You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Monday, May 31
Friday, May 28
Week ending 28th May
Road to nowhere ... Although Lincolnshire County Council promised to keep delays caused by the town's marathon roadworks to a minimum, we found Boston badly jammed up yesterday afternoon. The reason? Narrowing of the road on the inbound stretch of Spalding Road near the Liqorpond Street Roundabout. The decision to close one of the two lanes caused tail-backs on the A16 beyond the London Road roundabout and even for several hundred yards along London Road itself. We calculate that the delay crossing town would be of the order of half an hour. On the other side of town for drivers using Sleaford Road encountered long delays as well. What they delays didn't surprise us, our jaw dropped when we checked the leaflet helpfully issued to show us where and when the "improvements" were being made, and found that they weren't listed. Expect more buffoonery in the weeks and months ahead.
Carping diem ... After our critique of Councillor Ramonde Newell's attack on Councillor Michael Brookes, we received some words of wisdom from Councillor Richard Leggott - who's probably forgotten more about operating as an Independent than Councillor Newell will ever know. "What Councillor Newell seems unable to accept/understand is that if he was truly a free Independent himself he would have no problem with anyone else's politics, or how they saw to practice such to the best effect for their electorate," writes Councillor Leggott. "In 19 years as an Independent on Boston Borough Council I have had no backlash from any true Indy as to how I have performed my duties - advice when sought; yes, but any sort of recrimination - never. Nor, whilst spokesperson/point of contact for the Indies, have I passed on any such recriminations- from any source - to true Independent members. And, believe me when I say, there have over the years been many attempts at censure from political groups re individual Indies' voting 'foibles.' It really makes one wonder what sort of Independents are this Bypass Party, of which the carping/changeling Councillor Newell is apparently a representative voice.
Crocodile tears ... We had to laugh at the news that Boston Borough Council has apologised after leaving a trailer in a disabled parking bay. The fact is that disabled parking bays have been hijacked by these trailers for months - almost as if they had a right to be there. The only time it matters seems to be when you get caught. It will be interesting to see how long it is before the trailers sneak back again.
Turning over a new leaf ... We enjoyed the latest issue of the Boston Bulletin. Our copy had five pages. Can anyone offer more than that?
Same old song ... Angry letter to the editor writer Councillor Richard Lenton persists in trying to blame all the borough's present problems on the previous administration in yet another attack on Councillor Michael Brookes for his switch from independent to Conservative. Amusingly, he also expresses his anger at the fact that "during his term of office as mayor, he was supported more by the BBI than any other party." Did he seriously expect that any self respecting representative could have his loyalty so easily swayed? If so, then politics is definitely not for him!
Snap happy - 1 ... A while ago we suggested that someone in Boston should set up a webcam for the town, without realising that Bicker had beaten us to it! We stumbled across the Bicker Webcam by accident, and when we saw the pictures, we rather wished that we hadn't. The site appears to have been defunct for around three years - but with so much to see, we can't think why!
Snap happy - 2 ... Talking of webcams, and after yesterday's traffic debacle, we found ourselves wondering whether someone could persuade Lincolnshire County Council to make the live traffic pictures from its Scoot traffic management system available via the internet, so travellers could check the state of the roads before they set out. It could prove a great help.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Thursday, May 27
Even more radical review is needed
A gloomy picture of Boston’s future is painted by Acting Chief Executive Richard Harbord in the latest issue of the online Boston Bulletin.
He says the high level of national debt will mean cuts, which in turn mean it will be eight or nine years before we see any real growth in public sector investment.
He also expects a freeze on council tax increases.
While county or metropolitan authorities have some room for manoeuvre, district councils have very little flexibility at all.
“Typically over 80% of district council budgets are on staffing and 10% on contractual commitments, leaving little manoeuvre for financial management of the budget,” he says.
”Central Government believes that there is enough money in the public sector as a whole to maintain current levels of services but to ensure that happens requires a complete cultural change in the way the public sector operates.”
Mr Harbord cites research done in Cumbria a couple of years ago where they found that a very large sum was spent on back office tasks such as paying salaries and bills, collecting taxes, personnel, legal and the like.
From this study came something called “One Place,” which argues that if one organisation paid all the salaries or provided other back office services for everybody it would save considerable sums of money.
Whilst the government is keen for this to happen, Mr Harbord says it is not easy to set up – and Boston can’t wait for these new ways of working to be put in place.
“We have therefore set in train a major review of everything we do and how we do it. Each service will be examined to see if there is any duplication of work or
whether all we currently do is necessary, we have already carried out a review of the top management structure of the authority which now just has a Chief Executive and two Directors.
“We will be looking at purchasing and procurement, better IT support and at staffing costs throughout the organisation. The whole purpose of this is to maintain and improve the service we offer our residents and customers whilst being as efficient as we possibly can.
”This programme is currently in it’s (sic) early stages. Ideas and views of staff and members are being sought on areas for particular review. These items will go to Cabinet in July for discussion and we will then prioritise and programme our work to ensure we can balance our 2012-13 budget and beyond.
Boston Eye thinks that all of this is fine as far as it goes.
But the diminishing role of the borough council in recent years means that its very existence ought soon to be called into question.
In broad brush terms, district authorities are responsible for collection of council tax and non-domestic rates, environmental health, housing, leisure centres, local plans and planning applications, public conveniences and waste collection.
Boston has already relinquished responsibility for housing and leisure facilities, and is thinking of farming out environmental services to a private contractor.
The borough’s budget is around ten million pounds.
Eight million of this goes to pay the wages of the people who manage the people who collect the council tax on behalf of Lincolnshire County Council, keep the borough clean-ish (at present,) deal with planning applications (most of which are governed by rules which mean they could be dealt with anywhere) and running a handful of public loos.
Looked at like this, it seems a huge sum of money for very little. The borough exists to pay for its existence.
A handful of staff could manage the few minor remaining responsibilities for a fraction of the cost.
As we said, whilst the borough is taking the right approach, it needs to think really radically, and if that mean signing its own death warrant, then so-be-it.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail .com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
He says the high level of national debt will mean cuts, which in turn mean it will be eight or nine years before we see any real growth in public sector investment.
He also expects a freeze on council tax increases.
While county or metropolitan authorities have some room for manoeuvre, district councils have very little flexibility at all.
“Typically over 80% of district council budgets are on staffing and 10% on contractual commitments, leaving little manoeuvre for financial management of the budget,” he says.
”Central Government believes that there is enough money in the public sector as a whole to maintain current levels of services but to ensure that happens requires a complete cultural change in the way the public sector operates.”
Mr Harbord cites research done in Cumbria a couple of years ago where they found that a very large sum was spent on back office tasks such as paying salaries and bills, collecting taxes, personnel, legal and the like.
From this study came something called “One Place,” which argues that if one organisation paid all the salaries or provided other back office services for everybody it would save considerable sums of money.
Whilst the government is keen for this to happen, Mr Harbord says it is not easy to set up – and Boston can’t wait for these new ways of working to be put in place.
“We have therefore set in train a major review of everything we do and how we do it. Each service will be examined to see if there is any duplication of work or
whether all we currently do is necessary, we have already carried out a review of the top management structure of the authority which now just has a Chief Executive and two Directors.
“We will be looking at purchasing and procurement, better IT support and at staffing costs throughout the organisation. The whole purpose of this is to maintain and improve the service we offer our residents and customers whilst being as efficient as we possibly can.
”This programme is currently in it’s (sic) early stages. Ideas and views of staff and members are being sought on areas for particular review. These items will go to Cabinet in July for discussion and we will then prioritise and programme our work to ensure we can balance our 2012-13 budget and beyond.
Boston Eye thinks that all of this is fine as far as it goes.
But the diminishing role of the borough council in recent years means that its very existence ought soon to be called into question.
In broad brush terms, district authorities are responsible for collection of council tax and non-domestic rates, environmental health, housing, leisure centres, local plans and planning applications, public conveniences and waste collection.
Boston has already relinquished responsibility for housing and leisure facilities, and is thinking of farming out environmental services to a private contractor.
The borough’s budget is around ten million pounds.
Eight million of this goes to pay the wages of the people who manage the people who collect the council tax on behalf of Lincolnshire County Council, keep the borough clean-ish (at present,) deal with planning applications (most of which are governed by rules which mean they could be dealt with anywhere) and running a handful of public loos.
Looked at like this, it seems a huge sum of money for very little. The borough exists to pay for its existence.
A handful of staff could manage the few minor remaining responsibilities for a fraction of the cost.
As we said, whilst the borough is taking the right approach, it needs to think really radically, and if that mean signing its own death warrant, then so-be-it.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail .com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Wednesday, May 26
Pot calls kettle black
However, our fearless hacks can never resist making space for the mouth of the Witham to clamber upon his soapbox and rubbish a council chamber colleague.
This time, Councillor Ramonde Terrence Newell, Major or Major (retired) depending on which council cushions he parks his bum on, exceeds even his usual impudence with an attack on Councillor Brookes headed "I, like his voters, misjudged Cllr Brookes."
His letter says that it is clear that Councillor Brookes "has to justify to himself and others why he has changed his political party allegiance, without reference to those of his constituents who voted for him."
Superficially - an apposite word when discussing Councillor Newell's contributions to local political debate - this all sounds very fine ... were it not for the fact that councillor Newell also made a change of party allegiance within days of joining Lincolnshire County Council.
He was elected as a member representing the Boston Bypass Independents but subsequently threw in his lot with the Lincolnshire Independents, declaring at the time so as to have "a greater stake in the political process at county level."
"What I wanted to do was get on the Highways Committee. If I remained as a singleton it would have been impossible."
Councillor Newell was at pains to stress he was not collaborating with a party, but a group.
However, as we pointed out at the time, the thesaurus treats the words "party" and "group" as interchangeable, and the County Council also defines the grouping of independents which includes Councillor Newell as a political party.
Interestingly, until his move to the Tories, Councillor Brookes was a member of this self same political group, but as he told Boston Eye: "I found myself in an Independent Group including a BBI member which has formed a Shadow Cabinet as the official opposition to the Conservative Administration (our italics.)
the council."
We raised an eyebrow at this at the time, as Lincolnshire Independents claim in their mission statement that "their first loyalty is to the people they represent, regardless of party politics," and that they have no time for the party whip and block voting."
As you might expect such a contradiction created problems for Councillor Brookes. ""This has caused conflicts and inconsistencies for me working with the Conservatives in opposition to the BBI at Boston and with one of the BBI in opposition to the Conservatives at Lincoln. This compromises me and makes it impossible to best represent my constituents going forward. Indeed the question has been posed on many occasions 'how can you work in opposition to them in one place and with them somewhere else?'
We don't recall Councillor Newell going to much trouble to inform anyone about his change of allegiance, and feel he is skating on thin ice to attack Councillor Brookes so vehemently.
And we certainly think that Councillor Brookes's reasons for his decision sound slightly more persuasive than "I wanted to get on the Highways Committee."
It would be far better if Councillor Newell confined his verbal antics to the Bostoninnies' blog - which is currently obsessing with BNP bashing, convincing people that Boston is the largest town in Lincolnshire in population terms, and where appropriately one of the most recent photographs was of a load of old rubbish.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Tuesday, May 25
Will West Street scheme rise from Modus ashes?
And if so, why aren't we being told?
A number of prominent websites which report development news have been saying that the "Merchants Quay" project has now been saved.
Property Week reported:
"Kevin McCabe’s Scarborough Group has bought Modus Properties and seven other Modus companies for £37m.Redevelopment of West Street began life as a twinkle in the eye of the developers Modus - once the preferred bedmate of the town's Mayor, Councillor Peter "Grumpy" Jordan, which planned to transform the run-down West Street into "Merchants Quay" - an area so smart that it wouldn't need an apostrophe.
"Scarborough Developments has bought the companies, which own assets such as:
"The proposed Ocean Plaza development in Rhyl, Wales, comprising 237 apartments, 175,000 sq ft of mixed use commercial space and a hotel.
"The £80m Merchant’s Quay scheme in Boston, Lincolnshire, due for completion in 2010 (sic)
"The third phase of the Grand Arcade scheme in Wigan, an 18 storey tower to be built next to the centre in Wigan. The tower block will house 15,000 sq ft of retail and leisure units, 30,000 sq ft of offices and 150 apartments.
"Funding has been provided by Investec.
"Ernst &Young’s Tom Jack, joint administrator, said: 'This is a significant deal to have completed, particularly given the current challenges in the property market for developers and investors. The sale will ensure commercial, retail and leisure schemes will now be completed in a number of key locations, including the North West and Wales.”'
"Ernst & Young was appointed administrator of 14 Modus companies when they went into administration in June last year.
"A statement from Scarborough said: 'Scarborough Development Group confirms that, with Investec Private Bank as funding partners, it has acquired a portfolio of eight developments, formerly owned by Modus, for £37 million. The properties are located in: Rhyl, Stockport, Preston, Congleton, Boston, Glossop, Newport and Wigan.
"Further details of plans, by Scarborough and Investec, for these developments will be announced in due course.'
Part of the company went into administration more than a year ago and with it the plans for the £80 million development comprising 60,000 sq ft department store, a food store, eight "major space units," 17 additional units of various sizes, a new "riverside restaurant quarter," a 700 space "gold standard" car park, more than 100 new "city-style apartments," an hotel and a new "iconic" pedestrian bridge linking to the town centre - all due for completion next year.
In the way that the internet often remains the repository of broken dreams, this particular piece of pie in the sky can still be found on a Google search, with glamorous images of happy Bostonians strolling wide peaceful boulevards without a scrap of litter, an empty bottle or Lithuanian lurcher in sight..
But the sad fact is that Modus put too many of its eggs in one basket - in this case Debenhams - which shortly before the developer went into administration announced its withdrawal from the Merchants Quay project.
Scarborough Group International (SGI) - the new owner of Merchants Quay - is one of the UK’s leading property development, investment and leisure companies.
The company says of itself: "With global links, SGI has a prestigious track record of property investment and development primarily of a commercial nature including offices, business parks, distribution and warehouse units and shopping complexes.
"Significant growth has seen diversification meaning the company’s interests now include:
"A global investment portfolio in excess of £1 billion.
"Close relationships with long standing joint venture partners specialising in global property development and investment.
"A majority interest in championship football club Sheffield United plus worldwide links with sporting clubs in Europe, China and Australasia.
"Provision and management of serviced office space in the UK and the Far East through Forsyth Business Centres."
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Monday, May 24
Move to Westminster - "why I'm not resigning"
News that Boston Borough Councillor Myles Larrington has won a job at Westminster as a case worker for John Redwood - a former Tory minister and leadership contender - was coupled with the announcement that the other Conservative borough councillors will be taking on enquiries or concerns from residents of his Pilgrim Ward.
Councillor Larrington will continue to attend council meetings in Boston "as required" but has declined to accept any future remuneration or related expenses.
We have to say that letting council colleagues take on some of his work struck us as a mite unusual, as did the fact that he would apparently be an absentee councillor, so we asked him why he was not resigning the seat to allow a by-election and the appointment of a dedicated councillor for the voters of Pilgrim Ward?
Councillor Larrington told us: "Firstly, it is not wholly correct to state that I will be passing over the day to day handling of ward affairs. As I am sure you are aware, given modern technology, I shall be able to remain very much in-touch with what is going on in Pilgrim Ward – and I certainly aim to answer the majority of enquiries myself.
"Secondly, I shall endeavour (at the very least) to return to Boston at weekends to address any important issues raised by any of my constituents – as well as visiting my ward. I already work closely with our existing Borough and County councillors – so enquires are usually passed around political groups to the person with the most knowledge depending on the complexity of the enquiry itself. My current position will not fundamentally alter this process.
"I can assure you that I will not be an absentee councillor – my new employer has made it clear he is willing to be flexible around key or important meetings of the council, so I shall continue to attend as and when required. Can I also kindly point out that if you visit the House of Commons website and take a look through the Register of Interests of Members’ Secretaries and Research Assistants you will find it is usually acceptable for someone working in an MP's office, to hold a position as a councillor outside of London.
"It is a fair point you make regarding the issue of a by-election. I understand the arguments for having someone who lives in Boston all week and I certainly do not wish to stand in the way if there are other people who wish to come forward and serve the town. That said, I can assure you that before coming to the decision to stay on I widely consulted many people, as I feel I have a duty to do the right thing for my ward residents. I can genuinely say the feeling amongst both people I talked to in Pilgrim Ward and all political groups on the council were unanimous in saying they felt Boston would lose the positive contribution I have brought should I resign immediately.
"In addition, I am also mindful of the cost this would impose on the taxpayers of Boston, especially at a time when the next Borough Council Elections are not far away and also given the dire financial state in which the council finds itself currently.
"That said, I will be mindful of the views of the public on this. Clearly, I have a duty to take into account how they feel about my current arrangements and I will respond accordingly to that. I do not wish to be unfair to my electorate in anyway, nor do I want to let down people who have put their faith in me.
"I can’t really say anything more yet until the public view becomes more clear. I will however, try to continue to act faithfully to my electorate in future."
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Councillor Larrington will continue to attend council meetings in Boston "as required" but has declined to accept any future remuneration or related expenses.
We have to say that letting council colleagues take on some of his work struck us as a mite unusual, as did the fact that he would apparently be an absentee councillor, so we asked him why he was not resigning the seat to allow a by-election and the appointment of a dedicated councillor for the voters of Pilgrim Ward?
Councillor Larrington told us: "Firstly, it is not wholly correct to state that I will be passing over the day to day handling of ward affairs. As I am sure you are aware, given modern technology, I shall be able to remain very much in-touch with what is going on in Pilgrim Ward – and I certainly aim to answer the majority of enquiries myself.
"Secondly, I shall endeavour (at the very least) to return to Boston at weekends to address any important issues raised by any of my constituents – as well as visiting my ward. I already work closely with our existing Borough and County councillors – so enquires are usually passed around political groups to the person with the most knowledge depending on the complexity of the enquiry itself. My current position will not fundamentally alter this process.
"I can assure you that I will not be an absentee councillor – my new employer has made it clear he is willing to be flexible around key or important meetings of the council, so I shall continue to attend as and when required. Can I also kindly point out that if you visit the House of Commons website and take a look through the Register of Interests of Members’ Secretaries and Research Assistants you will find it is usually acceptable for someone working in an MP's office, to hold a position as a councillor outside of London.
"It is a fair point you make regarding the issue of a by-election. I understand the arguments for having someone who lives in Boston all week and I certainly do not wish to stand in the way if there are other people who wish to come forward and serve the town. That said, I can assure you that before coming to the decision to stay on I widely consulted many people, as I feel I have a duty to do the right thing for my ward residents. I can genuinely say the feeling amongst both people I talked to in Pilgrim Ward and all political groups on the council were unanimous in saying they felt Boston would lose the positive contribution I have brought should I resign immediately.
"In addition, I am also mindful of the cost this would impose on the taxpayers of Boston, especially at a time when the next Borough Council Elections are not far away and also given the dire financial state in which the council finds itself currently.
"That said, I will be mindful of the views of the public on this. Clearly, I have a duty to take into account how they feel about my current arrangements and I will respond accordingly to that. I do not wish to be unfair to my electorate in anyway, nor do I want to let down people who have put their faith in me.
"I can’t really say anything more yet until the public view becomes more clear. I will however, try to continue to act faithfully to my electorate in future."
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Friday, May 21
Week ending 21st May
Flying visit ... After our piece the other day from a fly on the wall at the jaw-achingly named Overview and Scrutiny - Performance Review and Governance Committee of Boston Borough Council, we received another e-mail signed " Fly no.2." It reminded us: "A few weeks ago Boston Borough Council's Scrutiny performance was itself 'under the microscope' with an observer from Lincolnshire County Council present at meetings, at the request of the imposed Boston Borough Council Improvement Panel. It was in the presence of this observer that one Boston Bypass Independent councillor made their one and only oral contribution that I can recall in three years at Scrutiny with a question that, sorry to say, really sounded as if it had been written by someone else. One has to wonder whether, if that observer had still been attending (this latest) Scrutiny Committee, Mesdames Austin and Owen would have made the remarks they did on this occasion."
Day too late ... Almost a month after his death, the Boston Standard finally gets around to paying tribute to former Boston Mayor Alan Day. What is wrong with our local papers these days? There was a time when the news would have been in the next available issue. Certainly the announcement of Mr Day's death was published in the paper, but the hacks didn't realise his one-time status in Boston. It's all down to employing staff who look no older than 12 and who therefore don't understand the difference between "resistant" movements and "resistance" movements in the war. The answer is simple. There is no such thing as a "resistant" movement. We also wonder whether there wasn't a more suitable political figure to go to than Council Leader Richard Austin whose insipid "tribute" ("He was a very prominent citizen of the area for many years. He made a huge contribution to the borough") said nothing at all.
Fish and chip rappers ... Still with our local papers, we wonder what it takes to get some decent coverage of our local politics. The recent changes in party allegiances were so cursorily covered, that Councillor Michael Brookes has founf it necessary to write to the local papers to explain the reasons behind his decision. Ironically his letter is precisely the same as the one published in Boston Eye more than a fortnight ago. Have our local papers no shame?
It takes two ... The famous Boston Bulletin (so good they did it twice) has hit the buffers sooner than expected. Last week, as we eagerly waited for Issue No 2 to hit our e-mail boxes, we received instead the following blithely worded e-mail. "Hi, due to unforeseen staff sickness we will be unable to send the above out today as previously advised. We would hope to be able to send the next issue out in a week or so if you could please bear with us. Many apologies Communications Department Boston Borough Council." Stick that in your pipe and smoke it! Is this bulletin really such a complex affair that it can only be handled by one person. If so (and we can't believe it is) then a deputy wants appointing and training pdq.
Waves loom at pool ... After our early warnings following the issue of leisure services contracts to a private contractor Leisure Connection, we were interested to read that concern is already being expressed that Boston Swimming Club may not be allowed to use the Geoff Moulder Pool for training anymore and therefore not being able to offer the service its has been doing to the people of Boston. Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, with whom the concerns were raised, took the issue up with Boston Borough Council. The reply he reports on his blog here included the leaden words that the club was offered "opportunities" to generate the additional income through discounted access to the Geoff Moulder pool and support for additional events, free attendance at Leisure Connections training events for swimming club officials to improve lifeguard cover and reduce costs further, and that there would be no increase in fees to the club this year. Hopefully the Boston swimmers (if they are allowed in) are hoping to avoid the plight faced by Grantham Swimming Club, which for almost 80 years in harmony with the local leisure centre. Enter Leisure Connection, and the club, which receives no subsidies, has had to sustain increases of 25 per cent over three years with no room to negotiate on better pool times. Be afraid, be very afraid. If you've not visited it, the website devoted to the crass treatment Leisure Connection metes out to its customer can be found by clicking here .
Parting shot ... Having earlier mentioned the death of Alan Day, we recall an amusing anecdote which shows how the role of "yoof" has changed in the last 60 years. As the war ended, the young Alan, who joined the RAF at 18, was shot down in his Spitfire, and who received the Distinguished Flying Cross and Bar, found himself based in Italy. He was told by his commanding officer to take a lorry and drive himself to Rome for some rest and recreation. Sadly, he told the CO that he was unable to comply - because he had never learned to drive!
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Thursday, May 20
Is this another road to nowhere?
Now that the latest batch of roadworks are underway in Boston, we think that it's time for a little clarity on what exactly is going on.
In his ramblings on the social networking site Twitter in the run up to the general election, Labour's candidate Paul Kenny twice alleged that a bypass for Boston was no more than pie in the sky.
On April 27th he claimed "It is official -Tories have said no distributor roads for Boston & Skegness if Tories win."
Then, on May 7th, he appeared to backtrack on this when he wrote: "Boston & Skeg will lose out with Tory government - no bypass in first term - Radio Lincs interview 27/04/10 - this is not change - it is worse."
In some ways, the Twitter concept of limiting contributors to saying it all in 140 characters or less is a good one - especially where politicians are concerned - but in this case, we have to say that it would be helpful if Mr Kenny could have been a little more forthcoming.
Back in March 2008 Boston's MP Mark Simmonds gave the bypass issue a good airing in Parliament.
He acknowledged that there had been some progress through short-term measures, but pointed out that in a big rural county such as Lincolnshire, people have no choice but to use their cars and other motor vehicles.
He went on to quote Department for Transport figures which said that by 2025 across the UK there will be an expected increase in kilometre journeys of 31 per cent. and in congestion of 28 per cent.
He went on: "It is not sufficient to say that short-term measures are a medium or long-term solution - they are not, particularly when they are coupled with the continued population growth in Boston, which has occurred for a variety of reasons, including the relatively low-cost housing and a significant influx of migrant labour working in agriculture and horticulture.
"I have come to the conclusion, along with many representatives of local people, that the only solution is what is euphemistically called a 'distributor road' around Boston. "As a major part of funding the distributor road, those involved would seek to maximise private sector contributions."
A distributor road is all the "Bypass" Independents seem now to be talking about as well - but we really do need to know - and to have the differences and the pros and cons clearly defined.
It would also be helpful to hear someone's guess as to where the private money for such a scheme might come from, as Boston is not the sort of area which would hold much appeal for investors.
More than a year ago, when the current roadworks were announced, we were told that they were necessary because in the longer term they would fail to ease congestion, thus proving the need for a bypass.
In fact at the time, Council leader Richard Austin referred to another vital "step towards a bypass."
This is the second time that we have suffered traffic jams today in the name of traffic jam tomorrow, and many motorists will be asking whether it is a price worth paying.
Clarification would be appreciated.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
In his ramblings on the social networking site Twitter in the run up to the general election, Labour's candidate Paul Kenny twice alleged that a bypass for Boston was no more than pie in the sky.
On April 27th he claimed "It is official -Tories have said no distributor roads for Boston & Skegness if Tories win."
Then, on May 7th, he appeared to backtrack on this when he wrote: "Boston & Skeg will lose out with Tory government - no bypass in first term - Radio Lincs interview 27/04/10 - this is not change - it is worse."
In some ways, the Twitter concept of limiting contributors to saying it all in 140 characters or less is a good one - especially where politicians are concerned - but in this case, we have to say that it would be helpful if Mr Kenny could have been a little more forthcoming.
Back in March 2008 Boston's MP Mark Simmonds gave the bypass issue a good airing in Parliament.
He acknowledged that there had been some progress through short-term measures, but pointed out that in a big rural county such as Lincolnshire, people have no choice but to use their cars and other motor vehicles.
He went on to quote Department for Transport figures which said that by 2025 across the UK there will be an expected increase in kilometre journeys of 31 per cent. and in congestion of 28 per cent.
He went on: "It is not sufficient to say that short-term measures are a medium or long-term solution - they are not, particularly when they are coupled with the continued population growth in Boston, which has occurred for a variety of reasons, including the relatively low-cost housing and a significant influx of migrant labour working in agriculture and horticulture.
"I have come to the conclusion, along with many representatives of local people, that the only solution is what is euphemistically called a 'distributor road' around Boston. "As a major part of funding the distributor road, those involved would seek to maximise private sector contributions."
A distributor road is all the "Bypass" Independents seem now to be talking about as well - but we really do need to know - and to have the differences and the pros and cons clearly defined.
It would also be helpful to hear someone's guess as to where the private money for such a scheme might come from, as Boston is not the sort of area which would hold much appeal for investors.
More than a year ago, when the current roadworks were announced, we were told that they were necessary because in the longer term they would fail to ease congestion, thus proving the need for a bypass.
In fact at the time, Council leader Richard Austin referred to another vital "step towards a bypass."
This is the second time that we have suffered traffic jams today in the name of traffic jam tomorrow, and many motorists will be asking whether it is a price worth paying.
Clarification would be appreciated.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Wednesday, May 19
Fly on wall brings buzz of meeting
We're talking of the Overview and Scrutiny - Performance Review and Governance Committee of Boston Borough Council, which met last week to debate the calling in of a cabinet decision to back a "Boston Healthy Lifestyles Hub" - helpfully also referred to in the agenda papers as a "cafe."
As is customary these days, the BBI cabinet steamrollers decisions through the council in a way that means not only its non-cabinet colleagues, but the substantial coalition of opposition members have no say in the matter whatsoever.
Equally, as is also customary these days, any public attempt to discover what's going on is roundly thwarted, as in the case of trying to view details of the call-in request online, the only information available is "THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT AVAILABLE ELECTRONICALLY."
Perhaps someone should explain that the use of capital letters in e-communication is regarded as shouting, and that shouting is regarded as rude - not that this will matter much, we are sure.
So, for reasons withheld from the public, a group of at least four councillors objected to the proposal going through without consultation or discussion.
Thank heaven for flies on the wall.
As a result we now know that the discussion began with the Deputy Leader, Councillor Brenda Owen - who is also the pertinent portfolio holder for housing, health and learning - tearing the rebel quartet off a strip, saying she was "absolutely astounded" at such action being applied to this proposal, and that there was no justification whatsoever for it to have been called in. As if her wrath was not enough, she was also backed up by that other deputy leader, Councillor Alison Austin, to make the objectors even more ashamed.
Our fly on the wall reckons someone should have a word with these two, and explain that this type of scrutiny is designed to minimise risks to council funding and to its reputation, and they, as councillors ultimately benefit from it.
The general feeling is that such councillors need to begin to see call-ins as an opportunity to have input from outside the BBI cabinet bubble, instead of displaying such childish paranoia.
Councillor Owen had apparently ignored the fact no details or costs appeared in the papers, and that several statements rang alarm bells by stating public funding and support was or would be required.
Our fly on the wall told us: "Councillor Owen needs to be informed that her admonishments were thoughtless and unwelcome; that she should know there was support for the aspirations of the proposal, and that members were merely making sure that Boston Borough Council was not being massaged into yet another ongoing financial burden."
But all's well that ends well.
To the great surprise and relief of the callers-in, an assurance was made that no funding of any description was being sought - but just to be on the safe side, a request was made that this was noted.
The final irony was that if Councillor Owen, as Portfolio Holder, had included this major piece of information in the first place, the call-in would not have been activated, and chastisement avoided.
Despite all this, Boston Eye still has some doubts.
The idea of this project is that it will be self-funding after three years, which is something we very much doubt - but that is when the council will most probably be asked to bung in a few thousand to keep it going.
There is also the issue of the empty shops funding grant, which we mentioned yesterday.
A line in the proposals for the "Boston Healthy Lifestyles Hub" (cafe) says that should the grant "not be fully allocated, then it may be appropriate for the council to consider making a financial contribution towards the Boston Health Lifestyles Hub.
Given the shadow cast by empty shops over the Boston townscape, there is no earthly reason why all the grant money could and should not be fully allocated, so the very suggestion of a surplus - when it comes from the BBI - is as good as a cast iron guarantee that money will remain be and thrown at yet another white elephant.
We thank our fly on the wall for the insight, and caution: Watch out for BBI councillors armed with Flit guns!
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Tuesday, May 18
Making more of what we've got
During a week beneath our upturned coracle on the Norfolk coast we had lots of thinking time on our hands.
One of the things that impressed us most about our stay was the incredible enthusiasm that local people have for the area in which they live.
Almost every shop you go into has shelf upon shelf devoted to local topics; there are books, videos and DVDs galore; models, novelties, T shirts, and ingenious ideas to get locals and holidaymakers to work together in the spirit of fun.
One such example was in Cromer, where the fairly mundane fact that they catch crabs and lobsters for a living was turned into a massive competition cum treasure hunt, with shops, hotels and guesthouses, displaying 3ft and 6ft crab and lobster models in a "Crustacean Crawl."
We contrasted this ingenious promotion and ongoing display of localness with what we see in Boston.
A handful of local titles in Ottakar's and W H Smith and that's about it. Plus a few bits and bobs in the Stump and Guildhall. The Tourist Information Centre used to sell a few dusty remnants of Boston souvenirs, but we think that fell into abeyance.
So what's the problem?
Collectively, we appear to lack a love for our locality. We take what few attractions we have in Boston for granted and expect people to come to visit them as a matter of course.
When that doesn't happen we lament our plight instead of thinking of ways to change things.
Certainly Boston doesn't get the coverage it deserves in the county tourism leaflets.
All of the above got us to thinking about the lamentable waste of the government grant money designed to address the issue of empty shops in Boston ... more than 25 of them.
Slightly more than £52,000 is to be spent "to improve the appearance and vibrancy of town centres" in a scheme that was scheduled to have started last month.
The first part of the plan is to bring these shops up to a "common standard" by using sticky backed plastic graphics to decorate the shop windows at a cost of £12,000.
Then the dreaded "third sector," get a couple of shops for "community use" at a cost of £30,000, and the small change will possibly be spent on trying to attract new business.
Our time away got us thinking...
Why not - instead of letting the great and the good have a couple of shops for peanuts - don't we use at least one of them to celebrate Boston.
Selected items from the basement in the now closed Haven to show something of our history, and a full range of local books. Richard Kay publications has been helping Boston writers for decades and could surely provide a selection, and local historians have covered many of the surrounding villages.
Why not run a photographic competition for people staying in the area, with a weekly prize for the best picture across the summer. It might even make a Boston calendar.
Let's draw up a series of trails for people to follow ... historic, gastronomic, nature ... the list is endless.
All it needs is enthusiasm and will - two things that seem lamentably lacking around the place.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
One of the things that impressed us most about our stay was the incredible enthusiasm that local people have for the area in which they live.
Almost every shop you go into has shelf upon shelf devoted to local topics; there are books, videos and DVDs galore; models, novelties, T shirts, and ingenious ideas to get locals and holidaymakers to work together in the spirit of fun.
One such example was in Cromer, where the fairly mundane fact that they catch crabs and lobsters for a living was turned into a massive competition cum treasure hunt, with shops, hotels and guesthouses, displaying 3ft and 6ft crab and lobster models in a "Crustacean Crawl."
We contrasted this ingenious promotion and ongoing display of localness with what we see in Boston.
A handful of local titles in Ottakar's and W H Smith and that's about it. Plus a few bits and bobs in the Stump and Guildhall. The Tourist Information Centre used to sell a few dusty remnants of Boston souvenirs, but we think that fell into abeyance.
So what's the problem?
Collectively, we appear to lack a love for our locality. We take what few attractions we have in Boston for granted and expect people to come to visit them as a matter of course.
When that doesn't happen we lament our plight instead of thinking of ways to change things.
Certainly Boston doesn't get the coverage it deserves in the county tourism leaflets.
All of the above got us to thinking about the lamentable waste of the government grant money designed to address the issue of empty shops in Boston ... more than 25 of them.
Slightly more than £52,000 is to be spent "to improve the appearance and vibrancy of town centres" in a scheme that was scheduled to have started last month.
The first part of the plan is to bring these shops up to a "common standard" by using sticky backed plastic graphics to decorate the shop windows at a cost of £12,000.
Then the dreaded "third sector," get a couple of shops for "community use" at a cost of £30,000, and the small change will possibly be spent on trying to attract new business.
Our time away got us thinking...
Why not - instead of letting the great and the good have a couple of shops for peanuts - don't we use at least one of them to celebrate Boston.
Selected items from the basement in the now closed Haven to show something of our history, and a full range of local books. Richard Kay publications has been helping Boston writers for decades and could surely provide a selection, and local historians have covered many of the surrounding villages.
Why not run a photographic competition for people staying in the area, with a weekly prize for the best picture across the summer. It might even make a Boston calendar.
Let's draw up a series of trails for people to follow ... historic, gastronomic, nature ... the list is endless.
All it needs is enthusiasm and will - two things that seem lamentably lacking around the place.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Monday, May 17
A chance to change the system
Welcome back. We hope you enjoyed our holiday.
As politicians struggled for power following the general election, the people of Boston were being asked to form their conclusions about how the borough should be managed in the future.
The issue is one that we have mentioned before - the choice between what is more or less the status quo - a leader appointed by councillors - or a directly elected mayor chosen by the punters.
Right now, Boston Borough Council is asking us to complete a simple survey which for once doesn't devote more space to questions about our ethnicity, sexuality, religious persuasion and inside leg measurement than it does to the issue at hand.
It simply asks which option you prefer and what your postcode is - a consultation so simple that all of us who are able should take part in it.
But which is the better option?
When first we wrote about this, we felt that the problem with having an elected mayor was that there would be no figure big enough to fill the post.
But cometh the hour, cometh the man (or silly old woman) and our musings have led us away from the idea of keeping the present system.
It is broken and it does need mending.
Whether accidentally or deliberately, successive administrations in Boston have confused the role of "leader" with that of dictator.
It's something not uncommon - how many of us have bitter first-hand experience of "managers" who think the job title means giving orders, patronising where they should be encouraging, and using the stick in preference to the carrot.
An elected mayor would hopefully bring an end to this ever present danger.
The post holder would be directly chosen by the public for a four year period and would not be a councillor or even a member of a political party. He or she would not have an area to represent and would operate full time as mayor, choosing up to nine councillors to make up the cabinet.
The more we think about this, the more we like it.
Even though we, the hoi polloi, are being asked for our views, councillors (ie the cabinet) will make the decision in the autumn - so expect a vote for the status quo.
In the meantime, ponder these wise words from The First Book of Ayres by Thomas Campion, written in 1613.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
As politicians struggled for power following the general election, the people of Boston were being asked to form their conclusions about how the borough should be managed in the future.
The issue is one that we have mentioned before - the choice between what is more or less the status quo - a leader appointed by councillors - or a directly elected mayor chosen by the punters.
Right now, Boston Borough Council is asking us to complete a simple survey which for once doesn't devote more space to questions about our ethnicity, sexuality, religious persuasion and inside leg measurement than it does to the issue at hand.
It simply asks which option you prefer and what your postcode is - a consultation so simple that all of us who are able should take part in it.
But which is the better option?
When first we wrote about this, we felt that the problem with having an elected mayor was that there would be no figure big enough to fill the post.
But cometh the hour, cometh the man (or silly old woman) and our musings have led us away from the idea of keeping the present system.
It is broken and it does need mending.
Whether accidentally or deliberately, successive administrations in Boston have confused the role of "leader" with that of dictator.
It's something not uncommon - how many of us have bitter first-hand experience of "managers" who think the job title means giving orders, patronising where they should be encouraging, and using the stick in preference to the carrot.
An elected mayor would hopefully bring an end to this ever present danger.
The post holder would be directly chosen by the public for a four year period and would not be a councillor or even a member of a political party. He or she would not have an area to represent and would operate full time as mayor, choosing up to nine councillors to make up the cabinet.
The more we think about this, the more we like it.
Even though we, the hoi polloi, are being asked for our views, councillors (ie the cabinet) will make the decision in the autumn - so expect a vote for the status quo.
In the meantime, ponder these wise words from The First Book of Ayres by Thomas Campion, written in 1613.
Wise men patience neuer want ;
Good men pitty cannot hide ;
Feeble spirits onely vant
Of reuenge, the poorest pride :
Hee alone, forgiue that can,
Bears the true soule of a man.
Some there are, debate that seeke,
Making trouble their content,
Happy if they wrong the meeke,
Vexe them that to peace are bent :
Such vndooe the common tye
Of mankinde, societie.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Sunday, May 9
Technical knockout for Boston Eye
As we warned, problems with internet service mean that there will be no Boston Eye blog this coming week.
Normal service will resume on Monday 17th May.
We apologise to regular readers for any disappointment.
Good luck with the roadworks - we anticipate there will be troubled times ahead.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Normal service will resume on Monday 17th May.
We apologise to regular readers for any disappointment.
Good luck with the roadworks - we anticipate there will be troubled times ahead.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Friday, May 7
Week ending 7th May
Our Friday miscellany of the week's news and events
Round One ... Well, it's over for now - although at this stage we've been warned to prepare for a hung parliament and the possibility of another election in the not-too-distant future. As expected, Mark Simmonds won Boston for the Conservatives with 21,325 votes - 49.4% of the poll, up 3.1 on last time. Paul Kenny saw Labour slump still further with 8,899 votes, 20.6% of the poll and down a stonking 10.9 on last time - even more than the party's losses at the 2005 election. Next came Philip Smith, Liberal Democrat with 6,371 (14.8% +5.4); Christopher Pain, UK Independence Party, 4,081, (9.5%); David Owens, British National Party 2,278 (5.3% +2.9); and finally, Peter Wilson, Independent, 171 (0.4%). Mr Simmonds's majority was 12,426. Turnout at 43,125 was 61.1% - up 2.2% on last time.
Twittering on ... Throughout the election campaign we were constantly entertained by the Tweets of Labour's Paul Kenny. We know that a Tweet is limited in the number of characters it can contain, but we really feel that quotes like "So Tories tell us they are green, so why are local Tories nailing posters to trees - not very environmentally friendly," and "Only 2 posters per polling station but local Tories can't count - can we trust them to run our economy if they can't count," do nothing more than lead us to the conclusion that this candidate was singing from a different hymn sheet to the rest of us.
Road to nowhere ... More interesting was the Tweet that claimed that Boston will not be getting its distributor road after all - one of a series of claims branded as "official" during the election campaign.
Parking up the wrong tree ... Daft suggestion award of the week goes to George Wheatman of the Boston Target. By some arcane method of calculation he works out that a minute's stay in the Red Lion Street car park costs motorists £1. This is because in common with car parks throughout the town, rates increase after the first short term parking period. NCP charges £1.50 for the first hour then £3 for the next period. George calls for "a more gradual rise." So how would that work, then? £1.50 for the first hour, £1.51 for the first 61 minutes and so on. It makes no sense at all. Also, as fellow hacks, could we ask George to restore articles and pronouns to his musings so as not to encourage his readers into bad writing habits.
BID or BAD ... Looking at the latest aims of Boston BID, we are a little confused about what it's supposed to be going. Despite a laudable list of objectives on its website, it seems to do little more than obsess with keeping the town centre clean. Whilst that's highly praiseworthy, we wonder whether the businesses now being ordered to stump up their annual levies just because they operate in the BID area had somehow hoped for more. Have we got another white elephant/hopeless quango on our hands again?
Planning shake-up ... We're delighted to see that someone has had the good sense to start a campaign against the daft decision to refuse permission for a smoothie bar in Dolphin Lane. So far more than 1,500 have lent it their support, and we urge you to do the same. As we've said, Boston should be encouraging new and different businesses, not suffocating them. And to claim that using the shop as a milk bar rather than a hairdresser's "further reduces the already depleted retail character of one of the town centre's 'other prime shopping frontages,'" and worse still to say that the development is "detrimental to the viability and vitality of the town centre," is plainly nonsensical. You can sign the Facebook campaign at http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/group.php?gid=117730511586471
Their number's up ... We searched in vain for the 13-page supplement on the Boston Standard's community heroes. Eventually it dawned on us that even though the front page headline proclaimed it in text half and inch high, it had slipped past the paper's proof readers, and that the supplement was on pages 35-38, not 25-38.
Editor's note:
We may or may not be blogging next week. The members of the team who own the computer are on holiday in a place where we are told that mobile broadband dongles cannot reach. We hope to prove this wrong. If not, we'll be back on Monday 17th May.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Thursday, May 6
Thirty one and a half million seconds and they're history!
Look at our countdown calendar - there's just one more year left before we get the chance to consign the Boston Bypass Independents to the dustbin of history.
Just 31,536,000 seconds to go.
There's nothing much we can say that we haven't already said.
When the BBI arrived on the scene, Boston Eye welcomed them with open arms.
But sadly, perhaps inevitably, for a group that promised so much, the BBI gave us very little.
Most memorable from the past three years, is the internal warring, the failed audits, the need for an Improvement Board to try to stop the council's inexorable spiral down into further incompetence and disgrace. Factor in staff morale at rock bottom, and the endless blaming of everything on an administration that has been out for power for three years, and you'll need a couple of extra tubes of Ivory Black in your paintbox to produce a portrait of the council at this moment in time.
Oddly, we get the feeling that the BBI genuinely believes that it has achieved a great deal during its spell in power - which is an equally sad reflection of the party's mindset in itself.
Back in 2007, the BBI contested all 32 seats, winning 25 to become the first party to take overall control of the council since the borough was formed in 1972.
Now it has only eighteen councillors , half of whom comprise the cabinet and therefore tell the others what to do and how to vote.
To adulterate a time honoured phrase, donkeys led by more donkeys.
Next week sees the start of major roadworks designed to ease traffic congestion in the town, which will go on until March next year - nothing like the bypass we were promised.
Although Lincolnshire County council has pledged to keep disruption to a minimum, we have to say that we've heard that one before.
How ironic if the people of Boston spend the next eleven months battling with traffic delays and interminable queues to be confronted by a BBI singing that same old song about getting Boston moving.
How might they vote this time around, we wonder?
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Wednesday, May 5
Labour, Conservative, Liberal - Boston's been all three ... but the town could still deliver a few more surprises
Guess what?
There's a general election tomorrow, though if you live in Boston, it may well have escaped you.
Where our team members live, a handful of leaflets have dropped through the letterbox, but so far - and we doubt that it will change this late in the game - not one single caller from any of the six candidates has knocked on any of our doors.
They also seem to have been conspicuous by their absence in the town centre.
Our spies have spotted the UKIP candidate, but have seen no sign of anyone else.
Similarly, although this has been billed as the electronic or "virtual" election, our candidates have by and large shunned the use of the internet as a means of passing information to the voters.
The only exception seems to be Labour's Paul Kenny, whose use of Twitter to throw random scares into us has been remorseless since campaigning began. Whilst his postings have been consistent, they have also tended to be wittering rather than Twittering, but no doubt he considers them effective, or he wouldn't keep bothering.
So what is the likely outcome for tomorrow's election?
We don't have crystal balls (that would be most uncomfortable) but we can say with some certainty - along with all the pundits who've expressed an opinion - that the Conservatives will hang on to Boston.
The Tories have held Boston for donkey's years, although it was not always so.
In 1918 William Royce represented the constituency for Labour, followed in 1924 by Tory Arthur Wellesley Dean, then in 1929 by Sir James Blindell for the Liberals. and again in 1931 for the National Liberals. In 1937, Sir Herbert Butcher continued the trend for the National Liberals, then in 1950 as a National Liberal & Conservative candidate. Sir Richard Body nailed the Conservative colours to the mast in 1966, and Mark Simmonds has carried the flag for the Tories since 2001.
At the last election, the results were:
Conservative 46.3%
Labour 31.5%
UK Independence Party 9.5%
Others 12.7%
As we've said before, the inevitability of a Conservative victory is a chance for any voter who wants to to send a message to the three main parties.
We believe that may well provide some interesting voting for smaller parties - particularly the BNP and UKIP.
Stand by for a surprise or two.
The full list of candidates for tomorrow's big day is:
Paul Kenny, Labour.
David Owens, British National Party.
Christopher Pain, UK Independence Party.
Mark Simmonds, Conservative.
Philip Smith, Liberal Democrat.
Peter Wilson, Independent.
Whatever you plan for the day, make sure that you take time out to vote. A polling station is always within easy reach, and it's no good moaning for the next five years if you don't take the trouble.
Strangely, for a merry band that lauds independence at every opportunity, the Bostonionnies' blog - whilst providing links and information for Marianne Overton, a former bosom buddy of the BBI leader who is standing as the Independent candidate for Sleaford and North Hykeham, Gary Walker, Independent Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Lincoln, and even Jim Thornton the Independent candidate for Poplar and Limehouse for pity's sake - makes no mention of the truly local independent candidate for Boston, Peter Wilson.
Editor's note: Yes, we know we rubbished the BBC for the picture at the top of the page - but we just couldn't ignore the opportunity it presented for a caption. If you have any suggestions, send them to us, and we'll put them in the blog.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Tuesday, May 4
Councillors explain moves ...
Boston Eye can today bring you the real story behind last week's changes in the chamber at Boston Borough Council.
Never mind what you may have read on the Bostoninnies' blog, the truth is in here - not out there.
"It is a decision that I have not taken lightly and arrived at after a great deal of thought and consultation with my supporters," Councillor Brookes told Boston Eye. "When I wrote to you in October last it was soon after the County Council Elections, after the long summer holidays and before things had bedded in with the new council. I have worked closely with the Conservative Group at Boston Borough Council for the last 13 years, mostly as part of the administration, but more recently in opposition to the Boston Bypass Independents, who have been a disaster for our Borough resulting in a succession of failed audits and the setting up of an Improvement Board to help the council get back on track.
"Since being successful in getting on to Lincolnshire County Council I have found myself in an Independent Group including a BBI member which has formed a Shadow Cabinet as the official opposition to the Conservative Administration, who I consider are doing a good job running the council.
"This has caused conflicts and inconsistencies for me working with the Conservatives in opposition to the BBI at Boston and with one of the BBI in opposition to the Conservatives at Lincoln. This compromises me and makes it impossible to best represent my constituents going forward. Indeed the question has been posed on many occasions 'how can you work in opposition to them in one place and with them somewhere else?' My politics are centre right and easily align with the Conservative party which is a broad church. As I have explained previously, I cannot operate on my own as I would not be entitled to any seats on committees.
"There is a great deal of work to be done to repair the damage done to Boston by the BBI which requires a consistent approach at both the Borough and the County which I feel is now best served by me being a member of the Conservative Group on both councils.
"Finally I would like to reassure my constituents that I will continue to represent their best interests going forward, and to thank the Independent Group at Boston Borough for all the help and support they have given me over the last 13 years, particularly Richard Leggott who is my fellow Borough (Swineshead and Holland Fen Ward) member and a valued friend. I have tried to keep them fully informed as I have wrestled with this issue and trust they fully understand the reasons behind my decision."
"Please fear not, I have in no way whatsoever switched allegiance from the BNP, in fact far from it.
"The independents and I are working together simply for the purpose of seat allocation on the committees, so that I can more effectively conduct my role as borough councillor for the Fenside ward.
"Readers may recall that since my election back in November 2008 I have been trying to gain fair and equal representation on committee seats, I have pursued the issue via the every available channel, finally bringing the matter before the standards committee and full council.
"In the now traditional manner we have been accustomed to here in Boston, the ruling BBI party voted out an amendment to the constitution that would and could have allowed me to take my rightful place.
"I feel that my association with the Independent group for this purpose serves both their own cause as well as mine, given they have lost one of their number to the Conservative group.
"As I am sure you are aware I am standing for the British National Party in the forthcoming general election, and I fully expect that after next year's local election results the BNP with have a group all of its own."
Councillor Leggott told Boston Eye ... "Any true Independent reading the recent Bypass Independent (?) Party blog site will probably be amazed at the surprising song and dance there seems to be thereon at the two latest developments amongst members of Boston Borough Council.
First: Councillor Brookes's move. A true Independent can accept that any person may wish to withdraw from a council group, for any reason, and, for seat allocation purposes, join another group. A real Independent, whose guiding principle is how to best represent his/her electorate by whatever means, should understand that. So why the fuss about Councilor Brookes by a group who call themselves Bypass Independents? I have no problem.
Second: Councillor Owens overcoming the ban on his committee rights.
The fact that Councillor David Owens, having made the arrangement that he has with the Independent Group on Boston Borough Council, will now be accorded his proper right to formally take his place on any Borough Committee for which he is qualified, also seems to have mightily riled the Bypass Party leadership.
"As it was some of the Bypass leadership in the first instance who used a technicality to deny Councillor Owens these committee representational rights -for what reason was never explained - one can perhaps put two and two together and work out why they are now demonstrating their 'miffedness' on their blog.
"Once one is aware of the facts, I guess it does not reflect too well on the authors - especially if one of them might even be a BBI Councillor who has in the last three years applied to join, and been turned down by, a major political party. Or perhaps even the BBI Councillor who invoked in the first instance the constitutional technicality to deny one of the democratically elected councillors for Fenside their full representational rights on the council.
"In explanation of the technicality referred to above, a councillor who is the sole representative of a political party on a council should, according to advice from the Local Government Association, be allowed a corresponding number of the seats on committees required to reflect the overall proportionality of the council (eg 60 such seats/30 councillors = two seats per councillor amongst the relevant committees needed to deliver proportionality) Boston Borough's constitution states,for some inexplicable reason,
that this is to be allowed only if no other councillor speaks against the single group councillor being accorded the right to such seats.
"Ps.If you detect a funny smell in West street it's not always the sewers."
The new constitution of Boston Borough Council is now: Boston Bypass Independents - 18, Conservative - 7, Better Boston Group - 4, Independents - 3.
Editor's note: We take Councillor Leggott's point about the smell at West Street. Amusingly the writer on the Bostoninnies' blog describes himself as "Blogger number 2." In our young days the words "number two" had a specific and none too fragrant connotation. The BBI blogger concerned has named himself most appositely.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Never mind what you may have read on the Bostoninnies' blog, the truth is in here - not out there.
Councillor Michael Brookes
First the change of allegiance by County and Borough Councillor Michael Brookes, who now sits as a Conservative on both authorities, having been elected as an Independent. It was only last October that gave a passionate espousal of the importance of independence ... so why the change?"It is a decision that I have not taken lightly and arrived at after a great deal of thought and consultation with my supporters," Councillor Brookes told Boston Eye. "When I wrote to you in October last it was soon after the County Council Elections, after the long summer holidays and before things had bedded in with the new council. I have worked closely with the Conservative Group at Boston Borough Council for the last 13 years, mostly as part of the administration, but more recently in opposition to the Boston Bypass Independents, who have been a disaster for our Borough resulting in a succession of failed audits and the setting up of an Improvement Board to help the council get back on track.
"Since being successful in getting on to Lincolnshire County Council I have found myself in an Independent Group including a BBI member which has formed a Shadow Cabinet as the official opposition to the Conservative Administration, who I consider are doing a good job running the council.
"This has caused conflicts and inconsistencies for me working with the Conservatives in opposition to the BBI at Boston and with one of the BBI in opposition to the Conservatives at Lincoln. This compromises me and makes it impossible to best represent my constituents going forward. Indeed the question has been posed on many occasions 'how can you work in opposition to them in one place and with them somewhere else?' My politics are centre right and easily align with the Conservative party which is a broad church. As I have explained previously, I cannot operate on my own as I would not be entitled to any seats on committees.
"There is a great deal of work to be done to repair the damage done to Boston by the BBI which requires a consistent approach at both the Borough and the County which I feel is now best served by me being a member of the Conservative Group on both councils.
"Finally I would like to reassure my constituents that I will continue to represent their best interests going forward, and to thank the Independent Group at Boston Borough for all the help and support they have given me over the last 13 years, particularly Richard Leggott who is my fellow Borough (Swineshead and Holland Fen Ward) member and a valued friend. I have tried to keep them fully informed as I have wrestled with this issue and trust they fully understand the reasons behind my decision."
Councillor David Owens
Meanwhile, Councillor David Owens has aligned with the Independent group. Here's what he told Boston Eye."Please fear not, I have in no way whatsoever switched allegiance from the BNP, in fact far from it.
"The independents and I are working together simply for the purpose of seat allocation on the committees, so that I can more effectively conduct my role as borough councillor for the Fenside ward.
"Readers may recall that since my election back in November 2008 I have been trying to gain fair and equal representation on committee seats, I have pursued the issue via the every available channel, finally bringing the matter before the standards committee and full council.
"In the now traditional manner we have been accustomed to here in Boston, the ruling BBI party voted out an amendment to the constitution that would and could have allowed me to take my rightful place.
"I feel that my association with the Independent group for this purpose serves both their own cause as well as mine, given they have lost one of their number to the Conservative group.
"As I am sure you are aware I am standing for the British National Party in the forthcoming general election, and I fully expect that after next year's local election results the BNP with have a group all of its own."
Councillor Richard Leggott
The man in the middle of all this is veteran Independent Councillor Richard Leggott, who has come in for some childish criticism on the Bostoninnies' blog, which lines such as "jilted Leggott finds a new bed-mate" and references to a "three in a bed scenario."Councillor Leggott told Boston Eye ... "Any true Independent reading the recent Bypass Independent (?) Party blog site will probably be amazed at the surprising song and dance there seems to be thereon at the two latest developments amongst members of Boston Borough Council.
First: Councillor Brookes's move. A true Independent can accept that any person may wish to withdraw from a council group, for any reason, and, for seat allocation purposes, join another group. A real Independent, whose guiding principle is how to best represent his/her electorate by whatever means, should understand that. So why the fuss about Councilor Brookes by a group who call themselves Bypass Independents? I have no problem.
Second: Councillor Owens overcoming the ban on his committee rights.
The fact that Councillor David Owens, having made the arrangement that he has with the Independent Group on Boston Borough Council, will now be accorded his proper right to formally take his place on any Borough Committee for which he is qualified, also seems to have mightily riled the Bypass Party leadership.
"As it was some of the Bypass leadership in the first instance who used a technicality to deny Councillor Owens these committee representational rights -for what reason was never explained - one can perhaps put two and two together and work out why they are now demonstrating their 'miffedness' on their blog.
"Once one is aware of the facts, I guess it does not reflect too well on the authors - especially if one of them might even be a BBI Councillor who has in the last three years applied to join, and been turned down by, a major political party. Or perhaps even the BBI Councillor who invoked in the first instance the constitutional technicality to deny one of the democratically elected councillors for Fenside their full representational rights on the council.
"In explanation of the technicality referred to above, a councillor who is the sole representative of a political party on a council should, according to advice from the Local Government Association, be allowed a corresponding number of the seats on committees required to reflect the overall proportionality of the council (eg 60 such seats/30 councillors = two seats per councillor amongst the relevant committees needed to deliver proportionality) Boston Borough's constitution states,for some inexplicable reason,
that this is to be allowed only if no other councillor speaks against the single group councillor being accorded the right to such seats.
"Ps.If you detect a funny smell in West street it's not always the sewers."
The new constitution of Boston Borough Council is now: Boston Bypass Independents - 18, Conservative - 7, Better Boston Group - 4, Independents - 3.
Editor's note: We take Councillor Leggott's point about the smell at West Street. Amusingly the writer on the Bostoninnies' blog describes himself as "Blogger number 2." In our young days the words "number two" had a specific and none too fragrant connotation. The BBI blogger concerned has named himself most appositely.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Monday, May 3
BBC apes George V and says "B****r Boston"
We said we were taking the day off today, but when we saw the picture above, we were so angry that we had to put pen to paper.
In the past we've criticised the way the BBC covers Boston - mostly in the context of national programmes such as Radio Four's Today show, as BBC Radio Lincolnshire pays lip service at best when it comes to reporting news from the town.
Today only finds Boston newsworthy when it wants to feature the fattest, most bigoted people in the country. For the rest of the time it leaves the town alone.
BBC Radio Lincolnshire's sporadic coverage of Boston is largely an insult, and the regional television coverage is even patchier.
This picture from the BBC's website, forms part of its general election "coverage" of the county's seven constituencies.
Most of the others are treated pretty neutrally, but in Boston, BBC Political Editor for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, Tim Iredale, chose Fenside as the area to visit and on which to base his report because it had returned a BNP borough councillor.
It is scarcely possible to imagine a more slanted coverage than the one offered to viewers who know little or nothing about Boston.
What words are planted in our minds by this picture and the film that accompanies it?
Bigotry, ignorance, and squalor are the first that spring to mind.
The film is not just an insult to the people of Fenside, but to the people of Boston as a whole.
The BBC has tarred us all with its crass stereotyping.
Watch this disgraceful nonsense at http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/lincolnshire/hi/people_and_places/newsid_8655000/8655062.stm
Coverage like this is disgraceful, and if our local leaders had the guts they would complain to the BBC at the highest possible level - just like they claimed they would when
Kristina Murrin made us all look like fools in her Channel Four programme: "The woman who stops traffic" a couple of years ago.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Sunday, May 2
Boston make it ... at last
Their success was hard won but achieved with honesty and determination, and is a fitting result after the trials and tribulations of recent years.
As their decline occurred under the previous Boston Borough Council administration, and their success during the reign of the Boston Bypass Independents, expect some sort of claim on the Bostoninnies' blog in the not too distant future.
You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
