The week in words ...

The most used words in Boston Eye in the last seven days

Click on the photo to enlarge it

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Week ending 29th October

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Unkindest cuts of all …Whilst it looks as though Bostonians will have to wait a few more months before we have a clearer appreciation of the government financial cuts, we can get a clue or two from other areas.

Roading roughshod … Lincoln's proposed £130m Eastern Bypass has been put on the lowest rung of a three tier list, which means that it will receive more investigation, and only be approved if it passes certain “pre-qualifications.” The result will be announced in January. There are no prizes for guessing what the chances are for Boston’s “distributor road” – the booby prize intended to replace the bypass promised by the BBI … now know as DRIP (the Distributor Road Independents’ Party.)
Copping out … Meanwhile, Lincolnshire’s Chief Constable has said the need to save £20m over the next four years could mean the loss of 70 officers and 100 support staff. Regrettable as this may be, we have said before that Boston could wave goodbye to its PCSOs and probably never notice the difference. What’s even more worrying is that reports say that public safety is at risk because more than four in five police authorities are not good enough to best protect front line policing.
Quote of the weak … Comes from Steve Goulder, a local shopkeeper who has inherited the chairmanship of Boston Business Improvement District. Despite an apparent majority wish by the press-ganged membership to have the BID dissolved, Mr Goulder is quoted as saying: “We take it forward with our without them. Members can either continue to harass us and waste money, or join us and reap the benefits.” Aside from that piece of blatant impudence, he’s also whining that the meeting he was forced to call to debate the BID’s future cost between £1,300 and £1,500 to arrange. No wonder the BID’s in such deep water. Such a dog in the manger attitude won’t help things at all – but then we note that an anagram of S. Goulder comes out as “dogs rule!”
Vic or treat ... What a shame that the pseudonymous "Victor Hunter" went to such elaborate lengths to make local councillors chase a red herring on a genuinely important local issue like the wasteful and pointless community hub project by using a faked e-mail. Presumably, the idea was to ensure that any future attempts to highlight the issue will be dismissed for fear of embarrassment. It should be enough to guarantee that a bit of slack cash finds its way into the equally pointless healthy eating cafe without the slightest murmur of protest.
End of an era … No letters in the local press this week from Council Leader Richard Austin. But the Mouth of the Haven is still in full spate in the shape of Councillor Ramonde Newell. With no apparent sense of irony, the galloping major - who famously shed his Boston Bypass Independents’ allegiances when elected to Lincolnshire County Council to side with the Lincolnshire Independents group in order to get committee places – fulminates against what he calls the “turncoats” within Boston Borough Council. There’s a worrying hint of foam flecks on our newspaper, and we think that Councillor Newell may be starting to lose the plot. The addition of the letters “BBI” after his name may hold a clue. We can hear him repeating them over and over again in a quiet room … much like amphibians go “ribbit, ribbit…”
Chuffed! … One of Boston’s great and good has come up with an idea to save the Royal Train from government cuts. John Cammack tells the Daily Telegraph that it could be hired out to companies wishing to promote British commerce and industry, in a similar way to the Royal Yacht. Perhaps we could lay tracks in Strait Bargate and use HRH’s train to carry passengers rather than those wretched buses.
Hypocrisy … It seems that Council Leader Richard Austin has recruited NFU Mutual as a sponsor for his Flood 200 event. We’re sure that they willingly signed up because it makes them look good – but we know of at least two cases in the past year where they have flatly rejected requests to quote for house insurance on the grounds that the properties concerned are in the Boston PE21 code and therefore in a high risk flood area …
Sub Standard and off-Target … Once again, our local papers have come up trumps. The Standard continues its policy of creating new words whilst mangling old ones. Last week it brought us “punction” for “puncheon,” whilst this week if offers us the story of a Boston man who won a “guerning” championship 45 years ago. Try “gurning” – the word’s only been in the language since the days of bad King John. We’ll ignore the fact that they can’t spell Sketchley or Phoenix, but can’t resist the other comedy clanger in the “Pages from the Past” with the story of the year-old baby who had to be fed bananas because of “an abdominal affection.) But of a slip there – which leads us to...
Four candles … Remember the hilarious sketch by the two Ronnies all those years ago … featuring the frustrated shopkeeper who produced four candles when asked for fork ‘andles? Well, the Boston Target has come up with its own version in the advert pictured below…

You can almost hear the ‘phone call placing the advert, can’t you?
“What’s the headline for what you’re selling ….?
“Boxer pups, ready now….”
“Box a pups … right….”

Thanks for reading. Don't forget "The week in words" tomorrow.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Stop this nosey nonsense!

 

We had to smile when we read the following story in the Daily Mail.

“Fruit and vegetable growers are protesting over a council survey which asks if they are gay. The questionnaire is put to residents when they apply for one of the 18 allotments available in Lincoln. The city council wants to know their sexual orientation, race and religion.

"Taxpayers' Association spokeswoman, Fiona McEvoy, said the venture was a waste of time and money.

"It is local authority nonsense at its worst,' she said. 'It's costing money and taking up the time of council officials. 'Who cares how many lesbians, Christians or black people want allotments?'”
If all this sounds familiar, that’s because you heard about this nosey parker “nonsense” before – in the pages of Boston Eye.
It’s a standard feature of every consultation/survey run by Boston Borough Council, and there are no end of these pointless questionnaires issued each year.

The latest is the “cultural” survey which asks a mere eleven questions – including several numbered empty boxes for comments and explanation – about our attendance at “cultural” events in and around Boston.

It then asks a further fifteen questions in the “Getting to know you” section which is prefaced by the words: “We want to provide great services to everyone and it would really help if you could give us some information about yourself…”

This is the usual intrusive, nonsensical exercise of gathering information for its own sake – including age, sex, disability, ethnicity, religion, sexuality and interestingly for Boston “your preferred language” (in our experience it generally starts with an ‘F’.)

The great missed opportunity is that – given the borough’s dominant national migrant groups now hail from Latvia, followed by Lithuania, then Poland, Romania, Bulgaria – no opportunity is taken to analyse this more deeply

We really wish that someone at Boston Borough Council would explain to us why this sort of information needs to be gathered – and whether one single benefit has been gained from gaining it.

Meanwhile, the “cultural” survey ignores one major flaw – which is that Boston broadly lacks any decent cultural structure.

One museum, which is the same every time you visit and has been sanitised to seem as though it could have been built yesterday. A collection of local artefacts that remain locked away from the public gaze. An art gallery that was so completely hopeless, it has been closed. A cinema that could use decent projection equipment. Then there’s Blackfriars – more or less a cut down version of the Embassy Centre in Skegness – but scarcely what you might call “culture.”

We’re sure that there is a small group that would like to think that Boston is the cultural capital of South Lincolnshire, but if there is, it’s high time that they woke up to reality.

In the meantime, the Borough could improve the culture of its questionnaires by dropping all this unnecessary nonsense about disability, ethnicity and sexuality. By all means ask when necessary – but not routinely.

And remember the words of the Taxpayers' Association. “It is local authority nonsense at its worst. 'It’s costing money and taking up the time of council officials. “

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

"Bright new future" is still

just light at end of tunnel

Last week’s committee meeting which considered a report on the performance of the Boston Sports Initiative heard that its proposed takeover by the private firm Leisure Connection – hailed by the borough at the start of the year as “all systems go for a bright new future for leisure services in Boston,” is still on the starting blocks.

The contract is dependent on staff pensions being assured by a certificate issued by the Government Actuaries Department, and so far this has not happened.

Presumably this means that instead of saving a small fortune these past few months, the borough is continuing to foot the bill for the Princess Royal Sports Arena, and we wonder why what ought to be a simple piece of admin procedure is taking so long.
Meanwhile, criticisms of Leisure Connection (slogan:- "Private sector quality in a public access environment") continue to mount.
A recent report to North Kesteven District Council , which lists a summary of the Leisure and Cultural Services activity from April 2009 – March 2010 in partnership with Leisure Connection, notes that Northgate Sports Hall did not meet four of its key performance indicator targets... including the percentage of customers who rated the repair and maintenance good or above. The target was 75% , but the 2009-2010 rating was 48%
Sleaford Leisure Centre did not meet four of its key performance characteristics.
They included the percentage of customers who rated the repair and maintenance good or above. The target was 75% but the 2009-2010 rating was 51.5%
Harpers fitness centre in Sleaford did not meet two of its key performance characteristics. The target for the percentage of customers who rated the repair and maintenance good or above was 75% - but the 2009-2010 rating is 13.5%. And whilst the target for the percentage of customers who rated the wetside programme as good or above was 75% , the current position is 43. 5%
North Kesteven Centre did not meet six of its key performance targets
During the period there were 312 complaints compared to 66 in the previous year.
North Kesteven Centre received 91 complaints – again mostly about pool temperature and cleanliness.
Sleaford Leisure Centre drew 40 complaints – with common themes being pool temperature and cleanliness, whilst Harpers got 19 complaints - mostly about showers and the pool being cold.
You can read the entire litany of disaster about Leisure Connection by clicking here .
We wonder whether it might be time to think about all this again before it’s too late.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

A Hunter seeks answers

over empty shops grant

Another day – and another question about how Boston Borough Council conducts its business.
This time it comes in an e-mail - signed Victor Hunter - which  says is  has been sent to all Boston Borough councillors and executives, and copied to Boston Eye, the Boston Standard and the Boston Target.

The subject is one that we have written about repeatedly - 34-36 Strait Bargate, which has been turned into a “community hub” using finance received under a government scheme to help improve the look of town centres blighted by empty shops (pictured left.)

Mr Hunter’s e-mail does not mince words:-

“I wish to make a formal complaint about the apparent misappropriation by officials of Boston Borough Council of government money under the ‘Empty Shops Funding Grant Scheme’ and trust that you will conduct a full investigation and take appropriate action as necessary.

For background information please refer to enclosed ‘Report to Cabinet’ dated 24th February 2010.

“Thus the Council received a Government grant of £52,631.58 under the ‘Empty Shops Funding Grant Scheme.’

“Cabinet agreed to allocate £52,000 in three ways as follows: £30,000 was allocated for the above shop units (34-36 Strait Bargate). For the avoidance of doubt hereinafter referred to as 'the empty shop.'

“£12,000 was allocated to bringing 25 other empty shops up to a common standard by improving the outside of the shops and use of graphics to decorate the shop windows using a common theme (My Boston) to decorate the shop windows.

“£10,000 was allocated to establishing a grant scheme to offer new retailers occupying empty shops funding towards business rates for their first year following start up.

“My first complaint is that whole £52,000 has been spent/committed on 'the empty shop.'
“Thus the other dedicated allocations of £12,000 for improving the appearance of 25 other empty shops and the £10,000 for establishing a business rates grant scheme have been abandoned / ditched.
“- Why has the whole of the £52,000 been spent on 'the empty shop?'
“- Why have these other two schemes been ditched?
“- Who took these decisions and when?
“I understand that South Lincolnshire Community & Voluntary Service (SLCVS) is the tenant of  'the empty shop.'
“My next complaint is that it is scandalous that SLCVS are apparently not paying one penny towards the rent or running costs.
“Thus the Council have spent £52,000 of taxpayers money on 'the empty shop' and SLCVS are getting the benefits of it absolutely free of charge.
“Surely this cannot be right especially when you look at the SLCVS published accounts which shows they have cash reserves of £365,997 (from the Charity Commission website.) Any organisation with such vast reserves should surely be expected to contribute something towards the rent and running costs? Most small shop keepers in Boston would be very envious of such vast wealth.
“I understand the Council gives SLCVS an annual grant in excess of £100,000 per annum so it seems particularly generous of the Council that additionally they give SLCVS 'the benefit' of a further £52,000?
“As a minimum I would recommend you request SLCVS to contribute £22,000
back to the Council such that the other allocations (£12,000 and £10,000) can proceed as originally agreed by cabinet.
“I would imagine that the SLCVS Trustees (Jim Hopkins, Bert Shaw, Paul Kenny, Barbara Blatherwick, Richard Barclay, Margaret Powley, Debbie Belton) are particularly embarrassed by the whole affair and would think that as a gesture of goodwill they would be more than pleased to voluntary return this £22,000 to the Council.
“Alternatively if they do not return this money voluntary then I suggest you should take this into account when accessing their future grant funding (if any given impending cuts).
“I would also recommend you investigate who made the decision to grant SLCVS the tenancy? Was it a fair and open process and were other charitable and voluntary groups given the opportunity to become the tenant?
“My final complaint is that it is scandalous that £52,000 of taxpayers money has been spent on a shop which may well be demolished in 'a few months time.'
“Yours faithfully
“VICTOR HUNTER”
Boston Eye says:- Some interesting and important questions - but will any answers be forthcoming?


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Scheme has no place for this resident

The Placecheck Scheme run by Boston Borough Council has come in for criticism in the past – and now it’s under fire yet again.

Basically, Placecheck (see logo, above) comprises a £100,000 kitty awarded to the council by the Health and Well-Being Programme from which five areas of Boston can each have £10,000.

We wonder about the mathematics as well, because although £100,000 has been received, only half is being given away, and we have yet to find any explanation about what is being done with the remaining £50,000.

So far the scheme seems to have spent the bulk of its grants on services which are already provided by the council and paid for through our council tax – mostly litter cleaning and other tidying up exercises.

Areas to “benefit” to date include Boston High Street, Daisy Dale, and parts of Main Ridge.
Next to wallow in the council’s largesse is the Carlton Road neighbourhood.
But the scheme there is causing at least one resident wondering what it’s all about.
Robert Smith of Argyle Street e-mailed us to say:-
“Dear Boston Eye,
“I wanted to get this down, while events were still fresh in my mind.
“A little while ago a glossy, no doubt expensively, printed brochure dropped through my Argyle Street letterbox. ‘The 'Placecheck Report Carlton Road Neighbourhood'.
“Instead of simply binning the thing as I normally would, I bothered read it.
“You may possibly have seen one. It has lots of lovely photographs of litter, graffiti, pot holes, rubbish, dog mess, parked cars, etc, etc.
“In short, no sights that I don't see every day as I weave around the pot holes on my bicycle.
“It also invited me, as a local resident, along to a meeting at Carlton Road School on Tuesday 19th.
“I was intrigued enough to arrange to get away from work after a long twelve hour shift in order to directly attend before going home.
“Of the small assembly present, I only recognised two faces. One was the Mayor, the other was serial council complainer and local press letter writer Paul Kenny.
“After a brief introduction, outlining how great everything was going and how much (but not particularly what) had been achieved, the proceedings were adjourned.
“The assembled throng descended with gusto on the free buffet.
“The proceedings then drew to a close.
“I still don't know what this group stands for, I don't know what the purpose the meeting was, I don't know what its aims are.
“I do imagine that I'm probably paying for it, either directly or indirectly.
“Needless to say, I won't be attending again.”
We decided to see if we could clarify matters a little, and according to the borough’s website, the event which Mr Smith attended was the presentation of Carlton Road Neighbourhood Action Group’s  Placecheck report - detailing aims and objectives against which a list of possible improvement schemes will be drawn up - to the Mayor Councillor Peter Jordan, who accepted it on behalf of the council.
The borough says: “The report was put together after members of the steering group made a fact-finding walkabout of their neighbourhood, listing its good and bad points and the aspirations of its residents. Councillor Helen Staples, housing, stronger communities and community development portfolio holder outlined the Placecheck process and steering group chairman Diana Walker presented a speech to encourage more volunteers to come forward.”
It seems that somewhere along the line, the borough must have got its communications in a tangle, as Mr Smith appears to have been invited to a function which was no more than a fait accompli – and missed out on an invitation to become involved in anearlier decision making process.
We have heard of this happening before with previous Placecheck schemes leaving some residents out of the loop.
Again, according to the borough, local councillors for the Carlton Road area are Councillors Councillor David Lingard (Staniland North Ward) Councillor David Owens (Fenside Ward) and Councillor Sheila Newell (Fenside Ward) – so we asked Mr Smith he had noticed them at all.
The response was not encouraging.
“Dear Boston Eye,
“I had to go to Boston Borough Council's website to find out what two of these three people looked like.
“I didn't speak to, nor was introduced to, any of the three persons mentioned.
“I don't believe I saw David Lingard or Sheila Newell, but wouldn't want to put my hand on a stack of bibles to say they hadn't been present.
“I've met David Owens previously and would have reintroduced myself had he been there.
“I don't come under a Fenside councillor and looking at the brochure, I don't think it actually covers Fenside as a self-contained area.”
On paper, Placecheck sounded to be quite a good thing.
In practice, it is emerging as something of a glee club for the great and the good of the borough with occasional events to keep them topped up with canapes, which is not serving local people in the way intended.
And we would question how usefully the money given to local people is being spent – and ask again how the other £50,000 has been budgeted.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

The week in words

The most used words in Boston Eye in the last seven days

Click on the photo to enlarge it

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Week ending 22nd October

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Bar ha! … We are delighted that a planning inspector overruled Boston Borough Council’s refusal to grant permission for a milkshake and smoothie bar in Dolphin Lane. At the time we were highly critical of the council argument that the development was “detrimental to the viability and vitality of the town centre.” We think it more likely that the planners were sulking when the shop owner went ahead  because he didn’t think he required permission as his shop was formerly … a shop. The planning inspector said the smoothie bar “sits comfortably with other retail outlets, and is likely to benefit the vitality of the town centre because of the site’s positioning.” The shop owner says he’s glad his appeal was dealt with by somebody with commonsense – and we agree. Interestingly, Boston’s planning committee heard earlier this week that whilst the “target” for dismissed appeals was 25%, the reality was that 37% of appeals went against the council. Let’s hope the lesson is taken on board.
Floods of tears … The hoo-hah over the forthcoming Boston 200 exhibition tells us to expect a disappointment. We were astonished to be greeted by an avenue of banners promoting the show on our way into town, which might well seduce passers-by into believing that it is a major event of some sort. In fact it is being staged in the "Community Rooms" - aka the old Sketchley shop in Bargate, and which is hardly the Royal Albert Hall. Speaking of  the community rooms, we have taken some stick after publishing the claim by the noble-sounding Ladey Adey, Chief Executive Officer of South Lincolnshire Community and Voluntary Service that our report of an alleged spat involving Council Leader Richard Austin and volunteer workers were merely an easily solved " communication problem." For the record, we published the explanation because it was sent to us. We didn’t say whether we believed it or not!
If it’s broken, don’t fix it … Those of you who recall former Boston Chief Executive Mark James will remember that he was the man who gave us the Princess Royal Sports Arena. Apparently he thought the idea of a publicly funded financial drain on taxpayers was so good that he took it with him when he left to run Carmarthenshire. A blogger who’s following his progress there tells us that he has just decided to slash interest payments on loans regarding the rugby club Llanelli Scarlets and his Parc y Scarlet's stadium. We’re told the move will see £250,000 in lost revenue just when the council is on the verge of major cuts and job losses. Not his job though! You can read more by clicking here
The farce is still with us … Tuesday’s meeting of Boston BID finished in chaos and incompetence once more, and it now appears that the lunatics have taken over the asylum and decided to carry on running the fiasco regardless. Apparently, there is regulatory body for BIDs, but the phone line is discontinued - and even letters sent by our MP Mark Simmonds go unanswered. But never mind. The good news from the BID manager Niall Armstrong that Santa’s Grotto will be back for this year’s Christmas Market, as well as a “mini pantomime.” Presumably he’s hoping the show will take the spotlight off the current farce in which he plays a starring role.
War of words 98 … The record breaking letter writing of Boston Borough Council leader Richard Austin goes on, and on, and on … For the sixth week in a row he has a letter in the local papers. It’s about standing for elections, and an appeal to would be candidates to let BBI members tell them how well the party has done – and confirm that a whip has never been applied to the group’s councillors since the party took office. Historians also tell us that Hitler liked children.
War of words 99 … Interestingly, we hear that when it comes to offering  a soapbox through the letter pages of the local papers, the Boston Standard is proving somewhat less than generous towards non BBI councillors. A letter sent in response to Councillor Austin’s latest missive was rejected by the editor. Will she now also extend this reverse democracy to Councillor Austin, and cap his fountain pen for a while?
Spellchecker - no, spielchoker … We’ve tended to stop highlighting errors in our local papers, as they occur so often. But we feel that the Boston Standard deserves a special mention for telling us how someone was paralysed from “the waste down” after an accident. Spellcheckers are a great help, but it’s also a benefit if you know the difference between words that sound alike but are spelled differently as well. We’re also a little bemused by the Standard’s creation of the word “punction” to describe the pub formerly named the Rum “Puncheon.” That’s one the spellchecker would have noticed, although the writers didn’t.
That’s it for this week. Many thanks for reading. And don’t forget tomorrow’s graphic feature “Week in Words”

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

BID bosses dodge

the column - again

Tuesday night’s special meeting of Boston Business Improvement District was another disappointing affair, with half of the people tasked with running the BID bothering to turn up.
And those that made the effort came armed to the teeth with legal advisers.
Bearing in mind that these people are technically servants of the wider membership, it seems a strange way to go about winning over the people who think you are doing a bad job - treating them with contempt, and then - just in case they don’t get it, adding a little more contempt just in case.
Our fly on the wall at the meeting told us ...

“Another fiery meeting. Matters were not helped when the five members of the board that could be bothered to attend wheeled in not one, but two, solicitors from Wilkin & Chapman from Lincoln.

“Chairman Steve (editor's note - Steve Goulder, a director of Oldrids, - appointed chairman by the outgoing postholder at the July AGM debacle - and pictured right in the office production of 'Night of the Living dead') opened the meeting like the old headmaster declaring how disappointed he was that the meeting had been called at such expense to BID.
“He would not accept the suggestion that he was not the elected chairman, then he turned to his solicitors to argue the point, but they still did not answer the fact the the minutes from the AGM stated he was appointed.
“A statement was read out from Simon Beardsley (who did not grace the meeting with his presence) which basically claimed a majority of businesses were still in favour of the BID.
Niall Armstrong (the BID manager) then claimed they had 100 signatures of businesses that wanted the BID to continue.
“Various people then asked for a ballot of all members to prove the majority they claimed. Councillor Jim Blaylock spoke very well on behalf of the Butterfly Hospice, but the board were not budging.
"Steve Goulder almost made the mistake of agreeing to the ballot until one of the solicitors sprang to his side to stop him - hence the pantomime BOOs.
“After a number of further angry responses it became apparent that the board would not agree to a ballot as they were frightened that they would lose it. The audience then decided to leave.
“Chairman Steve then closed the meeting after he stated that he would not entertain another request for another general meeting.”
Editor’s notes:
We understand that around seventy people were at the meeting.
After the July meeting of Boston BID ended in chaos with calls for it to be wound up, Simon Beardsley, from Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce, was appointed to investigate the feeling about winding up the company and promised an answer within three months.
His non appearance at Tuesday’s meeting tells us all we need to know about his sense of service to the membership, as does his lack of an answer.
Niall Armstrong’s claim to have 100 supporters of the BID cuts no ice, when you know that it has 500 members - scarcely a majority.
These people are running scared, and must grow up and accept their responsibilities, rather than trying to maintain the status quo for its own sake.


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Will BOSH plan be tosh plan...?

Here we go again ...
Tonight’s meeting of Boston Borough Council’s cabinet is looking at yet another get together to save money and improve services.
A report recommends that the gang of eight agrees arrangements for a south-east Lincolnshire joint committee to produce the local development framework for the combined areas of Boston and South Holland.
A joint committee would enable a “more strategic” vision for south-east Lincolnshire through the LDF up to 2026 and take a unified approach to the promotion and growth of an area which has cross border implications.
Of course, there are financial savings to be made, and the report says a total of £375,000 can be saved over five years.
There will also be no need to fill two vacant posts, which would save another £84,000 – or £433,000 over five years.
If the cabinet backs the idea,  the full council on November 15th will be asked to approve a formal request to the government.
If some of this sounds familiar, regular readers may well recall events of around a year ago, when Boston appeared all set to share a number of services with South Holland and East Lindsey district councils.
The merger would have saved millions, but fell apart at the eleventh hour when it was realised that Boston’s parlous finances made it impossible.
At the time, South Holland was particularly scathing towards their Boston colleagues, with leader Gary Porter accusing Boston Leader Richard Austin of “misinforming” the council when the decision was taken to pull out of the deal by feeding colleagues “rumour and ill informed gossip.”
More recently in a discussion at County Hall, Councillor Eddie Poll, Executive Councillor for Economic Development, couldn’t resist a poke at Boston when he said: "I have to say that the comments about Boston quite struck me that there were certain parallels with Rome - in that, all roads allegedly lead to Rome - and I think that Boston thinks that all roads lead to Boston. I couldn't but help but extend that parallel a bit further and see that the current administration kind of reminds me of Emperor Nero"
Perhaps relations have thawed since then or …. does South Holland know something we don’t know?
We note from the report that if the idea goes ahead the new joint committee won’t be up and running until after next May’s council elections – at which time there will certainly be another group in power in Boston.
Meanwhile, if anyone wants a suggestion for a merger between Boston and South Holland, could we offer ... BO-SH.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Business group shows true colours 

- and gives town the BIDdle finger

Perhaps the shortest lived committee in the history of Boston Borough Council is the Task and Finish group established at the end of September to look into the running of the Boston Business Improvement District - Boston BID.
The group was set up after a rancorous annual meeting in July at which members called for the company to be wound up.
However, the BID has apparently refused to have any dealings with it – even though Boston Borough Council was highly influential in its creation and has a close relationship with the company – which some critics feel is less than healthy.
When the July meeting collapsed in chaos a member of the Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce was appointed to look into the way the BID was working and report back within three months.
Little seems to have been done since then, but tonight sees a special meeting called at the demand of dissatisfied BID members.
Regular readers will recall that once the BID was created (and there is a school of thought that says the majority vote required for this was pathetically small) all businesses in the area became members whether they liked it or not, and forced to pay a levy of between one and two per cent of their business rateable value. Boston Borough Council dragged the handful who refused into court to make them pay.
We won’t bore you again with the fine detail, but the BID draws in more than £100,000 a year, and spends the lion’s share of that on staffing and admin.
It has delivered some minor projects – but most of them fall into areas which their normal business rate payments already fund … something that was promised would not be the case.
The BID has already nailed its colours to the mast ahead of tonight’s special meeting.
It has had the audacity to spend members’ contributions on legal advice and told them that item one on the agenda – a vote of no confidence in the board of directors is “not a term recognised in company law.” So yah, boo, sucks to you!
The second and final item on the agenda “ to progress the winding up of Boston BID Ltd” is dismissed with equal arrogance – “Business members are reminded that only the Chamber member can vote on proposals to wind up Boston BID.”
There’s democracy for you. One man - the one and only vote!
However, the battle is being carried forward under the championship of local accountant Darron Abbott, who represents several of the pressed members of Boston BID.
He has written to all Boston councillors and told them: “This lack of desire to co-operate does not surprise me, it purely reflects the contempt that Boston BID shows to its levy payers.”
He has asked the council to get its officers to withdraw their co-operation from Boston BID and seek value for money for the council taxpayers and business rate payers by charging the company for the correct amount of officers time spent collecting the levy.
He has also asked that the council withdraws its officer representative from the BID board until the company decides to co-operate and also listen to levy payers
His e-mail concludes: “I would hope as a councillor you will now look at Boston BID in its true light - a company that does not listen to its members wishes and carries on regardless, totally ignoring what its members want from it.
Sadly, since the e-mail was sent last Friday, only four of the borough’s 32 councillors have bothered to respond, and a senior officer who ought to know better is said to be more worried about the bad publicity for the BID -  rather than showing concern for its disdain of the council, the businessmen and the wider general pubic.
What can you say?
The BID hierarchy is acting like a bunch of tin pot banana republic dictators. They need lessons in good business manners, common courtesy – and really, we think that the critics are right … Boston BID has failed the town dismally and should be wound up as soon as possible.
If any of you are at tonight’s meeting, we’d appreciate  your thoughts about what went on.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Achievement list plan rolls on ...

As expected, the BBI steamrollered on when last Thursday's call-in of the cabinet decision to create a “Roll of Achievement” to go on to the borough's website was rubber stamped. Our thanks go to an anonymous reporter who sent us this account of what went on ...

“The call in of the cabinet decision to proceed with the establishment of a Roll of Achievement service by the Borough Council heard that among Councillor Richard Austin's circle of acquaintances the establishment of such a roll is a permanent item of concern and conversation.
“Such seemingly repetitive conversations had caused our leader to decide that the establishment of such a scheme of recognition, on top of present three tier recognition scheme, was a necessity in these straitened times.
“Although Councillor Austin's report to the cabinet had mentioned a mere £500 as the cost of officer and committee time, IT use, and research as to bona fides of an unknown number of nominees, legal opinions as to safe wording of recognition (these last two points obviously new to Councillor Austin's thinking) he now admitted he could not be exact as to the cost of this new scheme - although there was already a queue of applicants.
“But he was sure its establishment would make Boston a more attractive destination and would thus be jolly good value for whatever money.
“As to whether the scheme would be carried on by any future Administration after elections in May '11 - that seemed to matter not one jot to all six BBI committee members present who duly backed their leader's scheme, as was required of them, to carry the vote..
“After which half of them left before an obviously 'unimportant' discussion on PRSA funding, past and present.
“A matter, seemingly, of limited interest to BBI party members. Probably too many zeros in the figures for them to understand! ‘All those round things,darling, they just give me a headache!'
“Well done those who did stay!”


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Busy week looms ...

There's a busy week ahead on Boston Eye ...
Among the items to look forward to -
... How Austin’s amigos backed his roll of achievement - many of them finding it more important than discussing the funding of the Princess Royal Sport Arena.
... How Boston BID has given the borough the finger just days before a special meeting calls for it to be shut down.
Join us every day for the blog that speaks its mind about what’s going on in Boston.


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

The week in words

The most used words in Boston Eye in the last seven days

Click on the photo to enlarge it

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Week ending 15th October

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Market well – or you’ll miss it ... Boston had a continental market last weekend. You didn’t know? We can’t say that we’re surprised. It was tucked away at the rear of the Ingram Memorial, obscured by a trader’s large truck. As well as being out of sight the event also went almost unadvertised. Although it was apparently organised by Boston Borough Council, it rated just a one line mention in the council’s events diary published on its website – almost invisible within the listings of the Lincoln Comedy Festival. We won’t be surprised if events like this eventually fade away. We recall the Christmas Continental Market of a few years ago, which traders who had travelled hundreds of miles abandoned after being dumped on a limb in West Street. It’s almost as if the borough wants these things to fail and vanish rather than giving them the billing and prominence that they deserve.
None too well policed … On Market Day we noted a couple of PCSOs giving a motorist who’d parked in Strait Bargate a hard time because her vehicle was impeding the smooth progress of the sainted Into Town bus service. The officer, who seemed to be a little heavy handed in his treatment of the driver, apparently failed to realise that the bus could easily have passed the offending car had the police’s own large pantechnicon plastered with notices telling us how wonderful our local cops are was not parked a mere six feet away … A lesson in public relations to us all.
Parking mad … As was the sight of a traffic warden patrolling Pump Square, and descending on any hapless motorist silly enough to stop for a split second, like a vulture on a piece of road kill. This technique is known as shooting fish in a barrel. We all know that parking is hard to find on market days, so we use wardens who are seldom seen on the other six days of the week to make a pile of easy money. It’s been suggested that the few remaining market stalls which now close The Green could – with a little ingenuity – be relocated on to the former poultry market, freeing up dozens of spaces for hard pressed drivers. But that might be too easy and helpful.
War of words - 1 … Another week, another record. Council Leader Richard Austin has a letter in the local press for a fifth consecutive week – although we can’t quite think why. It relates to an item in the Grantham Journal which appeared as long ago as September 17th and refers to a man whom Councillor Austin wrongly calls Nick Bowles. The man in question is in fact Nick Boles, Grantham’s new Conservative MP, who has called for South Kesteven District Council to be scrapped. It’s not clear whether Councillor Austin’s letter is addressed to the Grantham Journal or to Mr Boles, as it is somewhat confusingly written. He takes Mr Boles’s argument that “nobody in Britain feels a surge of pride when the name of their district is mentioned,” and uses it as a launch pad for yet another polemic on how great Boston is under the rule of “my council.” For once we find ourselves in agreement with the Leader. Whenever we hear mention of Boston under the BBI, we do feel a surge – but it usually passes after a liberal dose of Doctor J Collis Browne's mixture.
War of words – 2 … Meanwhile, in the remorseless BBI campaign to keep its name in the papers in the run up to next May’s elections, a letter appears congratulating everyone involved with the recent gala concert for the restoration appeal at Boston Stump. It is signed by Councillor Alison Austin. We are glad that she liked the show – but what does being a councillor have to do with it?
War of words – 3 … Fewer worries on this one. A third letter in the papers comes from our old friend, and "Mouth of the Haven," BBI Councillor Ramonde Newell. Its heading “No place for national party tribalism on local political scene” will spare most people the effort of reading further. In synopsis it is the same old rant blaming previous administrations for all the things that went wrong, and lauding the BBI for picking up the pieces. We assume that he is attempting to gain acceptance by repetition, and wouldn't last long on “Just a minute.”
Was this wheelie necessary? … A murder in Boston last week dominated the local headlines. But one of the pictures tells a story of its own.

We know that the police are hard pressed to buy the right sort of equipment, but really feel that they might have shown more consideration and sensivity by using something other  than a wheelie bin on which to string their evidence tape.
That's it for this week. Thanks for reading. Don’t forget tomorrow’s new feature … The Week in Words – our startling graphic which highlights which words appeared in Boston Eye most often during the week.


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Borough list of worthies

would be far too long

Another of Council Leader Richard “Papa Dick” Austin’s pet projects - a Boston “Roll of Achievement ” has been dragged back on to the agenda after complaints that it had been railroaded through by the BBI cabinet.
The idea is to create a permanent and accessible record for individuals with a connection with Boston and who have contributed to it.
It would be produced in electronic form and stored on the council’s website - with the idea that it will attract more visitors.
It is claimed that this will cost as little as £500, although sceptics have their doubts - particularly as part of this proposal it will be require a Roll of Achievement Committee and an Achievement Controller.
As is so often the case these days much of the arranging of this was done out of the public eye, and the cabinet decision was regarded as a done deal.
But tonight , the borough's Overview & Scrutiny - Performance Review Committee will decide whether the cabinet decision should stand, whether the cabinet should think again or whether the full council should review the plan.
Although it my seem like a storm in a teacup, this is yet another issue of the cabinet riding roughshod over the rest of the council - including its own non-cabinet party members.
And quite frankly, the idea of a Roll of Achievement seems pretty feeble.
Two examples  have been given of who might be placed on this list.  The are  local athlete Bernice Wilson and the late Ernest Bowser (1887-1969) who was big in drainage - which is another of the leader’s current obsessions.
Critics say that Boston borough council already has a community and civic award scheme and doesn’t need another one doing the same thing under a different name.
We have to say that we agree.
We have to add that give the nature of the two examples cited, whilst laudable in their own way, are so widely disparate that the list would be open to scores, it not hundreds of similarly “worthy” entries.
Not for the first time the leader has come up with an ill thought out idea that has gained approval simply because he is the man who commands the votes.


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Community room spat was

 "communication problem"

Yesterday's blog about the Boston community rooms has brought a swift response from Boston Borough Council Leader Richard Austin.
Councillor Austin tells Boston Eye:-
“The new chief Executive of CVS is appalled that a minor management issue has received coverage in Boston Eye. She has therefore set (sic) me the attached email as (sic) is entirely happy for you to publish it. Please check with her if you wish.”
The e-mail from Ladey Adey, the Chief Executive Officer South Lincolnshire Community and Voluntary Service says:-
“It has been drawn to my attention that has been a complaint against you by another Councillor plus a derogatory article in a blog of Boston Eye regarding the communications at the Community Rooms in Boston.
“As you know SL CVS and the Borough Council have piloted the Community Rooms and are working together to provide a space for community action to occur in Boston Town Centre. I feel that you are doing everything to support this project, and have acknowledged that when you visited the Community Rooms on 6th October you didn’t speak to the relevant person about the necessary ambitions for the exhibition. This was dealt with swiftly when I spoke with you the following day, and appropriate officers from the Council and SL CVS’s Senior Manager then set up various meetings to accommodate expectations and work out practicalities.
“It was therefore a communication problem which was dealt with to the satisfaction on (sic)  both sides. I am therefore, horrified and embarrassed to realize this has been picked up and used as a complaint. I can only apologize and trust (sic) will not adversely affect our working relationship.
With regards
Ladey.”
As Tony Hancock told the Lady Almoner in the Blood Donor:- “It’s nice to see the nobility doing their bit.”

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Now playing at

Community Rooms

 - a Boston farce!

We have to say that we’re less than happy with the way the so-called Empty Shops Grant Funding scheme is working in Boston.
We mentioned last week that what sounded like the first interesting exhibition by a local photographer had not started when advertised, and noted at the weekend that although it had been scheduled to begin on Saturday, it was to be closed again yesterday.
The venue is in the former card shop next to the former Sketchley’s, and has by some strange miracle of ownership become “The Giles School community arts space” - although sixteen other organisations expressed an interest in making use of it.
Not only that, but the “gallery” had barely opened when it acquired low level tables and chairs - hinting at the re-establishment of the creche facilities that help doom the hapless Haven Gallery - and for which the current premises are far too small.
Next door, the so called Community Rooms now look worse than they did when the shop was empty.
The windows are randomly plastered with leaflets - many of them identical, and most likely there to give some privacy to the volunteers who work therein ... but they make the place look as ragged and untidy as it did before.
At least it was peaceful.
But now volunteers have complained of being roughed up by the borough’s chief snake oil salesman, anxious to promote the “Boston 200” exhibition which “celebrates” the great flood of 1810 and combines it with a display about the history of Boston’s drainage and flood defence works.
By all accounts this would not appear to be going as well as expected, and the leader has clearly felt the need to drum up some enthusiasm for it
Staff at the community rooms - and let's not forget that these people are volunteers - were recently honoured with a visit from Councillor Richard Austin in “Papa Dick” mode and apparently ordered to move their office furniture to clear space for his display boards.
Not only that, but it’s also alleged that he had the impudence to command that they re-arranged appointments with clients so as not to clash with his silly sideshow.
Given the man involved, none of this surprises us, but it further underlines his inability to organise a booze-up in a brewery if he is struggling to create interest in an exhibition about flooding in a borough which is one of the most at risk in the country.
But back to the community project itself.
It was funded by a government grant of £52,631.58 to Boston Borough Council who promptly shrugged the job off on to Boston BID, who messed it up.
A total of £30,000 was allocated for the gallery and community hub.
Short term measures costing £12,000 to improve the outside of the shops and use graphics to decorate their windows do not seem to have happened.
Nor has there been any mention of longer term plans costing £10,000 to establish a grant scheme to offer new retailers occupying empty shops, funding towards business rates for their first year.
At this rate, when this mismanaged scheme comes up for review in March next year it looks as though there will be loads of money left over.
And guess what?
A report to the council on another pet project favoured by a small elite can easily take care of that should the inevitable occur.
“The NHS Healthy Eating Café project is currently being developed and already has significant committed funding; however further funding may be required for fit out costs. This project meets objectives of the Empty Shops Grant Funding and should be considered as a potential future project if all funding is not allocated.”
Expect no surprises!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

"True independence is only way to stand"

After last week’s mention of the amazing achievement by Borough Council Leader Richard “Papa Dick” Austin, in getting a letter published in one or another of our local “newspapers” on four consecutive weeks, it seems another letter hasn’t been quite so fortunate.
It has been sent by Independent Councillors Richard Leggott and John Storry, and reads:-

"We note that on the back of an Audit Report allowing that governance at Boston Borough is merely 'adequate' Councillor R. Austin is happy to encourage your readers to believe that Boston is one of the most improved councils in England.
“Adequate? Most improved? Yes,well, hmm?
“Linking these two descriptions together one must obviously ask how low had this Bypass Party dragged our Borough in their 40 months in power before the threat of direct Government Intervention forced these councillors to change their ways and take notice of an imposed Panel of External Advisors who, incidentally, intend to hang about until the outcome of 2011 election is known.
“I wonder why this was not mentioned by the Bypass Party leader.
“Whilst not wishing to discourage prospective candidates of any persuasion, there are at least two more good reasons for Independent minded people to be wary of signing up with the Boston Bypass 'Independent' Party.
“First: the Bypass Party is actually a registered political party which imposes a party whip on several occasions. This can hinder its members' ability to truly represent their varied communities' concerns.
“Second: anyone signing up with the Boston Bypass party will be joining a party that in four years in office will have spectacularly failed to fulfill its promise of securing a bypass for our town.
“No - if you really wish to represent your community on a local independent basis , be an Independent.
“Prospective Independents can seek helpful guidance from National Advisor Maggie Sullivan (tel: 0207 6643206) or do not hesitate to contact Independent Councillors Richard Leggott ( tel: 01205 280188) and John Storry (tel: 01205 354644).
Signed: Richard Leggott & John Storry"


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

This week we launch a new feature - the week in words. It's called a Word Cloud, and it ranks the number of times particular words have appeared in Boston Eye across the week in graphic form. We hope you like it. Click on the image to enlarge it.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Week ending Friday 8th October

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Killjoy was here ... We were saddened to read an item on Boston Borough Council’s website
(which was slavishly reproduced by our local “newspapers”) headlined “Illegal campers.” The story told how the council’s anti-social behaviour team “acted quickly” when locals complained about an “illegal campers’” site in Witham Country Park. But , the fearless team sounded more like killjoys when the borough handout went on to report “Taking into account the small amount of litter that surrounded the tents, mainly soft drink cans, crisp packet and sweet wrappers, it is thought the site was most likely to have been used by young people on a sleep out.” A night under the stars under canvas used to be a rite of passage for youngsters in happier times, and it is a crying shame that for once the borough hit squad couldn’t have acted more kindly, rather that clearing the site and taking the kids’ tents to their Fen Road depot where they will be kept for two weeks - presumably before being destroyed.
Letter lout ... We believe that the inexorable campaigning to keep the BBI name in the headlines in the long run up to next May’s local elections has set something of a record. The Beloved Leader, Councillor Richard “Papa Dick” Austin, has had a letter on one or another of the local papers for four weeks in a row. Admittedly, the cunning old councillor has achieved this not through originality, but by staggering his missives so that the same letter appears in different papers on consecutive weeks, but the fact remains that the only party making its mark in the local papers is his. Don't be surprised if the opposition parties fall flat on their faces next May - which they will if they don’t soon get their act together.
The lamppost is the one on the left ... And to prove getting into the papers isn’t that hard, the Leader manages it again in a photo to promote the Boston 200 flood fest. He provides what the used to call “foreground interest” by posing beside a lamp post carrying a banner for the event. Fortunately, the paper had the forethought to caption the picture so that we know who’s who.
Snap unhappy ... Those of you who've paid a visit to the “Room52Gallery Giles Arts” (The Giles School community arts space) to view what sounded like a highly promising and relevant exhibition, will have come away disappointed. The advertised display of historical photographs and artefacts by local photographer/historian Steve Woolhouse failed to materialise - even though it was promised “from October 4th.” Instead, a hand scribbled note on a flyer tells us that it will start tomorrow. Who is running this facility? And since when did it become the property of the Giles School and “supported by the Arts in Empty Shops scheme and the Boston Bid (sic)? More on that next week.
Words of Wisdom ... The same flat cap, the same cheeky sense of humour. Yes, Sir Norman Wisdom may be have left us but that doesn’t mean comedy has died along with him.

Our photo above shows the distinct resemblance between the late, lamented slapstick comic, and another comedian whose slightly less funny turns are famous sadly only on the Boston political stage. Can you tell who is whom? We’ll give you a clue. Norman Wisdom was proud of the fact that he never wore glasses whilst the other is naturally short-sighted.
Now they know how it feels ... Lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth at County Hall on the news that government funding delays will force back the start date of building work on Lincoln's £130 million eastern bypass, which was planned to begin in 2013. Councillors were miffed that despite giving unanimous approval to the road on Monday, the government may not come up the the cash on time. Chief among the moaners was the county’s highways overlord and Mr Jolliman lookalike Councillor William Webb, who very recently as good as said that Boston will never get its by-pass and that a distributor road may not even be on the cards. We hope that a delay for the citizens of Lincoln may give him a greater sense of empathy with the plight facing Boston.
Lowering the tone ... The on-off debate about the abilities of the town’s resident poet and busker, opens a wider issue about the quality of music heard on our streets. Recently our ears have been assaulted by two newcomers - both female - who crouch by shopfronts beating the living daylights out of either a guitar or an accordion. We like street entertainment. If well done (like the extremely talented accordionist who appears in Strait Bargate occasionally) it enhances what the borough calls the “street scene.” Done badly, it spoils a morning out shopping, and can ever seem threatening. If the council can summon up a squad to ruin an innocent bit of fun by a few kids in a park, surely they must be able to police the cacophonous offerings of some of your so-called “street musicians.”
And finally ... Has the Mayor been caught in the act of  sending an unconventional greeting to the voters of Boston?

We’re sure that he wasn't - but thought that the photo might amuse some of you. The shot appears in the current newsletter of the Butterfly Trust.


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Numbers add up to

 need for more job creation ...

As Boston Borough Council struggles to get to grips with the concept of equality, news comes in that the Borough tops the list of increased immigration among Lincolnshire district authorities.
It leads all three data sources used to calculate this sort of thing - the National Insurance numbers allocated to overseas nationals (NINos), the Worker Registration Scheme (WRS) records data, and Flag 4 records data.
Boston now has 30 more registrations under NINo than it did in the last year - a total of 2,170 representing slightly more than three and a half per cent of the population.
Perhaps surprisingly, given the nature of employment usually undertaken, Boston’s total is vastly ahead of our neighbours in East Lindsey which stands at a mere 300.
Boston continues to be ranked fifth for the number of NINo registrations out of the 40 East Midlands districts.
Only Leicester, Nottingham, Northampton and Derby are above Boston, all of which have populations of over 200,000 compared to Boston’s 59,000.
And Boston, along with South Holland and Lincoln, make up three of the top ten
districts regionally for NINos.
Interestingly, the breakdown of nationalities shows the borough’s dominant national migrant group now hails from Latvia, followed by Lithuania, then Poland, Romania, Bulgaria making up the top five.
Oddly, the data on the industry and occupation types international migrants are working in tells us that the majority in Boston - almost 60% - work in “Administration, business and managerial services” - whatever they may be, followed by around 40% in “agriculture activities.”
Top ten occupations in the borough are process operatives and farm workers.
The Flag 4 records show NHS registrations and give a clue as to the size of family groups in the county, as they include youngsters up to 16, and people over 65.
Again, Boston tops the Lincolnshire list with 1,963 registrations - up 36 on the year.
Meanwhile, at 3.4% the unemployment rate in Boston is the second highest among the county’s thirteen economic zones, and also the second highest among Lincolnshire’s local authority districts.
What do all these the figures tell us?
They tell us that more and more people are chasing fewer and fewer jobs, which suggests that increasing employment ought to be much higher on the borough’s agenda than it is at present.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Goody Two Shoes is old hat - meet Goody Three Shoes!

We ranted on yesterday about the borough’s latest survey - this time into hate crime. The survey has the avowed aim of encouraging more people to “report” hate crimes - the effect of which will be to boost Boston's crime figures perhaps in a quite disproportionate way.

The survey has its roots in a bigger document - The Equality and Fairness Strategy 2010-13 - fifteen pages packed with worthy phrases and promises to make the sun shine on Boston and its residents 24 hours a day.
As we said yesterday no one supports people who make others’ lives harder to live through unfairness or inequality.
But the strategy tends to dwell on the bad news at the expense of the good.
The statistics in the report show that reported hate crime in the county in the last year totalled 274 racist hate crimes, 25 homophobic hate crimes, seven disability hate crimes and three transphobic crimes.
That’s a total of 309 crimes in a county with a population of around 700,000 - which represents 0.04%.
Again, as we said yesterday, whilst no-one condones actions against people because of their race or sexuality, we still think that in many instances such actions should not really be called “crimes.”
To do so is to open the door to more and more things that one person does which another person disapproves of being called crimes, which would be very silly.
As part of its plan to improve our lives, Boston Borough Council intends to "increase the number of citizens who feel that people of different backgrounds get along together in their area.”
What good will that do?
And we’d also like to be a fly on the wall when the borough council undertakes its next “major drama-based training programme of equality and diversity awareness for council employees.”
The borough's highest priority by 2013 is “to increase the number of people who say
they receive fair treatment from local services.”
All told, this report runs to about 2,700 words, many of them stating the obvious and making promises that can never be kept. All it will do is take up oodles of time and money to pursue aims and ambitions that will achieve little if anything worthwhile.
As we said yesterday, much of this seems to be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
And - if you’ll excuse the expression - it all seems a little airy-fairy!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Surprise, surprise! Sledgehammer used to crack nut.

In the past few days much has been made of the new Equalities Act, which critics say will make life even tougher for employers.
The concept of Third-Party Harassment, for instance, means that if someone takes offence at a joke or banter in the office – even if it’s not aimed at them or anything to do with them – they can sue their employer.
Discrimination by Association means that if a worker thinks they’ve missed promotion because, for instance, their brother is gay, they can sue for discrimination by association. Or they can claim that their employer believed them to be gay even if they are not and use their “sexuality” as grounds for a claim.
Yes, it’s daft, isn’t it.
But not to be left out, Boston Borough Council is making its own contribution in the form of - yes, you’ve guessed - yet another survey ... this time into “Hate Crime.”
Hate crime is defined as “any criminal offence, committed against a person or property, motivated by the offender’s prejudice or hate against people because of their gender, race, religion, disability or sexual orientation.”
The borough tells us:- “It is believed that incidents of hate crime are under-reported.”
We take that phrase to mean that the borough actively wants more reports of such crimes - which, of course, may or may not be justified.
Typically, the survey devotes just eight questions to the matter under discussion - and fifteen
to the “getting to know you” sections which pries intrusively into details of age, race, religion, disability sexuality et al.
It appears that to be guilty of a hate crime, you often need to do no more than “demonstrate hostility” towards the “victim” which we guess could include not talking to them.
Or, in the case of homophobia, guilt can be assumed for showing “fear and dislike” for people who identify themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual.
And the good news for people who like this sort of busywork is that - “For every primary victim there are likely to be numerous other people affected by the attack.”
Obviously, prejudice in any shape or form needs to be eradicated. But it is often merely the result of ignorance, and education rather than criminalisation should be the answer that we seek.
And let’s not forget that there are some groups of people who because of age, religion, or just plain ignorance will be deemed guilty of crimes that they cannot help commit.
Despite the melting pot that Boston has become in recent years, the borough has - by and large - assimilated newcomers from other nations with courtesy and kindness.
What the borough is seeking to do is to create disharmony where none exists.
There are enough other issues of importance in Boston that need addressing without trying to drum up allegations of crime - which is the clear intention of this so-called “survey.”
All that will happen is that this unnecessary intrusion by Boston Borough Council will produce an increase in crime statistics, and once again put the borough high in a league of bad boys, when in fact no real problem exists.


You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

A tale of dinosaurs, big yellow motors ... and political hearses ...

After Boston Borough Council Leader Richard Austin’s recent call for candidates to stand for the Bypass Independents at next May’s local elections, we've received another plea - this time from Better Boston Group member Councillor Brian Rush ...

I am hoping that there are some honest individuals within our Borough who will come forward for Election in 2011, to replace the failed and disappointing Boston Bypass Independents.
We can only hope that this time we unearth candidates who truly cherish and value principles of honesty and integrity.
The warning I would give to the frustrated and angry people of this Borough would be to resist the temptation to re-install some of those past political dinosaurs that were rejected in 2007, it was they who caused us to have been burdened by the incompetent Bypass party.
Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems, and Independents - all who were in office at the time - failed to recognize or respond to the arrival of a Big Shiny Yellow Motor, revving up, in the council car park.
They were to blind to see that this beautiful ‘Big Yellow Limousine’, was not only a vehicle of hope for the people, but would also be, for them, a political hearse!
This was Richard Austin, blatantly claiming ownership of the Boston Bypass Independents.
Was this really his inspiration and invention?
No, it never was, the irony is that it was the brainchild of one Councillor A. Dorrian, who presented us with the Bypass dream; it was only when Councillor Austin hijacked the dream that he turned it into a nightmare.
This was his first act of treachery, robbery without violence, nor shame.
He adopted the actions of a common burglar, having been alerted politically, to the ‘open window’ of Boston`s need for a Bypass!
He disguised himself with the clothes of the Bypass Pressure Group, printed 32 counterfeit tickets, and began hawking them around offering a free spin in his `New Yellow Limousine`.
His offer was seized upon by some less than illustrious characters.
These joy-riders, now our ruling elected representatives, frantically scratched around in every corner of their pockets, casting aside all sense of respectability, and principle.
They eagerly lined up, threw away those coins of high value, like dignity, honesty, openness, and truth, just so they could get to swank around in the ‘Big Yellow Limousine.’
For some, a once in a in a lifetime chance of personal elevation; for others a chance to regain some long past self importance.
Of course the reality is that this was only ever about enabling him, and his ‘Star Candidate,’ to scam enough ‘fuel’ to get them both to their craved for, destinations as Leader and Mayor.
As suspected, those that know him would know that he never really had the skill to drive this ‘Big Yellow Limousine,’ and of course it was not long before the doors began to fall off.
His route map consisted of driving around in ever decreasing circles, using up precious, irreplaceable, fuel.
The constant exposure to stormy weather began to cause leaks and erosion, and the old girl quickly began to lose her lustre.
And of course her big MoT is looming in May, and there appears to be a shortage of genuine replacement parts. Oh Dear ...
Nearly four years on nothing significant has been achieved, save for some cosmetic tinkering - and to think all our troubles have been caused by that `unclosed window`.So who was the fool that left it open?
I can exclusively reveal today, the fault lies with a group of aged tourists, who had spent many years gadding about on a Mystery Tour.
A tour that had never needed a route map, even the designated driver didn`t know where they were going.
The most important thing of course was to avoid Lincoln, the journey then would not be unpleasant and the route could always stay the same.
So, every few years they each got a ticket, got on the bus and nodded off, woke up got another ticket and back to Noddyland.
These passengers were so selfishly comfortable remaining in the past, but cared very little for our people’s future.
This out of touch, mixed political group, claimed to have tried very hard to do something to cure the ‘draught from the window,’ but the truth is they stood and watched as the town ground to a halt.
Our worry now should be, that some of these old timers re-surface in 2011, or worse still, those other useless passengers from the Big Yellow Limousine, get to swap their seats for a present day Mystery Tour.
If that were to be allowed to happen this town will surely be driven to the point of no return.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.