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.