Who else will throw tricorn in the ring in bid to be elected mayor?

English Democrat councillors David Owens and Elliott Fountain seem to be undergoing something of a mixed set of fortunes at present. Whilst Boston Borough Council is treating them in much the same way as it did when Councillor Owens was first elected for the BNP in 2008, the other BBC – the British Broadcasting Corporation - sees them as a valuable source of news.
Friday’s Look North highlighted a planned campaign by councillor Fountain to become the first elected mayor of Boston.
The idea of an elected mayor was an option that was discussed and rejected by the borough council last year – and it then went on to adopt what’s been called the strong leadership model … the rules of which it has already flouted.
However, it appears that the public can still request a referendum on the proposals if five per cent of the borough’s population petitions the council - and with an “official” population of 85,000, just 2,950 voters would be needed … a not impossible number to find.
It’s reckoned that a referendum would cost between £50,000 and £75,000
Enter Councillor Elliott.
He told Look North's political editor, Tim Iredale, that he believes mass immigration has not been good for Boston, and would like big local firms to employ at least 50% of English workers.
It’s a view that we think might well strike a chord if it became a counter in the political game of snakes and ladders.
It’s also interesting to speculate on who might come out of the woodwork if the public called for a referendum.
We are sure that there are many members of Boston’s self-appointed elite who would want to throw their hats – or hairnets – into the ring for the chance to run Boston for four years … and who would not sit idly by and risk letting someone else snaffle the local crown jewels.
We shall see.
Meanwhile, it seems that the English Democrats are still struggling for acceptance by the rank and file within Worst Street.
Councillor Owens has previously reported “a few challenges” trying to get information from officers at the council “due to the Chief Executive apparently banning councillors and officers speaking unless it’s through the head of department.”
He tells readers of his blog: “Now of course, I expect that the heads of each department are very busy people, so the last thing they need is councillors constantly calling them to seek advice and/or clarification on ward matters … the upshot of that has been having to wait days to get calls returned and emails answered.”
Councillor Owens reports that he e-mailed the Chief Executive for a reply and was told that it has always been "protocol" to conduct matters in the way he described.
“Well that's news to me, as I have numerous emails from officers over the years where that was not as per the ‘protocol’ he describes,” says Councillor Owens.
We questioned this attitude the other day.
The English Democrats nationally seem to be political pariahs – but at a local level, the people who represent them are councillors first and foremost, and should be treated as such.
More than 3,600 people live in Fenside Ward, and they are entitled to unhindered representation from their councillors.
This cannot happen if judgemental staff are allowed to hamper a councillor’s efforts through reasons of personal - and unprofessional - prejudice.

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 27th May

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Despite our best efforts to get the new ruling Tory elite to see some sense and share more equitably the duties of councillors representing the borough on outside organisations, it again showed itself as the BBI in blue on Wednesday night.

The Conservatives snaffled 59 appointments, plus fourteen reservations for cabinet members. The Independents gained seven appointments, and the BBI two. Labour – with just one nomination - got no appointments at all, and the English Democrats did not receive any nominations. There were also three non-council member appointments. This makes things even worse than they looked when we blogged on Wednesday. According to our maths there were a total of 73 Conservative appointments and nine from other parties. The other parties broadly represent 40% of the council’s composition, yet received only 14% of the jobs.

It seems that sorry really is the hardest word. We reported last week that former BBI leader Richard Austin had breached the council’s Code of Conduct by disclosing confidential details of a meeting with a member of the council to an officer of another council. As a result, the council’s Consideration and Hearings sub-committee censured Councillor Austin and ordered him to send a written apology to the complainant. Despite that, we hear that an apology has not been forthcoming. We wrote last week that – although the hearing took place on 20th April, we understood that the publication of the ruling was withheld until after the elections, and asked if there was one law on Boston Borough Council for Councillor Austin and another for everyone else. Given his contempt not only for a fellow councillor, but now apparently also for the judgement and ruling of his peers, we see no reason to change that view.

Our quest last week to find an appropriate collective noun for groups of leaders – as Boston Borough Council now has so many – brought a helpful response from Councillor Richard Leggott, the Independent group spokesman. “Please refer to our deputy appointments as - a new word coming up here - a  logicality of leaders,” he requested. “Logical, because group leaders/spokespersons are often accompanied to appropriate meetings by their deputies. Such deputies, unless they have been officially nominated, can be challenged. Often a single nominated deputy spokesperson will not be the group member with the most knowledge of the meeting’s theme. Therefore, to the Independents, it is logical to have a multitude of nominated deputies to overcome these problems in order to be able to serve the council best.” We are sure that Mr Spock would approve.

We scanned the local “newspapers” in vain this week for news of the plight of the Boston Chamber of Commerce, which we hear has run into difficulties – but yet again, it appears that another important local story has been missed. If what we hear is correct, then local businesses will find themselves without the useful co-ordination that such groups provide. And there may well be knock-on effects for other organisations as well …

Way back in March we reported that the borough council’s list of payments over £500 revealed how much the council’s Chief Executive earned  - sorry, was paid - between November last year and February. Richard Harbord was paid through his company, Mrf UK Ltd, rather than the normal payroll system – in which case the amount would have not been sullied by the public gaze. However, we note that all reference to Mr Harbord and his company has vanished from the payments list for March and April. Does this mean he has gone “on staff?” We somehow doubt it. But we think it is noteworthy that - when people think you don't know what a payment is for, they are happy to publish it - but once the details are exposed they are somehow made secret again. Unless, of course, Mr Harbord is doing it all for love!
A very wise letter from someone whose name has been associated with law in Boston for many years appeared in the Daily Telegraph newspaper earlier this week. The letter, from Richard Tinn, read: “The law, those who pass laws, and those who administer the law and give judgment are all servants of the people and not their masters. If the law is allowed to be manipulated by those clever enough and with money enough, it is (irrespective of the outcome for them) the reputation of the law that suffers, and with it respect for the law. Respect for the law is already low. It must not be allowed to sink lower, otherwise it is law and order itself that is at risk.” In the wake of some of our recent writings, we thought how well this summarised things if - broadly speaking – the word “council” replaced the word “law” in the letter.

In these desperate days, it seems that local estate agents will try every trick to make a house for sale look more attractive to a potential buyer. However, we thought we heard the sound of the bottom of a barrel being scraped when we read that among the owners of one delightful property was “the noted Boston historian, G.S. Bagley.” The team remembers George Bagley – even though he was in his prime half a century ago. In those days he was the “local editor” of the Lincolnshire Echo – which then produced a Boston edition. This was not an especially arduous task, involving as it did sitting in court or attending meetings of Boston Borough Council – which left plenty of time for extra-curricular activity. As a result, George produced Boston: Its Story and People (1986) – arguably his best effort, although hard going in places – plus the arcane Behind-the-scenes Story of a parish: Skirbeck Quarter, Boston (1982) Floreat Bostona : History of Boston Grammar School from 1567, (1985) and Samuel Partridge : a Lincolnshire minister and magistrate (2003.) It’s scarcely Simon Schama but if it sells the house …

Speaking of desperation, this week’s Boston Standard wins that particular award. “Look what’s packed inside” screams a front page headline. “91 LOCAL news stories, leisure reports and pictures; 235 LOCAL faces featured – is yours one? - and 57 LOCAL sports stories and pictures. We feel sorry for the sad sack who had the job of counting this lot up. But far from being something to brag about, we think that it highlights just what a poor job the paper is doing when it can come up with so little content from a borough with a population of at least 59,000. And given that most of the photos are of groups, who can they be sure there are exactly 235? We counted at least 237!

Having said that, the Standard continues to entertain – albeit unintentionally. The following items caught our beady eye. The first, headlined “Hip hip hooray for patients” tells us

"Returning home more quickly than ever, eh?  Probably because they can now run, whereas before even walking was an effort!.  And  a “… fractured neck or femur,?" We think that “neck of femur” would be more likely.
And then – this being Boston – an advertiser wisely chose to exercise caution when seeking what we assume to be toys.

Better to be safe than sorry, though. As we said, this being Boston you might end up with someone’s cuddly but unwanted rottweiler!
That’s it for this week. We wish you an enjoyable Bank Holiday weekend. We won’t be publishing on Monday, but will be back as normal on Tuesday 31st.

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

At last, some things on which we all should agree

As we said before the election, probably the most ambitious manifesto was the one drawn up by Labour – but our cynical side (yes, we have one!) told us that this was fairly easy to do, given that the party was not contesting enough seats to gain control of Boston Borough Council, and would not therefore be able to deliver on its promises.

Having said that, ideas are ideas, and Labour is now putting flesh on the bones by expanding on a few of their proposals.
Most important of these is the call to make Strait Bargate pedestrian friendly again.
On its website, Labour reminds us of the broadcast debate ahead of the election at which all parties -apart from the Bypass Independents - agreed that Strait Bargate should cease to be a bus lane which pedestrians are grudgingly allowed to use.
“It is no longer a place of relative safety, where children and older folk can walk without worrying about vehicles. It is no longer such a pleasant place to take visitors to our town, or to sit and talk to friends and neighbours, or munch on a bag of chips,” says the website. “The incessant sound of beepers has put paid to that, along with the seats turned in towards the shops rather than to what SHOULD be the pedestrian walkway.
“The plain and simple truth is, there was never any need for the buses to run through Strait Bargate and the fact is – they don’t come through Strait Bargate during May Fair and still manage to function perfectly well.”
The newly-elected Labour councillors promise to campaign to make Strait Bargate a pedestrian area once again - and given what everyone said on the wireless, we cannot see why this should be a problem.
But we bet that it will, and that the buses will still be menacing pedestrians and polluting the air with noise and fumes in four years’ time.
Another item on the list is the eradication of dog fouling – which again should be something that can be agreed by all.
“Our new councillors will be urging the new Conservative administration to reinstate a dog warden, as this would have a major impact on our estates - firstly by removing stray dogs; and secondly enforcing the horrific environmental blight of dog fouling in our streets and parks.”
Boston is very fortunate in that it probably has more pedestrian access to waterside walks than most other towns in Britain.
In places like Cambridge, this benison is seen as a huge asset, and exploited to attract visitors.
In Boston, we make nothing of it – except to treat it as a handy loo for Rover, and it is right that this should be stopped.
Finally, Labour tells us: “We have started campaigning to bring back Party in the Park.
“Over the last couple of years, people have been telling us how much they have missed Party in the Park as they felt that it was the social event of the year.
“The origin of Party in the Park was that it was conceived and campaigned for by your previous Labour councillors because they understood that Boston had a heart, and that a cultural event such as Party in the Park created a great sense of pride in our community. Nobody could deny how successful it was.
“Sadly the miserly Boston Bypass Independent Party councillors never supported it because it wasn’t their idea and they axed it saying it was ‘a waste of money.’ We promised in our manifesto that if elected, we would resurrect the issue of Party in the Park. Well some of us have been elected and we intend to keep our promise. We will campaign vigorously to reinstate Party in the Park. Sadly – we are likely to be too late to reinstate it this year, but we believe that 2012 would be an excellent year, as it is also the Queen’s Golden Jubilee and the Olympics year, to bring our local communities together.”
This is where we part company with Labour's ambitions.
Our recollection was that the Party in the Park (it needs a definite article) was created as part of the celebrations to mark the millennium – and also because of an almost childish love of fireworks by certain senior council members and officers at the time.
The year the BBI seized power they neglected to check whether or not the event had cancellation insurance – and as bad luck would have it, it didn’t, and it was called off due to bad weather.
It was kicked into touch – rightly we believe – because in the worsening financial climate it became increasing untenable to justify such a huge expenditure of taxpayers’ money.
The only way it could be reintroduced would be if it was privately funded. This would inevitably mean introducing an admission charge – and also lifting the completely unnecessary ban on drinking in the park for the weekend in question.
We think that the first action would wipe out the party’s appeal overnight.
The second would be yet another piece of hypocrisy by which the council breaks its own laws when it feels like it – as will again be the case with the Fake Festival in August.
However, Labour’s plans are a start – and two out of three ain’t bad!
In the meantime, we were interested to see an appeal on the borough council website calling for an end to the dumping of garden waste in Staniland Road. This has been a long standing Labour cause célèbre, and we are pleased to see that it has at last been taken up officially – without acknowledgement of course!

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

.

Let's share the jobs

 a bit more fairly

As Boston Borough Council resumes business this evening, it gets on with the job of making appointments.

As well as appointing the Leader, councillors will also be selecting members of committees, chairmen and vice-chairmen and making appointments to outside organisations.
This latter group comprises more than forty groups with which Boston Borough Council has a relationship with in one way or another – ranging from organisations such as the local Age Concern, to tourism organisations, drainage boards, health groups and the tiny and obscure local charities.
Surprisingly, the number of people wanting to do jobs like this is over subscribed rather than the reverse.
Whilst enthusiam is good, it also shows a worrying tendency for ruling council groups to want to hog the lot.
Of the total of 69 nominations – give or take, as the precise figure is unclear - 53 nominees are Conservative councillors, six are Independent, five are from the BBI, one from Labour, and none at all from the English Democrats.
If all this sounds familiar, one only has to cast one’s mind back four years – when the BBI pulled off precisely the same stunt to howls of protest from members of the various opposition parties.
The problem now is who to appoint.
Representing the council at an outside organisation would better be considered in the context of horses for courses rather than a desire to seek political dominance at all levels.
Given the composition of the council, it is clearly inequitable for so many Conservatives to be on the list.
After all, there are only 19 of them in total – constituting just over 60% –  so the level of nominations is clearly unfair and disproportionate.
Between now and tonight, we think that it would be a good idea for some of the nominated Tories to consider whether they really want some of these jobs, and how the council may in fact be better represented if a wider political spectrum was presented to outsiders.
Quite a number of BBI members have more experience than many of the newly elected Conservatives, and the same is true of members of the Independent and some of Labour ranks.
And why, we wonder, are the English Democrats getting the cold shoulder?
Don’t bother to answer that.
We had hoped that by now, the powers that be might have realised that at the local political level, people are councillors first (or should be) and party members second.
Whilst we wouldn’t impugn the motives of many nominees, newly-elected councils often see a stampede for jobs like these without the people who want them realising what is involved in terms of time, work and knowledge.
The end result is that people fall by the wayside, fail to turn up at meetings, and deprive the council of a say in an organisation which often needs it.
We hear of one such example with former Councillor Peter Jordan, who failed to attend the twice yearly meetings of the Rural Commission for three years until he was replaced by Councillor Richard Austin (whose attendance record is unknown.)
Let’s not forget that first and foremost, our councillors serve the people, not themselves, and that there is still time to try to balance out these appointments more fairly – and possibly more appropriately.

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

Parking, rescue boats and roadworks on  Boston's county agenda

Friday saw another full meeting of Lincolnshire County Council, where Boston got more than its fair share of attention.
The headlines:
• Resident parking schemes could be here soon.
• Boston may get a dedicated rescue boat
• And Boston’s finally paid its dues for the road improvement scheme.
First with a question was Conservative Councillor Mike Gilbert - who represents Boston East - asking Highways supremo Councillor William Webb to update the progress of decriminalised parking in the county and the development of residents’ parking zones.
How timely, Councillor Webb replied, explaining that a proposal will be put to the Highways, Transport and Technology Scrutiny committee in June, with proposals going to the Department of Transport in December with a view to implementing the scheme in June and July of 2012.
“One of the concerns which has been raised is the issue over off-street parking, and I want to make it absolutely clear that Lincolnshire County Council has no designs whatever on off street parking or car parking charges in any of the districts or boroughs in the county. We are only concerned with on-street parking. Allied with this will be - in certain parts of the county and certain of the towns - residents’ parking schemes which will run alongside the CPE (civil parking enforcement) concerns and will be dealt with hopefully as a package deal.”
Next out of the trap was former Boston BBI Councillor Ramonde Newell, representing Boston West as an Independent at county level, with a blood-curdling account of a recent accident in Boston when a car ran through the metal crash barrier on Willoughby Road, and fell 15 feet into the Maud Foster Drain.
“I understand that the fire engine from Boston was on the scene in about four minutes,” said Councillor Newell, which led him neatly to a subject which has become a hobby horse on his visits to Lincoln.
“Unfortunately, the Swift Water Rescue Boat and team had been removed from Boston to Spalding some time ago. The rescue boat and team were thus 16 miles away in Spalding. Miraculously, the three young men in the car managed to get out of it as it sank. They swam to safety. They were clearly very lucky to escape a watery death. “My questions are: has an investigation and a report on this very serious matter been carried out, and has an updated risk assessment been carried out to see if the Swift Water Rescue Boat and team should return to Boston?”
A good question for Boston – but one which fails to take into account what might have been asked had the boat been moored in town and the accident had occurred in Spalding.
But there was light at the end of the tunnel.
Councillor Peter Robinson, who looks after the county’s Community Safety, replied:
“Swift water assets in Lincolnshire are extremely stretched and their deployment is obviously a difficult decision. There is deep water in many places in Lincolnshire, and frankly, in this particular case, from what you’ve explained, I think it unlikely that the nearness of a swift water rescue team would have actually arrived to save lives of people in that car had they not made their own escape. However, on a much brighter note, I am glad to say that as a result of Exercise Watermark we have received the promise of extra funding from central government for a further nine or ten water rescue units, and when we get those, then I am sure that we will be in a better position to spread adequate water rescue services around much more of Lincolnshire - and I hope that will include Boston.
It was left to Tory Councillor Andrea Jenkyns, of Boston North West, to close the local questions with another for Councillor Webb, asking him for comment on the recently-completed improvements to highways in Boston - were they satisfactory and had all the work been completed?
We never quite understand the point of questions like these – other than to give the portfolio holders the chance to brag about what’s been going on in their department – and Miss Jenkyns has ‘previous’ with this type of question.
“I have been to Boston several times in the last few days” declared Councillor Webb, as though this depicted him as somehow either brave or foolhardy.
“I am sure all those who go through Boston will agree that the Spalding Road, Liquorpond Street and Sleaford Road improvements have worked very well indeed. “We’re not finished yet by any means. We’re now working on Spilsby Road. We’re doing the junction, we’re turning two sets of traffic lights into one – the Leader will be pleased about that - and we have more work still to do in other parts of the town. “So please bear with us, but we are delighted that the due funding from Boston Borough Council has arrived and as far as the future public transport infrastructure is concerned that will be largely under the control of Boston Borough Council, but the County Council continues to give a good service we hope and believe to the people of Boston in improving the circulation of traffic.”

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

Stop fief! -
ruling Boston is
for four years
– not just for Christmas!

Tonight, in a figurative, rather than a literal sense, the new Boston Borough Council totters officially into action.
Its brief meeting will elect a new Mayor and Deputy, and pat the old one and his deputy on the head with a vote of thanks. Speaking of the outgoing Mayor, it would be cavalier of us not to acknowledge old Obe-Wan’s sterling fund raising efforts which have brought in more than £5,000 each for Macmillan Cancer Support and the Stump restoration appeal. Well done that man!
Tonight’s session will then adjourn until Wednesday when it approves the meeting schedule for the year ahead, appoints a leader, committee chairmen and representatives to outside organisations.
We already know who’s who on the council cabinet.
The problem is, we know nothing about their capabilities.
When the BBI appointed its star chamber four years ago it merely listed names, followed by the title of the portfolio held.
This time around, the list of duties is specific and exhaustive.
Leader Peter Bedford, for instance, will have special responsibility for coastal strategy, strategic planning, conservation, heritage, the Local Development Framework, county and regional partnerships, the transformation programme, development control, Port of Boston, regeneration and media.

Bin hard at work all day!

Whew!
 As another example, Councillor Mike Brookes (right)  will take on responsibility for refuse and recycling, street cleansing, parish councils, democratic services, performance and improvement, grounds maintenance and green waste.
The poor man will never get any rest!
The remaining five members of the cabinet are equally burdened, and we have to say that we never realised that such a wide range of skills could be commanded by so few people.
Or can they?
The thumbnail sketches painted by the candidates themselves told us little about the talents they might bring to running a local authority
“I have lived in Boston all my life” may well be a sign of poor judgement to some people … rather than a ringing endorsement of their suitability to steer the direction of a multi million pound department.
Perhaps a little more salesmanship from the ruling group is needed to persuade voters that the square pegs are in the square holes - and not vice versa.
Something else that we have mentioned before is the business of the leadership itself.
Wednesday’s meeting will appoint the leader – a rubber stamping task apparently – but from this year, the leadership rules for Boston … and every other council for that matter … have undergone some changes.
Councillor Bedford has “clarified” his position as leader of the council, saying he is dedicated to the job for the next two years at least. Beyond that he said he will have to rethink once Lincolnshire County Council elections had been held.
However, the council has adopted a new leadership model under government changes which establish certain requirements.
One of these says that once the leader is elected, he or she will be remain in office for the four year term corresponding to his or her term as councillor.
The rules go on to say that during his/her term of office, the Leader may cease to be Leader by virtue of death or disqualification, but may only be removed from office by a council resolution.
The rules allow for no halfway houses.
If Councillor Bedford is obliquely hinting that he plans to retire from politics,
If that is the case, then surely, he is breaking the letter – or at least the spirit of the new rule which stipulates a four year term if he does not plan to complete one at this stage of the game.
These requirements have not been drawn up for fun.
They are designed to take some of the sparring out of politics and guarantee a decent period of stability for the taxpayers.
A leader with a four year term has space in which to plan, and a decent timescale in which to carry out those plans.
Halve that time, and there is the risk of rushing to get things done – in case a different leader decides to change things around. There is also the risk of the appearance of those political vultures which begin to circle when they know that a departure is imminent and create unnecessary distractions from the job in hand.
Boston is not some sort of medieval fiefdom to be handed from one feudal lord to another. It is a place to be cherished and run in the best interests of the people.
Boston now has a second chance – and so do the Conservatives. Let’s hope they don’t waste it.

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

PS: Unusually, we also posted a blog over the weekend. It appears immediately below today’s offering, or you can go to it by clicking here.

They seek us here ...
they seek us there

Regular readers will know that we have always said that if the identity of the writers of Boston Eye became part of the public domain, we would cease blogging.
So we felt something of a frisson when we received an e-mail late yesterday saying that we had been “outed” – and by no less a figure than Boston Borough Council Leader Peter Bedford.
We were told that at a meeting at West Street in front of councillors and officers, he named a policeman called Mike, who handles freedom of information requests at Boston Police station.
We breathed again.
There is no-one of that name on the Boston Eye team, and never has been – so pro tem, the quill of Boston’s Scarlet Pimpernel continues scratch away.
But then we wondered why someone would want to try to silence the voice of a blog that many agree is a much-needed campaigning voice for Boston that should be heard rather than gagged.
People have tried in the past – usually by technical means – to silence us … and failed.
We can only think of two reasons.

• by making his announcement to other councillors and officers, the leader was trying to make them think that if they were to write to Boston Eye, he would get to know.

If that was the case it would be undemocratic – and a bad thing for Boston.

• The second thought that crossed our minds was that he believed we would close our blog, and thus stifle discussion of the council and its role.

If that was the case it would be undemocratic – and a bad thing for Boston.

Readers be aware!
If you write to Boston Eye to tell us something and ask for your contribution to appear anonymously we guarantee to honour that request and protect your identity.
We have stuck with this pledge through thick and thin for more than four years, and nothing that any outsider tries to do will change that fact.
See you on Monday …

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 20th May

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

If a flying saucer were to land outside Boston Borough Council’s West Street offices and the occupants uttered that time-honoured phrase take me to your leader,  they might well end up very confused. It was announced earlier in the week that of the borough’s 32 councillors, no fewer than thirteen  hold the status of leader or deputy leader – or in the case of the Independents, spokesman and deputies. .
That got us thinking about a suitable collective noun for a group of leaders. Obviously, it must be alliterative, so what do you think of these?
A Laputa of leaders. Laputa is an imagined land in Gulliver’s Travels where impractical projects are pursued, and practical projects neglected.
A Limbo of leaders. A state in which somebody or something is neglected or is simply left in oblivion.
A Lethargy of leaders. A state of sluggishness, inactivity, and apathy, and a state of unconsciousness resembling deep sleep.
A Lament of leaders. To express sorrow or regret – in Boston, previously about the work of a former administration.
A Languish of leaders. To exist or continue in miserable or disheartening conditions: to affect a wistful or languid air, especially in order to gain sympathy.
A Lunacy of leaders. Extreme foolishness or an instance of it
Or, given the numbers at Boston, a Legion of Leaders. Very great in number, a legion was a division of the Roman army, comprising between 3,000 and 6,000 soldiers.
We note that the former Boston Bypass Independents’ leader Councillor Richard Austin has stepped down to the role of deputy, and wonder if the decision has anything to do with the publication of a Consideration and Hearings Sub-Committee ruling that he had breached the council’s Code of Conduct. Naughty Councillor Austin disclosed confidential details of a meeting with a member of the council to an officer of another council - despite a ban on such actions. The sub-committee censured Councillor Austin and ordered him to send a written apology to the complainant. Doubtless, it will be as heartfelt and sincere as always. Although the hearing took place on 20th April, we understand publication of the ruling was withheld until after the elections, which meant the general public were unaware of it throughout the election campaign and the day of the poll. Whether this would have made any difference will never be known – but we can’t help feeling that … not for the first time, there seems to be one law for Councillor Austin, and another for everyone else at Boston Borough Council.
Still with the BBI, in an e-mail that missed out on publication last week for some reason we can’t explain, a correspondent told us: “On leaving the election count I was particularly privileged to witness a very public and very loud altercation taking place in the car park amongst a few 'less than up-beat' members of the BBI (or should that read ex-members?) Quite astonishing, but I do have to say, most gratifying. One gentleman in particular appeared quite critical of his peers and visibly upset, screaming at the top of his voice for all to hear, the somewhat obvious observation 'you are all useless and you are all fired..... everyone of you!' You couldn't make it up, no matter how hard you tried.”
After our comments in this column last week about English Democrat Councillor David Owens and his change of allegiance from the BNP, Councillor Owens has written to say:” As you well know the association with the Independents was only to obtain seats on committees and for the Indy's to still maintain representation on said committees. My political affiliation remained with the BNP up until the time for nomination for election. I take this opportunity to remind you and those observers of your excellent blog, that unlike many other councillors over recent years, when I made a change of political association I stood before the electorate under a new flag. The same cannot be said of all councillors, one of whom serves at county level despite their political colours changing...”
Meanwhile, the problems of political image for the English Democrats continue. After the BBI tried to compare them to the BNP, it turns out that that party doesn’t like them either. BNP leader Nick Griffin, in his chairman’s review of the elections, refers to Boston’s unique result. “The candidates for the pro-IRA, Muslim-loving English Democrats were humiliated in most areas. They won in only one small ward in the country, and even then only because the Tories didn't stand.” Step forward Councillor Elliott Fountain of Fenside Ward. “This gives a fair view of exactly what is happening in the world of politics. Many people are trying to give us a bad name but as you can see from the election results, none of these false claims have stuck. The English Democrats will grow and grow in Boston. We will increase borough councillors, run for county council, get a referendum when the timing is right for elected Mayor - and put forward at least ten people for general elections in Lincolnshire and the East Midlands. Since I became a councillor I have not stopped working. I have spoken to all officers regarding the party in park, HMOs, the Assembly Rooms, benefits, jobs, housing, resident parking, Placecheck, litter, jobs, youth clubs, recycling, discos, highways, St Bede’s School and the failing of all Boston’s schools, helped residents with issues, and we are in process of starting a volunteer help service on Fenside to help pensioners.”
However,  despite all this, it seems that the party still has a hill to climb in West Street, if not a mountain. Since the elections, both English Democrat group leader David Owens and Councillor Fountain have been surprised that their attempts to contact some council officers have been rebuffed - and they have been referred instead to the appropriate heads of department. This has obviously caused difficulties getting information, and and a procedure that was not mentioned when the new council was briefed -  leaving both men wondering why they have apparently been singled out. Perhaps the Chief Executive has the answer?
We were interested in the letter in both local “newspapers” from former BBI Councillor Richard Lenton, who held the borough’s finance portfolio in the Bad Old Days. In it, he highlighted “a rather peculiar practice” under which we have paid hundreds of millions of pounds to Lincolnshire County Council but yet are still asked to chip in towards projects such as the recent road widening scheme and the forthcoming Market Place refurbishment. Mr Lenton asked: “Isn’t this a double tax on the people of Boston.” Even if it technically is, we are sure that Boston is not alone – as we can imagine the squeals of protest if, for instance, Lincoln was never required to chip into county council projects that benefited the city. Strangely, Mr Lenton declares that with the Tories running both the county and the borough, “we now have a powerful lobby to put an end to this rather unfair practice.” Why now? Apparently, Mr Lenton was aware of this peculiarity throughout his stay in office, so why has he waited until now to bring it to our attention? And why did he do nothing about it for four long years?
Another person who thinks that the Conservatives will do something that was previously unattainable is the chairman of the Wash Branch of the Federation of Small Businesses (didn’t know we had one.) Mr Kevin Mothers wants the controlling group to “think small” and give more help with discretionary rate relief for small businesses. The Federation wants a small business “champion” – but we understand that this job goes hand in hand with the role of portfolio holder for regeneration – which as of yesterday, is council Leader Councillor Peter Bedford. Councillor Bedford has already voiced an interest in business in Lincolnshire. On his appointment as the 25th Chairman of Lincolnshire County Council a year ago today, he said: “My main aim for the year is to support and promote county businesses. Times are tough. I want to help raise the profile of our local industries and bring people together, creating new opportunities.” He has already pointed out that the borough spends “substantial” amounts locally, but stresses that competitiveness is the key. We would endorse that, and emphasise that relationships such as those between a council and its local small businesses needs to be a two way street – and not as at first appears, an appeal for cheaper rates.
Just a reminder – if one were needed – the fact that today is the anniversary of Councillor Bedford’s election to office at Lincolnshire County Council means that it is his final day in office. He hands over the reins at today’s meeting in County Hall. Time now for some real work!!

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

Are we nearly there yet...?

It’s now two weeks since the election that saw the Conservatives seize control of Boston Borough Council.
Yesterday, we said that it was time to see some movement, to give us something of a clue as to the direction that the Tories planned to take the town.
If memory serves us well, by this time four years ago the BBI had a cabinet named and in place – and presumably involved in behind the scenes discussions.
Sadly, at the time they sought election, they forgot to ask the second question … with the result that they had nothing on their agenda other than the bypass issue – and we all know how that ended up.
Whilst the Conservatives appear to have a number of issues they plan to address, on the admission of their own leader, Councillor Peter Bedford, they were wrong-footed by the outcome of the election.
“We thought that we would win but we honestly did not expect to win by the majority that we did,” he said. “We thought that Boston would go back to a no overall control council.”
Well, as we now know, it didn’t - and it’s now time to talk the talk.
The Conservatives’ five election pledges were to maintain front line services, introduce accountability and transparency, restore the green waste collection, improve community safety, and to share resources with other authorities.
We hope that this was a summary, limited in scope only by the size of a sheet of A4.
In terms of what now needs doing, some of the promises have already been addressed.
If the BBI was telling the truth – and who could think otherwise? – then all the cuts that needed making have been made, and as a result, Boston is leaner, more efficient and more cost effective – and without the need for redundancies.
Apparently, we can put a “job done” tick in that box.
Also, shortly before the election, the council announced the restoration of the green waste collection service – another “job done” tick in that box … although much more could be done in this important area, and the County Council has said is may have a scheme in mind.
Whether accountancy and transparency becomes the norm will only emerge with time – but as the initial roles of leader, deputy leaders and that of Mayor were apparently decided over tea and crumpets – when they have still to be the subject of formal approval by the full council suggests that this pledge is already on shaky foundations.
Community safety and policing is always an emotive subject for the punters and a good vote-winner – although again, Boston Borough Council is boasting big improvements in crime reduction … and there is only so far that you can go.
That leaves shared working with other councils. The sole evidence of this to date came after the borough appointed a senior officer at £100,000-plus a year and a few months later decided that they could hire him out for half his working week to East Lindsey District Council – which led us to question why the vacancy was filled on a full-time basis in the first place.
Let’s not forget that the opportunity to make really big savings by merging some key back office services with East Lindsey and South Holland District councils fell by the wayside because of Boston’s parlous financial state.
Although the borough’s accounts are now being scrutinised by deputy leader Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, there is no way he can conjure fifty pound notes from thin air, and generating income is a key task.
Stripped down to the bare bones then, it looks as though the Conservatives must do some quick thinking about how to give Boston a much-needed shot in the arm.
We really do need some imaginative policies for the borough. It is not enough just for the reins of the on-going committee business to be placed into a new set of hands.
The last ride was a bumpy one and we don’t want to see it repeated.

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

Base to blue leader:

Time to come out of your shell

Novice journalists are told that the key questions to ask to elucidate the answers needed to build the framework of any story are Who? What? Where? When? and Why?
Now we know who is leading Boston Borough council, and why, we think it’s time to turn to the What? of it all.
In the radio interview announcing his leadership, Councillor Peter Bedford said:
“The very, very first function to do is to get on along with Lincolnshire County Council and South Holland to start to get in place our local plan so that if you like at least a line in the sand for developers and everybody else to start taking things forward and that has not been done over the four years, the LDS (which we think means the local development scheme, Ed.) has been stood still.”
We think this means that we need to decide where Boston is going in terms of its future development, and whilst it may well be the very, very first thing that needs doing, it would have been helpful to have been given a clue as to what might have been second priority.
Certainly, shared working with other councils was high on the Conservative manifesto prior to the election – but then so was the restoration of green waste collections, which have since resumed under the auspices of the BBI before it was so violently expelled from the local political scene.
We know that the Tories have been working closely with South Holland District Council, and so it is natural that Councillor Bedford should mention that particular authority – but what of our other neighbour … East Lindsey District Council?
We already lend them half the time of a highly paid senior Boston officer - something we have already raised an eyebrow at.
After four years of indifferent and secretive leadership - during which the Boston Bypass Independents addressed only the few issues that took their fancy - we now need something completely different, as Monty Python would say.
We have turned our back on political parties with a short attention span, and have hopefully elected a council that will look towards a better future for Boston and its inhabitants, and that promises to be “transparent” in its dealings with the public
But we need to be involved.
Our new leader has been a Boston councillor for twenty years this year – but how well do we know him? We don’t recall him making much of a mark with comments or observations over that considerable time, and the same is true of his joint deputy, Councillor Michael Brookes.
The time for the strong, silent type is past.
We don’t want moody and magnificent. We need charismatic leadership and a literal voice for Boston that we can hear speaking up loudly for the town.
With Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, we knew where we stood, and he was not backward in coming forward.
Let’s hope we hear our new leader speaking up for Boston soon.
We want to hear the ideas for Boston’s future; to have verbal portrait of where the town is going painted in our mind’s eye.
Fears have been expressed that Boston’s new rulers’ definition of closer working with Spalding and County Hall might mean doing their bidding, rather working in partnership.
We hope that this will not be the case.

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

"Broken promises

made me quit" 

On Friday, we carried a comment from an anonymous council member concerned that councillors elected under the BBI banner in 2007, who then left the group, continued in office without offering voters the chance to re-instate them at a by-election.

The comments followed an item by Councillor Brian Rush - who had quit the BBI, allied with the Better Boston Group for the remainder of the previous council term, then stood successfully as an independent.

“If you are voted in by the people, you are responsible and answerable to the people - not two parish councils who you can stand in front of, and who probably don’t want to say anything bad to a nice man to his face” said the writer. “If he had asked the same question to the full Boston borough council when he decided to switch, obviously they would have voted against him. The only fair way was to ask the people. Local issues need to be addressed by local people; real power must be returned to local people.”
Councillor Rush has since come back to Boston Eye with the following in reply.
“The ‘anon’ writer, who suggested that I ought to have stood for re-election in 2007/8, might at least do me the service of considering a few things.
“It may have escaped Anon’s attention but the Boston Bypass title did include the word Independent.
“This only carries some significant importance because it was reinforced by these facts.
“Those of us who were ‘approached’ to stand under the bypass banner, were given an absolute assurance by Richard Austin and Peter Jordan, that the only item that we would be expected to collectively support, was the delivery of a bypass.
“Other than this, we were told … and I quote, Elected Members will be free to act and vote as ‘Independents’ on any other issue.
It was only after the election that Mr Austin and Jordan decided to abandon that promise; this would prove to be the first of many dishonourable acts of treachery.
“I resigned from the Boston Bypass Independents because ‘they betrayed my election promise’ to fight for a bypass for Boston, as stated in the group’s manifesto.
“Does Anon not also recall the fact that the BBI promised ‘a full investigation into the financial affairs of the PRSA? ‘
“He will know this never took place either. Instead overseen by Councillors Jordan and Dungworth, they continued to pour valuable taxpayers money into what BBI cabinet member Ray Newell publicly condemned as ‘a white elephant.’
“In case Anon is unaware, I have continued with my promise, and have publicly challenged and questioned PRSA performance and management.
“I will concede that the action I took may have been contentious, but I honestly believe I did the right thing, and one can only assume, looking at my re-election results, that many of those I represent who came out to vote, obviously do not hold the same view as Anon and even those who did not vote, cannot have considered my continuance a serious enough issue to have got out of their chairs to vote me out!
It is a moot point, but look at what has happened to those BBI-ers who did abandon those promises!”

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

Leaders of the pack ...

It's  "best for Boston"

During the past week or so our reports concerning the leadership of the ruling Conservative group on Boston Borough Council have put us in the firing line.

We found it strange that after running the Tory group for the last year and steering it to a resounding victory that Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire should step aside as leader in favour of Councillor Peter Bedford – a 20-year veteran of Boston politics, a former mayor, and for the next few days the 25th chairman of Lincolnshire County Council.
We were taken to task for not seeing the bigger picture, which we are told is less about the captain’s bridge and more about keeping things running in the engine room.
We asked the obvious question – did he jump, or was he pushed, which Councillor Singleton-McGuire told us was a “bit unfair,”
“At least I was brave enough to make such a decision for the benefit of Boston and didn't have an ego that prevented me unlike the BBI. And no, I did not fall nor was I pushed. I can understand that is what would appear to be the obvious conclusion everyone would perhaps make but they are most definitely wrong. Believe what you may, but having canvassed the group I had the group’s support as leader, but under the circumstances asked that my vote should be given to Peter Bedford for leader so I could devote more time to sorting out the mess that the BBI have left the finances in!”
We also reported that we had heard that the change at the top had raised concerns among the newly elected members.
Our concerns led Councillor Singleton-McGuire to write to all elected Tory members.
“I understand that there has been some concern within the Group regarding my decision to stand down as Leader at Monday's AGM,” he told them in an e-mail.
“I reflected on the situation at Boston Borough Council and its issues, especially the finances. In light of this, I set aside my personal gratification and tried to think what would be best for Boston. My intentions were to engage Peter Bedford as a second Deputy similar to that at Lincolnshire County Council and South Holland District Council and to use his vast experience and ambassador qualities.
“Peter agreed to take over the Leadership in the interim period, therefore releasing my time to concentrate on the Finance Portfolio.
“I hope this explains the significance of my decision on Monday night as a positive and genuine reason for the future benefit of Boston Borough Council.”
This went a long way towards clarifying things, but left one aspect about which we wrote to Councillor Singleton-McGuire to ask: “The only question we have left is that the use of the word interim appears to suggest that Councillor Bedford will stand down in your favour once you have the financial side done and dusted. Is this the case?”
In reply, he told us: “The bigger picture is not about one's ego or in fact the kudos.
“All Conservative candidates received a deal of training so that in the event of forming the next Administration we could hit the ground running. Going forward, I expect a more harmonious working relationships between inter Political Parties and Officers. ”I have arranged and instigated and hopefully it will be approved, to have cameras in the Chamber therefore preventing any future personal bravado or outbursts and to retain the respect and diplomacy expected in a Council Chamber, this I began organising before the Election. I also felt it was necessary, having pushed the barriers with the By-Pass Party over Blogs, political bravado and other issues, to take the ‘wind out of their sails’ and to give the Conservative Party Members a clean-sweep away from any media retaliatory behaviour directed at me by the By-Pass Party, which would no doubt have reflected on other Members.
“You are perfectly correct with the word 'interim' and I feel my job at Boston Borough Council on Finance Portfolio is much greater, at least in the 'interim' period than the Leader's job.
“We, as a Group and team will be raising the stakes at Boston Borough Council and going forward. I will not tolerate any of the antics that have been associated with Boston Borough Council in the past.”

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 13th May

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

What a splendid Friday 13th - Google’s Blogger service crashed due to technical problems, which prevented us from posting for most of the day. Our apologies on their behalf, as this was something totally beyond our control.

Amidst all the hoo-hah of the past few days about leadership of the new council, we mentioned that we’d heard that the job of mayor had also been stitched up. Now we hear that Councillor Mary Wright was announced as the borough’s next Mayor at a meeting of the Witham Placecheck scheme earlier in the week. Councillor Wright is a newly elected representative for Witham Ward, and we are sure that joy was unconfined when the news was broken. What bothers us is that despite being publicly announced, both the roles of leader and mayor are subject to nomination and election by the full council. Perhaps the Tories plans the same “we’ve got the majority … so there” tactics, and the whipping of their members so heavily criticised by the late-lamented BBI bosses. But the fact remains that whilst the Conservatives may have an overall majority of six, unless their backbenchers turn out to be a compliant lot, it only takes a few to disagree with the top brass to put the cat among the pigeons!
Meanwhile, we note that Labour has appointed its team - a leader, a deputy leader, and a Chair of the Labour Group. Mind you, that’s easy-peasy when there are only three of you in any case, and it makes us wonder – how big does a group have to get before it runs out of titles and reverts to a simple leader and deputy scenario?
As reality sinks in for our thirteen newly elected councillors – many of them completely new to the job - and they start to get to grips with the work that needs to be done at West Street, we wonder if it is by sheer co-incidence that tomorrow sees the start of Adult Learners Week. If they were hoping for any pointers, they will be disappointed. Boston – where the word education is largely seen as a profanity – will see courses for painting with acrylics, painting on glass, and painting watercolours. There are just two attempts to bring us into the world of IT - a computer and online basics course, and creating a poster. Still, there’s always next year.
Businesses in Boston Market Place have been given cold comfort if they were hoping for a bumper Christmas. Apparently council staff have been dropping in to tell them that not only will the £2 million refurbishment project be late starting, it may also drag on into the New Year. If it does, work will be suspended for a fortnight over the festive shopping period. And a Yo, ho, ho to you too …
Two visitors enter the Giles 51 Gallery in Strait Bargate, and spend some time wandering around looking at the exhibits before departing. Throughout their visit, the “receptionist” never once raises her eyes from her keyboard or troubles to speak to them. This useless addition to the town’s “culture” was provided at great expense along with the “community hub” next door, which is now more presentable but no less pointless. What a shame that those who staff it cannot take the trouble to make the few visitors that do go in, feel welcome and a part of – not apart from – the community.
As a communications tool, there is nothing to beat blogging – and politicians find it particularly useful, as it is an immediate way to put a point across. However, in the case of Boston Borough Councillor David Owens, this point appears to have been missed. His most recent blog was a week ago today – 6th May, the day after the local elections. The one before it was 10th May last year … the day after the general election. If a week is a long time in politics, then a year is an eternity. Way back then, after throwing in his lot with the Independents on the council, Councillor Owens was telling us “Please fear not, I have in no way whatsoever switched allegiance from the BNP, in fact far from it.” A year on – under a photograph of a line in the sand, he writes: “As many people who follow local politics here in Boston may be aware I have drawn a line under my association with the BNP and stood for election as an English Democrat.” What next, we wonder?
For the next four years, at least, Councillor Owens and his newly elected Fenside colleague for the English Democrats, Councillor Elliott Fountain, plan to push for the return of the Party in the Park and also for an elected mayor for Boston. Until yesterday, whilst Councillor Fountain didn't blog, he Tweeted – and if you had any doubts about his preferred candidate should an elected mayor get the nod, his Twitter page was headed “elliottformayor” and proclaimed “i am elliott fountain, i am running to be elected mayor of boston lincolnshire , to make it a better place to live for everyone, please support and follow me.” Since the election, several readers have been in touch about some of the comments posted on the page – but when we looked yesterday it was all very prosaic. What we did note  was that the wannabe mayor’s “followers” included some people you might not usually think of as being interested in political campaigning. But today, the entry appears to have completely vanished.
We know that being a councillor is an important job, but this week’s Boston Standard has perhaps over-emphasised the might of the council leader.

Local hacks, please take note - it’s a council – not a kingdom!
Still with the Standard, and its entertaining use of the English language, we also spotted this little gem in the court news.

It makes it sounds like one of those cars driven by circus clowns…..
Speaking of which, the penultimate blog on the Boston Bypass Independents’ webpage followed the meandering trend set earlier. But we were taken by the following lines penned by Blogger Number Two: “In any circus … it is the clowns who often steal the show. To be a clown probably needs the greatest talent of all; something which few people can do effectively.” If BLT is who we think he is, then he, of all the BBI members, should know!
Behind the scenes, work is going on to excise the name of the leader of Boston Bypass Independents from Boston Borough Council’s website now that he no longer runs the council. But fans will still find him on Facebook by clicking here then clicking on the photo to enlarge it.

Facebook is normally used by more outgoing people than Councillor Austin, and looking at some of the names on his list of “friends” we’re reminded of the old phrase “with friends like these …”
Meanwhile another Facebook entry tells us something we didn’t know before.

Posted in the day of the election, it claims: “The BBI have been working for a bypass for the last four years. We are hoping to be announce a partnership with a local developer soon which should see the first section built.” It’s unlike the BBI to hide its light under a bushel, and we wonder what impact such news might have had on the election outcome had it been more widely known.
Finally, yesterday’s comments by re-elected Councillor Brian Rush produced an anonymous comment from a colleague. “My concern is that many of the councillors who did get in under the BBI banner in 2007 and then left the group should have had a by-election. These people were not originally voted in as independents, but on getting a bypass. This recent election was the first chance to reject these people, and maybe they lost their seats due to that fact. If you are voted in by the people, you are responsible and answerable to the people - not two parish councils who you can stand in front of, and who probably don’t want to say anything bad to a nice man to his face. If he had asked the same question to the full Boston borough council when he decided to switch, obviously they would have voted against him. The only fair way was to ask the people. Local issues need to be addressed by local people; real power must be returned to local people.” We wonder whether the writer has wind of any members of the new intake planning to switch allegiance at an early stage.

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

Savouring the stew of

the political dumplings!

No double blog yesterday after all – but unlike the weather, the possibility looks brighter today.

Meanwhile,  and on a different tack from the past few days, revenge is a dish best served cold, and there is nothing that we could say about the departure of the BBI from the Boston political scene that could not be better said by someone in the know.

Four years ago, Councillor Brian Rush – newly returned as an Independent for Frampton and Holme - was part of the BBI landslide.

But within months, he had seen through its phoniness and quit to join other disenchanted members in the Better Boston Group.

Of his return to office, Councillor Rush tells Boston Eye:  “I would like to thank all the people of Frampton and Holme that have put their trust in me, by returning me as their Boston Borough Councillor for a further term of office. I was touched and encouraged by not just the high level of support but the many kind words and warm welcome, and cups of tea, I received during my leaflet campaign.

“The overall election results have proved that my reaction to the Boston Bypass Independents’ disgraceful abandonment of election promises in 2007, which resulted in my decision to resign from the group, was the right one.

“There were however some that criticised me for doing so, and suggested I should have resigned and activated a by-election, and this is a matter of opinion.

“It should be noted that I did at the time put myself before, and  sought the advice of both Frampton Parish Council and Kirton with Holme Parish Council, both of whom I serve, and they approved my continuance.

“The almost total rejection of the BBI by the people of Boston in this year’s election was a triumph of justice and commonsense.

“It is clear that the past four years have been a tragedy for this borough.

“The arrogant and incompetent behaviour of the ruling group has caused untold damage, which frustrated and angered opposition group members of all political persuasions.

“Could there be anyone who was surprised and not gleeful at the early dismissal of egocentrics such as Jordan, Clare, Newell, with his wife, and her brother in law Hobson.

“But I must admit I was even more pleased when Kirton dumped the biggest dumpling of all  - Dungworth.

“The BBI, foolishly, preferred to believe that even the simplest of observations, comments, reactions, or suggestions made by opposition members were simply troublesome and irritable rabble rousers.

“They refused to consider or examine alternative proposals, preferring instead to ignore, exclude, and isolate themselves from opposition members. Whilst hiding behind a huge cloak of secrecy! And refusing to allow open debate.

“I am hopeful that the new Conservative administration will commit themselves to being a more inclusive and open regime.

“I hope they will not be tempted to use the power of numbers to railroad their own political projects and proposals, in the way that had become common within the now discredited and thankfully discarded bypass party.

“I hope that they will remember how many times they got the blame for all Boston’s past problems.

“I believe that the Conservatives can utilise the skills and experience that is readily available around them without the assistance of the four remaining political blots.

“It appears to be the case that the hapless and deposed Richard Austin is already seeking to set himself up as the leader of the opposition, by shamelessly making unsuccessful approaches to true Independent members.

“He has learned nothing; it is this despicable pursuit of power that has lain at the very heart of his weakness.  How can he expect ever to be trusted again by anyone?  I for one never will.

“Let me say this.

“If we make promises we should keep them.

“If we cannot keep them, we should be brave enough to explain and apologise.

“If, however, we simply do not bother to keep them, then we should resign.

Which is it for you Councillor Austin?

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

Crumbs! Leadership

agreed over

tea and biscuits

It looks as though you may well get two blogs for the price of one again today, as we struggle to penetrate the mists surrounding the Tories’ decisions regarding who is leading what.
After yesterday’s short addition, in which we queried the nature of Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire’s departure (“did he fall or was he pushed?”) we received an e-mail which said that this was unfair, and that we had misinterpreted a sacrifice for the good of Boston as some sort of political coup d'état.
Hopefully, more detail on this will emerge later today - and if it does, we will post again.
Meanwhile, we remain concerned at some of the comments from the new leader, Councillor Peter Bedford, which came after the leadership news apparently broke on BBC Radio Lincolnshire, shortly after 7am yesterday - a management “style” more commonly associated with national rather than local politics, and which may well have been the first time that some people who should have been told before heard the news.
Here’s what Councillor Bedford had to say.
“We made a decision as a branch and as a group. Raymond is still the branch chairman of Boston and, of course, he led the magnificent campaign to bring this together.
“It was felt that it needed a steady pair of hands, should we say, at the helm, and to allow Raymond to specialise in looking into the finances, because as you are well aware, with the cuts that are upon us from central government and we accept those, the fact that it has to happen, but we do need a specialist in the area, and on the Conservative group, he’s the only person that we have who’s a specialist in that area.
It would be absolutely impossible to do both jobs.
“Everybody is happy with what’s gone on. It was done amicably over the weekend; we had a group meeting yesterday (Monday) teatime to agree and rubber stamp the outcomes.”
So this wasn’t planned ahead of the election result?
“We thought that we would win but we honestly did not expect to win by the majority that we did. We thought that Boston would go back to a no overall control council.”
So, taken by surprise by their own success, the Conservatives are left without a plan, and cobble one up over a cuppa and teacakes. Not a good start.
Councillor Singleton-McGuire gets an added crumb from the tea table by becoming joint deputy leader with Councillor Michael Brookes. Councillor Brookes was not even a Conservative a year or so ago - he was an Independent on both the borough and county councils before switching allegiance - and his appointment is something which we hear has ruffled some feathers in the Conservative camp.
And unbelievably - especially given the rancour with which the BBI’s change to the rules regarding the appointment of Mayor was greeted – we hear that this post may well have already been stitched up.
You thought it had to go to the vote?
Not if you have a generous majority like the BBI once did.
It was Harold Wilson who famously ran a so-called “kitchen cabinet.”
Now it seems Boston has an equivalent – the Tory tearoom!

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

IN, OUT,

SHAKE IT 

ALL ABOUT!

Singleton-McGuire quits as leader


We thought that the BBI had the monopoly on daft politics – but the Tories haven’t been in power five minutes and already they’re playing fast and loose over who does what at Worst Street.
Having led the Conservatives on Boston Borough for just a year – and having led them to victory last Thursday – Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire has stepped down from the post and handed the reins back to borough council veteran Peter Bedford, who is also current leader of Lincolnshire County Council with just a few weeks left to run.
The ex-leader becomes joint deputy with Michael Brookes – who only became a Tory a year ago when he left the independent group of the County Council.
Councillor Singleton-McGuire apparently feel that he needs to devote himself to the borough’s finances, which needs to much work that he can’t also be leader.
However, people are already asking: did he fall or was he pushed?
And we hear that many newly-elected Conservatives are less than happy at what’s been going on.
Read tomorrow’s Boston Eye to keep up to date …

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