that the effects of the recession were probably worst overall in the United States - although we would agree that the UK comes a close second.
And whilst we are among the fiercer critics of the Bypass Independent ruling group, we feel that at heart they are well intentioned and (perhaps with one or two exceptions) not the megalomaniacs that they are painted in this letter.
How strange that when Mr Davie penned this obvious manifesto he neglected to remind us that Thursday 4 June this year sees elections for seats on Lincolnshire County Council.
Not for the first time, the Boston Standard shows a sense of bias by publishing such blatant, ill informed rubbish ... and we are sure that there will be much more in the future.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Prompt communication!

Dear Boston Eye,
In response to the comment - the communications team at Boston Borough Council deals with media enquiries which can include enquiries from local, regional and national media; writing press releases; carrying out consultations; marketing and promotion; complaints, Freedom of Information enquiries; internal communications, producing Boston Matters and the Council's web site and intranet site.
There are three people in the team, that's two full time posts and one part time.
Yours,
Sue Lawson
Communications Manager

Caution urged over West Street crossing plan

An e-mail from roads campaigner Mike Borrill reminds us that the recent tragedy on a railway level crossing near Spalding shows how dangerous these types of crossings can be.
"There is very little time between when the train activates the barriers and when it reaches the crossing," he writes.
"The train driver has only seconds to apply the brakes if the unforeseen happens - and even then a collision would be inevitable.
"Planning does not allow new crossings to be constructed when designing new roads and in these cases a bridge must be constructed.
"Over recent years many road/rail crossings which had been controlled by a crossing keeper have been replaced by automatic operations and only recently, the major crossing at High Street in Lincoln has been automated and is now controlled from the Lincoln Signalling Centre near to the university.
"In Boston we have the dreaded West Street crossing, which is signalman controlled ... but for how long?
"Possibly from Lincoln? The new Lincoln Centre has a capacity to take most of Lincolnshire.
"So now we have the possibility of an extra lane of traffic being routed over this crossing if Lincolnshire County Council - backed, of course by Boston Borough Council, who seem to "rubber stamp" everything that comes out of County Hall - approve.
"I know the response will be that trains using West Street go very slowly and the possibility of an accident are slim. But we should not even be considering this ... especially when it has been stated that the extra lane will not have any beneficial effect on the congestion in Boston.
"First we had the the case of buses being run through a pedestrian precinct (which, incidentally on a public consultation had over 90% against) but backed by Boston Borough Council even though a costly report on behalf of the council had emphasised that less pedestrian/vehicular conflict was required.
"Now this road scheme which will cause chaos appears to be gaining momentum, even though Boston Borough Council appears not to have sufficient funds to inject their part of the funding."

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested

Ranger plan is a bit of a Boo Boo!

The newly formed Boston BID has unveiled its big plan to give the town a vibrant future.
Writing in the Target, manager Niall Armstrong says the appointment of three "rangers" is a "key part" of the million pound scheme.
We worried about the word ranger, as it conjured up images of the broad-brimmed buffoon from the Yogi Bear cartoon strip (crikey, Hanna Barbera imagery twice in as many days.)
But relax.
The rangers will be "decked out" in a blue uniform emblazoned with the BID logo.
Their job, according to Mr Armstrong, will include deterring crime, keeping a look out for graffiti, anti social behaviour and fly-tipping.
Mr Armstrong also laments the possibility of a change in the funding of the town's CCTV camera system - which is not, as the Target story incorrectly claims, being switched off.
Boston Borough Council is for once showing singular commonsense by saying that it is not its job to fund the system. The police get the major "benefit" from CCTV and should therefore stump up the lion's share.
Mr Armstrong's suggestion that the rangers will help deter crime is once again letting the police off the hook.
His rangers will not be policemen, and we shudder to think what could happen if they encounter a group of yobs behaving badly.
The fact that they wear a uniform will create expectation in the minds of the public, so if they stand by and do nothing they will be condemned, and if they intervene, they will most likely end up in hospital.
The sorry fact is that the police are seldom if ever seen in the town's main shopping areas, even though they are housed within a stone's throw of the police station.
Crime, graffiti and anti-social behaviour could be considerably reduced if more cops got off their often over-ample backsides and braved the thrill of what is laughingly referred to as the beat.
Every time someone else takes on the work that the police are paid for it gives them an excuse to entrench still further into the form-filling comfort of their centrally heated offices.
The BID ranger concept is a feeble start to what we hope will eventually become a promising project to improve the town.
Niall Armstrong is a sound-alike for the first man to set foot on the moon.
We think he needs to come back down to earth - and as soon as possible.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.

So what do communicators do?

After our latest piece on the Boston Borough Council website, MG e-mails to say:
"I can't believe how daft that site is. Even though you've made me laugh, I hope they soon make a better job of it.
"On a serious note though, I didn't realise the council had a communications section.
"How many people work there and what does it do?
"I've never seen anything the the papers that looks like if comes from somewhere like that - in fact there's not much news about the council in the papers at all these days.
"Can anyone tell me?"
You've asked the question MG, and we've posted it on the blog.
Now let's see if anyone can answer it for you.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.

At last! An overhaul for borough website

When you're driving down the information superhighway it's best not do do it in a model T Ford manned by members of the cast of Wacky Races.
Which is why we're so pleased that at long last there has been a reaction to our ongoing campaign about Boston Borough Council's inept website.
Sue Lawson, the borough's Communication Officer, e-mails us to say:

"Dear Boston Eye,

"Thank you for your comments.
"The content of the web site is currently being reviewed and I am updating web pages where necessary. This will take at least four weeks, but I hope that as the weeks go by you will notice improvements.

"If readers notice any information that is either out of date or not available please email the web address to communications@boston.gov.uk and I will follow up any emails received and update the site."

Thanks for that Ms Lawson, we think that your four-week estimate may turn out to be optimistic, but look forward to a website for the 21st century rather than the present steam-powered effort.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence if requested.

We'll have a hot time at the old Crem tonight!

A few days ago we highlighted an error of local knowledge in Boston Borough Council's website - not for the first time.
It was corrected, but then we had to point our that the same error was repeated on two other pages, after which they were corrected as well. We've criticised the borough website on numerous previous occasions.
And whilst we accept that the management and maintenance of a site as large as this is no small task, we do think that the borough site seems more prone to errors than many.
For instance, one page (to which we've drawn attention before) tells us "The most recent elections for the Boston Borough and Parish Councils were held on 1 May 2003," whilst another reminds us "The next Borough Council election will take place in 2007" ... ah yes, we remember it well.
On other occasions, we have clicked a link to a page only to be told that we are not authorised. It's like receiving an invitation to a party from someone who then refuses to open the door.
And although it is difficult to make local authority websites "sexy" the managers think that they're doing their best by copying other sites, which flag certain items as "hot!" to tell users that they are worth a special visit.
We think that only in Boston could such nomenclature be applied to subjects such as the "Witham Ward baseline indicator study," the "report-sector position statements," and the "town centre map!"
But the medal for daftest such link must go to whoever labelelled the "Guide to Independent Cremation" as "hot."
We also doubt that "Advice and information for grave owners," "Granite Wall Tablets" or "Information on Embalming" truly deserve a place in this category, BUT, the "Health & Safety Law Enforcement Service Plan," "Refuse calendar," and "Bus pass application form," clearly have the merits to qualify.
The site has undergone a revamp, but apparently without taking advantage of the chance to review the content, update it where necessary, and remove some of the chaff.
Come on Borough webmaster, let's have a little spring cleaning.
Let us know if you'd like us to post the links to the pages we've mentioned.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Maud would be turning in her grave!

We see that the appalling state of an area next to the Maud Foster waterway is again being criticised.
A local resident has appealed to "the authorities" after her family pet was seriously injured on broken glass near the Windsor Crescent play area.
She says she has been asking Boston Borough Council and the Environment Agency to clean-up the play area and the land around it for months after seeing it become a dumping ground for bottles, cans and even shopping trolleys.
Now her pet dog has gashed his leg on a broken bottle, and she fears that next time the victim could be a child.
She says "I have contacted the council and Environment Agency on many occasions about the state of this area but it is just getting worse.
"The authorities need to get their act together and sort this problem out."
If these words sound familiar, it is perhaps because they are.
Not long ago, a complaint about a dustbin which lay dumped in Old Maudie at the other side of Boston for several weeks led to a flood of letters complaining about rubbish dumping both in the water and on the banks.
In this latest case, an Environment Agency spokesman said it only had responsibility for clearing obstructions or pollutants from the waterways and said fly-tipping and litter were the responsibility of the borough council.
This convenient excuse is often used by official organisations which should know better. It allows them to pass the buck of blame whilst doing nothing to improve matters.
The Maud Foster is an incredible local asset.
Any other town which had a stretch of water running through it would treat it accordingly and make the most of its attractiveness. It should possible to enjoy a long peaceful walk beside a well-groomed, neat and tidy Maud Foster, and without too much effort a circular stroll could be created that would take in a number of interesting sights.
But this is Boston, and so instead, anyone attempting such a thing is greeted by overgrown riverbanks, litter everywhere, rampant dog fouling and a threat to life and limb from cyclists hurtling along footpaths which clearly display prohibition signs. Anf of course there is never a PCSO in sight to deal with miscreants.
Instead of blaming each other for the mess, the Environment Agency and Boston Borough Council should hang their heads in shame at their joint neglect of one of the town's potentially great attractions.
To the west, the wards bordering the Maud Foster are Witham (represented by Councillors Graham Dovey and Jim Blaylock) and Pilgrim (Councillor John Ruskin)
To the east, the wards are North (Councillor Gerry Clare and deputy leader Peter Jordan) and Skirbeck (Councillors Anne Dorrian, Paddy Rush and Dave Hobson.)
We hope that at some point they might take on board the need for action to improved this potential jewel in the crown of their ward, but we won't be holding our breath.
Jim Blaylock is co-incidentally cabinet member for play areas, and he told the paper which reported the latest story: "Every week we check each play area to make sure it is safe for children and families.
"If we receive a complaint we do follow it up and check the area. But, it is just not possible to do this every day.
"I would appeal to people not to drop bottles and litter in the play areas as this incident shows it can cause injury."
Thanks, Jim, that'll do it!
To add insult to the irony, another two of the councillors listed are members of the enthusiastically lethargic Better Boston Group - but if they can't spot something on their doorstep that so obviously needs bettering we feel they should consider re-naming the group!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Tomb it may concern - crime is grave problem in cemetery!

So, have you spent the weekend guessing where the hotbeds of crime are that we asked you to identify on Friday?
The first location, PE21 9HE, which saw burglary increase by 20.3%, and robbery by 73% may turn out to be something of a dead end for any police officer trying to investigate ... it's none other than the postcode for Boston Cemetery.
How about our second location - PE21 8QS ? A bad place this ... robbery has increased by 200%, burglary by 125% and violence by 41.4%. Not a safe place to visit at all ... the statistics prove it. But hang on. Surely that's the postcode for the town's police station!
And finally, how about PE21 8QR. A rough place, this, with violence increasing by 39.5% and anti-social behaviour by 28.6%. Where is it? None other than our very own council offices in West Street. At least the level of robbery has remained unchanged, which must be good news for council tax payers!
Before someone tells us that postcodes are not individual to buildings or places, we would say that we agree - which underlines our point that these statistics are completely useless.
All they do is cost money and take more police staff off the streets - or worse still generate more pen-pushing and computer keyboard clacking clones that we could well do without.
Meanwhile, police forces in the East Midlands, which of course includes Lincolnshire, say they are the first to sign up to the government's national "policing pledge" which outlines standards in England and Wales, and which will improve services and make communities safer.
They will have to meet minimum targets such as answering all 999 calls within 10 seconds, and dealing with victims, and will be expected to meet national standards to ensure they answer phone calls promptly, give people up-to-date details about local crimes, and improve their treatment of witnesses and victims.
The public will also be made aware of the standard of service they should expect, and communities will be given a stronger voice in setting local police priorities.
They have also promised to improve incident response times.
Police minister Vernon Coaker calls the promises "clear concrete practical things that people will be able to expect from their local police force. "It's actually going to give people something concrete to which they can hold their own police forces to account."
Boston Eye will believe it when we see it.
All of this is a statement of the bleedin' obvious.
Shouldn't the police have been meeting most if not all of these "pledges" already.
And if not, why not?
Meanwhile police on our streets are conspicuous by their absence, but when they are there are often conspicuous by their size and obvious unfitness (they camouflage well in Boston, then.)

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested

These statistics are daft - crime and crime again!

We've often quoted that famous maxim that there are lies, damn lies and statistics, and the point is underlined by the latest offering from the world of information overload.
It's a crime mapping service from Lincolnshire Police.
The idea is that you enter your postcode, and statistics appear telling you about the level of crime for that area.
We can imagine that something like this is particularly useful for people wanting to move house, so we put it to the test with three Boston postcodes, so see how the reality of the stats compared with the image of the postcode concerned.
See if you can recognise the following areas. We'll tell you where they are on Monday.

Location 1: PE21 9HE
Compared to this time last year, burglary in this area has increased by 20.3%, and robbery by 73%.
Vehicle crime has decreased by 7%, violence by 1.6% , and anti-social behaviour by 9.2%.

Location 2: PE21 8QS
Compared to this time last year, robbery in this area has increased by 200%, burglary by 125% and violence by 41.4%. Vehicle crime has decreased by 40%, and anti-social behaviour by 15.3%
Location 3: PE21 8QR
Compared to this time last year violence in this area has increased by 39.5% and anti-social behaviour by 28.6%. Burglary has decreased by 37.5%, vehicle crime by 30%, and the level of robbery has remained unchanged.

No cheating and looking up the postcodes before Monday's answers are published, now!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested

More meddling needed to get website right!

Three out of ten for whoever organised the correction of the spelling of "Meddlecott" to "Middlecott" which we pointed out on our Wednesday blog ("Time for talk - not war of written words.)
Why only three?
Because whoever it was failed to consider the possibility that other councillors represent the borough on the Middlecott Charity apart from Councillor Richard Lenton.
Find the other two, correct this sorry borough website, and you'll get full marks.

Write to us at bostoneye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Now you CCTV 'em ... now you don't

The latest topic for debate seems to be the issue of funding CCTV cameras in the town.
One local shopkeeper has gone on record to say that if the cameras go, he will have to shut up shop.
We can't quite follow the logic of this, as the police will be as available as ever they were - albeit on the end of a phone rather than a hand held radio.
A letter writer to one of the local papers argues the need to keep CCTV because of the ever-dwindling number of policemen on the streets.
This is a silly argument.
The police service is larger than it was a few years ago, and has been heavily augmented by the addition of the chocolate teapot squad - better known as the PCSOs.
And if that were not enough, Lincolnshire Police are now trying to recruit more Special Constables.
No, a shortage of officers is not the problem.
The problem is that they are not where they need to be - out on the streets, doing the job they were recruited for, and not organising football matches, litter picking sessions, manning crime prevention exhibitions and filling in endless forms.
Another problem about CCTV is that it is wise after the event.
CCTV of itself does not solve crime, and we rather doubt that it acts as much of a deterrent.
What it does is occasionally to gather evidence after a crime is committed that helps identify the offender.
This is of little use to the victim - in fact it adds insult to injury .... quite literally.
If the police had been out and about a crime might have been prevented, and a victim spared loss or harm.
The same applies to roadside traffic cameras.
All they do is provide evidence to fine a motorist.
If a speeding driver flashes past a camera at 80mph in a 40mph area, there is nothing wrong with sending a bill for the transgression through the post.
But if, half a minute later, that driver loses control and ploughs into a pedestrian walking along the pavement, nothing has been achieved or prevented except an avoidable casualty.
In fact in the last day or two there have been stories in the national newspapers claiming that the use of cameras on a stretch of motorway have led to an increase in accidents rather than the reverse.
For once, we think that Boston Borough Council is bang on the money when it suggests that vast sums can be saved by withdrawing the CCTV funding.
If maintenance of law and order is so important to the police, then let them fund it.

Tomorrow, look out for our postcode crime quiz for another example of how the gathering of statistics for the sake of it can turn out to be completely useless (although it does keep the police out of mischief and off the streets.)

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Time for talk - not war of written words

Once again, Councillor Richard Lenton of the Bypass Independents raises the issue of immigration in a letter to the Boston Target - and once again takes recently-elected BNP Fenside Councillor David Owens to task.
For those of you who missed it, he said a point in a previous letter was to demonstrate an important positive side to immigration – rather than the one-sided argument he claims Councillor Owens might imply.
He said that over the next 10 to 15 years over 65s will represent a quarter of the population, and without immigrants settling in the UK, future basic state pension could be endangered or at least force would-be pensioners to continue working until 68 and beyond.
He writes of the decline in migrant numbers which some economists don't think helps the UK recovery, and concludes: "However, as Councillor David Owens will discover, the council does have an excellent leaflet on this subject entitled 'Migrant Workers: Myth Busting,' which should be read before jumping to conclusions."
In a reply sent to Boston Eye, Councillor Owens says: "As much as the good councillor may wish to continue saying that immigration has a positive side to it, unfortunately the reality is somewhat different. A House of Lords select committee examined this claim and “busted that myth” last year! When will the old gang politicians understand that repeating the same story over and over, will not make it true! The British electorate are a lot wiser than Councillor Lenton gives them credit for, and the use of smoke and mirrors just will not wash any more.
"However, thanks for the advice regarding the migrant worker leaflet. It happened to be a most interesting read when it was published, sadly it did not reference its claims and would appear to be another waste of taxpayers money as those concerns are still in the forefront of many people’s minds. I am presently enquiring as to the cost of its production."
We wonder why it is that Councillor Lenton talks to Councillor Owens through the pages of the local press, although we are fairly sure he doesn't pass the time of day with him in the council chamber.
We are starting to get puzzled by all of this.
We don't know much about the policies of the BNP - and we're pretty sure that many of its critics on the council don't either.
At the time Councillor Owens was elected, the council leader Richard Austin refrained to comment so as to be able to "reflect" on what he called the "serious implications" of the result.
As far as we know he is still reflecting.
In an exchange of e-mails, local MP Mark Simmonds told Councillor Owens "I do not approve of, nor do I intend to debate with, a political party whose fundamental policy tenant (sic) is racism."
We said of the Fenside result that it most probably came about because people were clearly unhappy with the status quo - the traditional political hierarchies, with all their incompetencies and broken promises.
So they voted en masse for a party that they believed would actually do something for them.
Eighteen months on, the voters decided that they were clearly unhappy with the Boston Bypass Independents, with all their incompetencies and broken promises, and their view of the old guard parties clearly remains unchanged.
In fact we think that when the political history of the borough comes to be written, it will show that the Boston Bypass Independents will have done more harm to the town than an entire posse from the BNP.
Why isn't Councillor Lenton courteous enough to talk man-to-man with Councillor Owens?
We have to say we think it somewhat cavalier to use a third party to lecture people.
Having said that, we see (according to the Borough Council's irrepressibly unreliable website) that Councillor Lenton is their representative on the Sir Thomas Meddlecott Charity Trust.
We always thought the name was Middlecott, but perhaps the council is trying to make a point!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Hiedi aye!

Despite our criticism of the borough council's budget plan questionnaire, we have received the following, and are happy to comply with the request.

Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to ask if you could place a link to Boston Borough Council's 2009/10 Budget Proposals online questionnaire on your website.This will signpost your readers to the questionnaire, and give them the opportunity to express their views on the proposals.
The consultation document and online survey can be found at www.boston.gov.uk.
Many thanks
Hiedi Wilkinson
Consultation Officer
Boston Borough Council

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Standard "shoddy best of bad lot"

After our recent economy tip, we have received the following from reader Andy:-
"I don't know why you're having a pop at the Standard now, for the last ten years it's been an embarrassment of a publication, shoddily put together in some print shop miles away from the town.
"Sadly though, it is the best of a very poor bunch of local papers, with the Target having become nothing more than a rehash of the Lincolnshire Echo's local articles since almost all the decent journos were finished a few years ago.
"Its not so long ago that the Target was a very respectable paper with at least 12 pages of local sport and pages and pages of local news, not ghost written articles about walking around Horncastle or Alford or horoscopes.
"I say bring back George Wheatman, Graham Brown, Ian Mitchell and Rob Singleton - local journos who wrote on local matters and who cared about the town they lived in - not wet behind the ears junior hacks from the West Midlands or Manchester who are looking for a stepping stone in their careers.....
"Keep up the good work, you don't know how many keep tabs on this site!"
Thanks for that, Andy.
We share your sentiments, but with a slight question mark over at least one of the names.
George W's column has failed to live up to its promise, and is now mostly a maundering stroll down memory lane at a time when we need incisive, forward looking comment - not a lament for the lost days when coppers wore high hats.
The same problem occurred when the late Alan Eves switched to writing the "Spectator" column after his retirement from the Standard.
We really need some independent, incisive writers who are willing to ask questions and not be afraid to speak their minds, and modern local journalism simply does not produce them these days.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested

Ice suppose it seemed a good idea at the time!

1100 hours

The ice rink is slowly being dismantled just as some of the first real snow of the season looks like arriving.
Doubtless it will be acclaimed as a great success, but we feel that it falls into the "tries hard, could do better" category.
We saw little evidence that it was especially popular.
We're sure that it wasn't as big as was claimed - and it certainly wasn't fifty feet by fifty feet ... being a rather strange shape that must have proved inhibiting for anyone trying to use it as a skating rink is intended.
It was definitely in the wrong place, a decision that we're told cost us a continental Christmas Market, which is something we feel that far more townsfolk would have welcomed.
The only thing that gave it an air of arctic realism was the adjacent tatty cluster of huts and sheds resembling Captain's Scott's final polar encampment.
If it returns next year, it must be after a lot more thought.
But hang on .... why not just leave it be, fill it with water in the summer and call it a town centre swimming pool.
After all it did resemble a bath rather more than an ice rink!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Thought for food ... not food for thought

Council leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin assures us in his new year message that ... "because our local economy is based on the food industry I am confident that Boston is better placed than most to weather the global storm."
Within days, we heard that up to 400 jobs could be lost after Bakkavor, which includes Exotic Farm Produce in Kirton, announced it needed to restructure its business in "challenging times."
The Icelandic company has not confirmed how many jobs would be lost, but it is understood it could be up to 400.
Bakkavor employs about 2,000 people across three sites - the other two being at Holbeach and Spalding, which could well involve people living in the borough.A company spokesman said: "These are challenging times for the food industry and the group remains cautious about the worsening economic conditions on consumer expenditure on top of ongoing pressures from inflationary costs."
So jobs in food firms are not perhaps as safe as we may think - and let's not forget the headlines surrounding Geo Adams in Boston in April last year.
At the weekend one national newspaper was advising readers wishing to save money to make their own sandwiches rather than buying ready-made, and to cut back on pricey items such as prepacked salad mixes.
It doesn't take too many people to take up this advice before the impact was felt at many of our local firms.
Being over optimistic is bad enough, but combining it with complacency is a potentially lethal cocktail.
Time for a still tongue in a wise head, wethinks!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Jordan river of hyperbole flows on and on....

Once again that master of the spoken word has come up with the mot juste to describe the plight facing the borough.
Deputy council leader Peter Jordan, you may recall, is the man who told us that the by-pass independents "walk on water."
Now he gives us his take on the draft budget problems facing Boston.
According to the Boston Standard he told councillors "It really is Armageddon."
Really?
According the the dictionary, the principal definition of the word is "the place where the final battle will be fought between the forces of good and evil."
We appreciate that the political cauldron of the council chamber often witnesses some frayed tempers .... but Armageddon would appear to be taking things a little too far.
At the same time, Councillor Jordan says of a report on the council's finance: "I have never heard a statement so dire from a S151 officer."
For those not in the know, an S151 officer is a council's finance expert, and given Councillor Jordan's relatively short time in local government, it is quite possible that had he served longer he might have heard as bad or worse.
Ironically, his words of doom and disaster are reported in the same issue of the Standard that records Leader Richard Austin's reassurances that Boston is better placed than most to weather the global economic storm.
Admittedly he appears to be referring to the fact that the local economy is relatively well insulated because of its reliance on the food industry, but that comes as little reassurance in the wake of Councillor Jordan's warning that "if we have to remove services, then that is what we will have to do."
At this time of year it would be nice if both men could rehearse their act and sing from the same hymn sheet.
Don't know about you, but Armageddon a better council at the first opportunity!

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.

Save your cash on this sub Standard effort!

No rest for the wicked!
We were planning a day off, but thought that in these troubled times you might like our top tip for saving 42p as we go into the New Year.
The answer is very simple - if you haven't bought this week's Boston Standard yet, don't bother.
A measly 44 pages include four devoted to a list of last year's news, and six - yes six - pages of "comic" horoscopes.
If the hack who had written these had devoted half the effort to turning out a few stories instead, we would have had something approaching value for money, and not this insult to loyal readers.
Understandably, the paper's circulation is falling, and its owner company Johnston Press fell out of the FTSE 250 last month due to declining revenues.
It also imposed a pay freeze, which, given the state of this week's paper seems entirely justified.
In August, the Standard's circulation was 11,305 ... a year-on-year fall of 6.9%.We know many people who remember the great days of the Standard in the 60s and 70s, when people would queue every Wednesday afternoon to buy their papers hot off the press at the office in Wide Bargate.
In those days the paper was a broadsheet packed with news.
Now, even though the town is probably twice the size, the paper is a shabby, shadowy, cheap (in all but price) and nasty production that goes from bad to worse with each passing week.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.