We’ve quoted the poet Robert Burns on these pages before – and here’s another of his particularly memorable bon mots – “O would some power the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us."
Well, in the case of Boston Borough Council, its officers, members, and the public, this is exactly what has happened.
The outcome of this interesting piece of navel gazing appears in a report called Bridging the Mismatch – another of those talking shops that councils like so much – but which this time may have delivered some useful insights.
In particular, it has exposed quite big differences between what the council thinks about certain things, and how public opinion - in the shape of  Community Champions selected to discuss the issues - differs.
Tellingly, officers were aware of local views that people think they are “featherbedded faceless bureaucrats‟, that people have a low opinion of the council, don’t know what it does and that there is a lack of trust.
And in a blow for the former leadership, everyone agreed that the promise of a bypass did not help with the council’s reputation.
But on a more basic level, wide gulfs between the council and the public emerged.
One example was the Party in the Park – now almost beatified in local history - where officers thought its demise was much lamented, but residents did not agree.
The same was true with the Placecheck scheme – where, although everyone agreed that it was a good way to focus on local issues and involve residents, officers effused about it, but residents, some of whom had been involved, had become sceptical.
Officers also felt the Community Showcase – this year’s speciality is Hate Crime - was highly valued … but there were mixed feelings about this amongst the champions.
And whilst officers noted four columns in the local papers about council activity every week, this did not strike a chord with residents, who felt that officers were trying to move away from human transactions which was not welcomed.
Officers also felt they tried hard on communication - which again wasn’t felt by the champions.
Even more interesting was the news that officers felt residents were generally complimentary about the borough’s troubled refuse collection service. However the Community Champions did not agree. The champions accepted that residents could be “moany” whilst officers felt that there was a “pool of serial complainants” - which quite offended the champions.
On the question of which groups were hard to get messages to – the agreement was that it comprised migrants, other minority groups, older people, younger people and rural communities – which represents something of a hill to climb as that seems to take in just about everyone!
Worryingly – as this is something we have been banging on about for years – it emerged that people don’t think much of the area; they think it’s gone down hill. Interestingly, officers and residents alike also agree that local people have a low opinion of the areas though outsiders appreciated it – which suggests to us that too much is being done for the benefit of visitors and not enough for residents.
The upshot of all of this is a list of things to make and do.
The highlights are:
• Exploring the potential of alternative communication methods, including social media such as Facebook and Twitter, to facilitate communication with groups less responsive to traditionally used methods.
• Improve “traditional” engagement by making customer service staff more visible in the community.
• “Buddy” residents and officers: the potential of “buddying” up residents with officers, creating longer lasting and replicated relationships should be taken forward. Words fail us.
• The idea of community communicators – well-connected individuals who act as information conduits and dispersers - was well received and should be taken forward.
• Councillors should also play a “mediating” role between residents and officers to facilitate communication.
It all looks good on paper. But as with the creation of Boston BID – which we mentioned yesterday – we need to bear in mind that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Somehow, we see much of the proposals as taking up more time and serving very little purpose.
We’ll wait and see.

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

Monday’s blog about the Market Place refurbishment scheme drew a big audience – and also a response from readers about the problems facing the town.
We were told of at least one business whose owner has already decided not to try to carry on, and has shut up shop.
Another feels he has already suffered from the road disruptions – and now has to brace himself for the Market Place debacle.
He also closed early one afternoon last week when the footbridge was shut for repairs as it killed the Church Lane area of the town for the period it was closed.
And of course, that’s just the start.
The Market Place regeneration is starting later than planned and is expected to take longer to complete than first thought.
And if it is completed on schedule in March next year, there’s just a few weeks’ breathing space before consultations start on replacing the footbridge over the River Haven and all the problems this will generate.
We would have thought that the organisation tasked with representing the interests of business in Boston might have had a word or two to say about all this – but Boston’s BID – the Business Improvement District – has maintained a lofty silence throughout.
The last time the Market Place refurbishment was mentioned was in passing in the January board meeting minutes, which mentioned an upcoming consultation meeting.
Whether anyone attended or not is unknown, since there has been no further mention of the issue.
The last board meeting was on February 6th. It was attended by six directors, with apologies from four.
No board minutes have been published since then.
No mention of the Market Place scheme has been made on either the BID’s website or in its newsletter – apart from one bragging about an advert in the Nottingham Trent Journal inviting visitors to visit the market – just as it is about to become a building site!
Meanwhile, business is left in uncertainty over their future and the likely deleterious effect on custom.
Local traders are charged a compulsory levy equivalent to one per-cent of their business tax to support the BID – and are dragged through the courts by Boston Borough Council and criminalised if they refuse to pay.
The home grown parasite siphons off £125,000 a year from Boston business, and is supposed to generate a similar sum in matched funding. In its two and a half year existence – half of its agreed lifespan -  it has produced little if anything, aside from the Town Rangers … which are a doubtful asset at best.
For weeks and weeks, the BID has been operating on a mobile telephone number because of unspecified problems – but is now proudly proclaiming the restoration of its “telephony.”
Earlier this year, Boston Borough Council concluded a “Task and Finish” report into the workings of Boston BID.
Among other things, it concluded that an overall improvement was required in communications between all persons involved within the BID company. Suggestions included board members supporting dedicated parts of the BID area, the issuing of dates for meetings, and the issue of general correspondence and information from the BID manager to improve significantly.
The report also recommended that all board meetings are open to members and that a 10-15 minute time slot be allocated at the beginning of each meeting to allow questions or statements by members.
Little of the above is possible, of course, when the board apparently meets so infrequently – and when it does is barely quorate. In fact two of last year’s final three meetings had to be abandoned for just that reason.
The Task and Finish Group also called for a report on the progress of the BID to be bought back to its committee next spring, for members to monitor the recommendations put forward.
Given the BID’s disgraceful showing in the three months since that report was filed, we think that something needs doing now.
Many of Boston’s businesses are balanced on a knife edge, and traders deserve better than this.
Is it any wonder that so few of them bothered to attend the recent shopkeepers’ meeting staged by the council?

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 make the message -

"Welcome to Boston"

not -

"This is Boston and

you're welcome to it!"

We mentioned last week about the appearance of a giant hoarding which tells visitors to Boston and residents alike that the town is a hotbed of anti social disorder.
Back on the borough’s website, two links to an anti social behaviour survey now appear – so there is clearly some imperative on the part of the borough to get people to come up with a complaint or two.
According to the website, “Anti-social behaviour has a massive impact on people's quality of life and Boston Borough Council's Community Safety team is working with partnership agencies to address and reduce anti-social behaviour issues. It is our intention to ensure that those who live in our community are allowed to enjoy a way of life free from this sort of behaviour and disruption.”
All well and good – but how serious is the problem in reality?
Residents are asked exactly this question – in particular “How much of a problem do you think each of the following are in your local area? ….”
It then goes on to list: noisy neighbours or loud parties, teenagers hanging around the streets, rubbish and litter lying around, vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property or vehicles, people using or dealing drugs, people being drunk or rowdy in public places, abandoned or burnt-out cars ….
The questionnaire also goes on to ask “Which, if any, of the following are you most worried about being a victim of in your local area? (Please tick one answer only) - and follows the question with another exhaustive list… anti-social behaviour, arson, burglary, domestic abuse, fraud/forgery, hate crime, racial attacks/abuse, robbery (mugging,) sexual offences, vehicle crime, violent crime (eg assault) or … none -I'm not worried.
By now, we think that you get the drift of all this – a determination to get figures to justify the argument that all this stuff is a big problem – and who can say with any certainly that their local area isn’t seething with fraud/forgery? Here’s another question that compels the person completing the form to categorise their area as a problem one – because there is no alternative answer.
“In your opinion, what are the major causes of crime and anti-social behaviour in your area? Too lenient sentencing, poverty, lack of discipline from school, lack of discipline from parents, drugs, alcohol, unemployment, breakdown of family, too few police, Other.
Note that at no point is there an option to say that the area has no problems to speak of.
Last weekend saw many people take to their gardens to enjoy the sunshine and a few drinks. To most of us, that is a reasonable thing to do, but to some, it could be seen as the actions of “noisy neighbours or loud parties,” when in fact it is nothing of the kind. But it’ll bump up the statistics, won’t it?
We’re not saying that Boston is not without its problems. But for some reason, efforts appear to be going on to push this issue further up the agenda than it may actually merit.
The figures from Lincolnshire Police give a clearer picture.

click on picture to enlarge

In April, the lion’s share of anti-social behaviour took place in the town centre, around the park and around the college. Oh yes, and in the Ingram Road/Shaw Road area.
What a surprise.
Figures for our neighbours put Boston somewhere in the middle, with Spalding on103 and Skegness on 382 - which seems about right.
Later this year, Boston’s Community Showcase will be focussing on hate crime. In previous years, it has been an excellent place for locals to see the range of community services available to them. But no longer.
Things like this, coupled with the poster campaign, send the wrong message about Boston.
We should be highlighting the area’s good points, not repeatedly running it down.
The poster site stands athwart the main road through town. Instead of depicting – as it has in the past – Boston as a flood risk area, or as it does now, a place where no-one may feel safe, why don’t we take the opportunity to spread a little light, rather than gloom.
The message should be Inviting … not Intimidating.
The message should be Welcoming … not Warning.

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

click on photo to enlarge

our 750th post

Sett in stone ...
grey is
the colour
for new look
Market Place

It’s a done deal, and in a couple of weeks Boston’s historic Market Place will be ripped to shreds and rebuilt over the next eight months.
Expect chaos, expect complaints, and at the end of it all … expect what?
Granite seems to be the watchword – two million quid’s worth - plus more retained parking than many of us would have wished.
And loads of new bus facilities.
Worst of all is the half-hearted nod to the traditional Five Lamps, which dominated the Market Place for years and which we were promised would be restored and replaced – and which are merely now defined on the attached plan as “Feature lamps as entrance with town Bus (note the capital letter) stop and stone plinth for added impact and use as informal seating” – whatever that means.
One other piece of the town’s heritage to suffer abuse at the hands of the planners is the listed boundary wall of St Botolph’s Church which is to be slashed open for nothing more than “pedestrian access.”
The idea behind all this is to make the Market Place a heritage feature of which the town can be proud.
Shoppers and visitors would co-mingle and gaze with delight at the scene of calmness and tranquillity before them
Ho!
Ho!
It’s just going to be a mess – another of those half-baked Boston schemes that somehow isn’t quite right and cries out that it could have been done better.
The colour and design of historic market places where they survive is mellow, not hard, and pleasing on the eye – not brash.
And, given what’s on the plan, we have to ask how on earth all this is going to run up such a massive £2 million bill. Where’s the money going?
This week’s local newspapers feature soothing and optimistic comments about keeping things running smoothly while the work is underway.
But someone who’s unconvinced is English Democrat borough councillor Elliott Fountain.
“One of my main concerns is that the Market Place is going to be cut off from traffic from July 2011 to March 2012 in what is surely one of the biggest economic downturns,” he told Boston Eye. “This has not caused much concern presently from the traders in the town centre, but I think it just helps to recognize that almost all the family businesses have already been put out of business and only the multi-nationals still exist who don’t really care because they are so big profit wise.”
“Another point I made clear was that they are building two new bus stops yet it has been said that the Into Town bus service will cease going through the precinct in the near future - so what is the point?
“The cost of the market place works is £2 million and will be carried out by same contractor who did road widening scheme at a cost of £10 million, so it seems like at least one business is thriving - I can’t wait until they eventually start the bypass!”
Councillor Fountain said he told fellow councillors at a members’ meeting that he had lots of concerns, and said the work should be stopped.
“I said if work needs to be carried out it should just wait until we have reviewed it, but all the Conservatives think it’s good. I then went to the shopkeepers’ meeting where I expected there to be more public to show their concerns, but I think there were only three shop owners. The public won’t even know this is really happening until the town is shut on July 11th - then they will be lost for words.
“It’s sickening what’s happening to this town, - I can’t believe what’s happening, and I don’t understand how designers from Lincoln can design a town centre in Boston where they don’t understand the needs and desire of the public.”
We think that Councillor Fountain makes some good points.
The Market Place regeneration is supposed to be a make or break chance for the town and its future. Yet only 13 of the 32 councillors involved in the decision to go ahead are still in post. Surely a brief pause in the plans to ensure that the new councillors are as happy with the scheme as the old ones appeared to be would be a sensible precaution.
Officers have a history of spending regardless – the classic example was the community “hub” fiasco … where they admitted that money was wasted - but regarded it a nothing more than a "learning curve" because it wasn’t  “local” money. So they’re not bothered one way or the other.
The Market Place is not just some baton to be passed from one leadership to another. It needs a second look. A short delay will not threaten the project. But we must get it right.

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 24th June

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

We hear that the borough’s budget is not being altered by the portfolio holder for finance, Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire after all.  Readers will recall that he stood down from the leadership because he thought the finances were in such a mess that they would require his full attention for the next couple of years. Which begs the question, if they do not need any tweaking, does this mean that the BBI had the finances under control and that everything was fine after all?
There clearly is spare cash around the place. An example emerged at the last meeting of BTAC – the Boston Town Area Committee. One agenda item proposed spending £10,000 on a garden area in Central Park. Labour and English Democrat councillors asked for a review on this to see if the allocated money could be better spent elsewhere. “But without joy,” reports one of the attendees, “because every Conservative on the panel thought it was more important to not wait, and spend the money immediately on the plan which a five year old child could have drawn better.”
And still on the subject of spending … A while ago, we criticised the choice of location for a poster making Boston look like a flood danger zone – when everyone else is telling us that the reverse is the case. The poster was sited opposite Aldi on the main A52 through town – which guarantees maximum exposure to visitors forming an opinion of Boston. The poster has now been replaced by another giant billboard featuring Boston’s Anti-Social Behaviour Team and telling those who see it that no one need suffer from anti-social behaviour - which the council announced only yesterday "has a massive impact on people's quality of life."  To us, it's just another poor impression being given to passers-by – dodge the floods and the baddies will get you. We’re not convinced that anti-social behaviour is as bad as the powers that be would have us believe – and we certainly think the borough could have spent what must be several hundred pounds more wisely than on this over-indulgent piece of self-promotion.
Boston’s Pilgrim Hospital is in the news for all the wrong reasons, and it is encouraging to see our MP Mark Simmonds joining the ranks of the critics. But what a shame that he had to dilute his outrage with the usual pap about how hard staff work at the hospital under difficult circumstances. At a time like this pressure needs to be at the maximum to bring about the reforms needed at the Pilgrim. This is not the time to try to please all of the people (i.e. the voters) all of the time.
It seems that Boston Borough Council is on something of a mission at the moment. The mantra is “search. ”  There's a “Search for Boston’s unsung heroes”  ... which turns out to be the offer of a pat on the back for the "unsung environmental heroes” … that is the people who do the council’s job for it. There’s also a “Search for Boston's Olympic torchbearers” – but you’ll need to run fast. The item appeared on the borough’s website just a week before the closing date for nominations and four days from appearing in the local “newspapers” if you’re not using the internet.
Talking of the borough’s website, we hope that isn’t becoming a fan club for the ruling Tory elite. A couple of the most recent entries include a tear-jerking tale of council leader Peter Bedford recalling childhood memories at the opening of a new playground, and the news that Councillors Mary Wright – who is also Mayor - and Carol Taylor are to hold monthly drop-in sessions for their Witham ward residents. We are sure that they are not alone in  doing this to keep their electorate informed and well served  – but try as we might, we can find no reference to surgeries run by other councillors.
Not for the first time, we breathed a sigh of relief that Boston’s former Chief Executive, Mark James, now works on the other side of the country. He was in the news last week after the arrest of a Carmarthenshire blogger who tried to film the proceedings of the council on her cellphone. The council claims there are rules against it, but it appears that they are hard to track down. At least we've been promised TV coverage of our council meetings, so that problem is unlikely to arise here. Is it?
Meanwhile, Boston's  latest attempt to encourage citizen journalism has appeared in the Boston Standard. Having all but eradicated news from the front page, its latest stunt is to invite readers to caption amusing photos. The idea is that they print a picture; you think up a caption and text it to the paper. The hacks will then select the best and print them on the letters page – which in passing will help make up for the fact that so few people write to the Standard these days. There is no mention of any kind of prize, and the stunt costs readers £1 to enter as well as their usual text charge. Are we missing something somewhere, or is this a very silly idea?

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

We’d like to know exactly what’s going on regarding the disposal of green waste – i.e. garden rubbish – in Boston.
A while back, the service ran out of cash, to the accompaniment of lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth, and the Conservatives took up the issue as part of their election manifesto.
An abbreviated form of green waste collection resumed shortly before the election – but concentrated more on the village and rural areas of the borough and less on the town itself – even though the disposal of garden rubbish is probably more of a problem there.
Since then another five locations have been added – again with a larger number rurally located.
The issue of waste disposal generally has become something of a political hot potato, after the government u-turned on its promise to re-introduce weekly rubbish collections.
Last week a national newspaper told us that one in four councils charges up to £113 a year for green rubbish collection - highlighting another of those postcode lotteries if you want your grass and plant clippings collected.
Significantly, the story singled out a situation in Lincolnshire – where residents in South Kevesten, pay £26 a year, whilst those in neighbouring North Kevesten get the service for free.
A long long time ago, Boston dallied with the idea of introducing charges for the collection of garden waste – we seem to recall that the figure mentioned was around £20 for a fortnightly collection over six months of the year – roughly £2 a time. We heard no howls of protest, and the cost seemed reasonable given the saving in time and expense of bagging your rubbish (if you’re able enough), filling the car with it (if you have one and it is big enough) then taking it to Slippery Gowt tip where you have to unload it all and empty out all the bags that you’ve just filled up.
Disposal of green waste is important. Earlier this year, figures from the Environment Agency showed that recycling countywide averaged 51.4% for 2009-2010 , with North Kesteven top of the green tree with 56.3% - and remember they make no extra charge - whilst Boston was last on the list with a meagre 31.5%.
At that time, Lincolnshire County Councillor Lewis Strange, Executive Councillor for Waste Services and Green Issues, said “We hope to promote green waste collection in Boston, should Boston wish to follow that route.”
We can’t think why Boston should not wish to follow such a course.
At election time the Tory manifesto maintained the sort of political vagueness that you might expect of a party that was subsequently shocked to take power and apparently wrong-footed by it.
All that was said about green waste was: “The Conservatives on Boston Borough, if elected, will push for cleaner streets and green waste collection.”
Well that resumed in part before they took power, and the additional service just announced is a small step indeed.
At election time, the Tories were quietly saying that they would go further - with funding already being in place from the County Council to start a door to door collection. Presumably this is the cash that councillor Strange was talking about.
If that was the case, then when do we get to hear the announcement?
We need the rubbish collecting this summer – not next.

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

click on the photo above to enlarge it

Can you credit it?

We're afraid we can't!

When we publish something that’s wrong, we are always happy to put it right, and in part that’s what this blog is all about – although we’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions once you’ve read it.
Before our break we criticised Boston Borough Council over a story in the Daily Telegraph about local authority spending on council credit cards. The Telegraph claimed to have asked all local councils for details of their spending over £500 - and Boston was one listed as having a zero spend … but only because it was said to have failed to reply to the newspaper’s e-mail request under the Freedom of Information Act.
“Welcome to the new age of openness and transparency,” we commented – which
put us on the Big Blue Dragon’s naughty step - and a request to publish a “response” trom the council to our piece.
“Checks have revealed that no such inquiry has been received by the council from the Daily Telegraph about this”, we were informed. “Checks also show that, as normally happens in these cases where ‘all local councils’ are asked for details, no Freedom of Information request has been received. However, details of ALL spending over £500 by Boston Borough Council is declared on its website every month.”
In the interest of fair play, we agreed to make matters clear on our return – but it then turned out that things were not quite that simple.
Subsequent enquiries disclosed that the Daily Telegraph did make a request - but sent it to info@boston.gov.uk – an address obtained from a website called whatdotheyknow.com – which we have mentioned before in Boston Eye.
And this is where things started to go pear-shaped.
It seems that the council is pedantic when it comes to its e-mail addresses, and because the Telegraph’s FOI request was not made to foi@boston.gov.uk, it remained “parked" in info@boston - which appears to mean ignored and unanswered.
If all this sounds like much ado about nothing, the point is this …
Info@boston.gov.uk is the e-mail address published for use by the punters – the likes of you and us - as a way to get in touch with the council.
On the evidence above it would appear if any hapless voter with a question for the council fails to address it specifically to the correct e-mail address, it will simply be “parked” i.e. ignored.
Surely, it is not beyond the wit of whomever checks this e-mail box (if anyone bothers, of course) to direct any questions to the appropriate department – in the case of the Telegraph’s request it would not exactly have been rocket science.
We wonder how many times members of the public have written to the council on any one of dozens of possible issues and waited for a reply that never came – just because someone couldn’t be bothered!
We are told that in the case we’ve been writing about, the information the Telegraph asked for was available without the need for an FOI request as the council publishes all expenditure over £500 on its website every month.
Up to a point, as Lord Copper’s endlessly patient foreign editor would say …
To see what the Telegraph could have learned from a perusal of the numbers, we visited the list of spending over £500 and selected one or two months at random. We searched for “credit,” “card,” and “credit card” without success. Does this mean, Boston has no credit card, no credit card spending - or simply files it under a reference that is simply very hard to find?
Perhaps like the word “info,” the words “credit cards” take on a whole new meaning in Boston!
Just one final point.
We also noted on the lists of expenditure the arrival of the figures for the month of May – but when we took a closer look, we found that they were the figures for March – duplicated and reproduced two months later.

May? Maybe not - the figures are for March

And guess what? The person who deals with it is on holiday.

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

Once it was Boston Borough Council - the BBC
Now its the Big Blue Dragon - the BBD

Hush ... the big blue

dragon is trying to

get some sleep

Ten days ago – just before we set off in our private Gulfsteam G650 for the delights of Mustique and the luminous Middleton family – we expressed disappointment that the Conservatives on Boston Borough Council had done nothing to make their presence felt.

We said at the time: “One might expect to see something by way of action even at this early stage – if nothing else as a way of saying ‘this is us, we’ve arrived, and we mean business.’”
But no. We returned to find the Tories lurking like a big blue dragon somewhere in the caverns of Worst Street, exhaling tendrils of insipid smoke rather than the flames that we expected would begin the work of forging a transformation for Boston.
Our parting comments and today’s mention of tendrils of smoke have a connection, as they both concern the route used by the Into Town bus service, which herds people using what is supposed to be a pedestrianised area aside by use of a penetrating alarm – backed by a blast from the horn should they fail to comply with its demands. The buses then pass by in a rumble of engine noise before gently adding their own specific je ne sais croi  into the air breathed by the shoppers.
Well, actually, we do sais croi.
Diesel engines produce an entertaining cocktail of carbon in the form of soot, nitrogen, water, carbon monoxide, aldehydes, nitrogen and sulphur dioxide, and sulphur dioxide, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons – which are described as potent atmospheric pollutants.
And it goes without saying that breathing diesel fumes as all users of Strait Bargate are forced to do can affect your health.
For a council as obsessively health conscious and “green” as Boston professes to be, this is a strange anomaly. There can be no question that running buses through Strait Bargate is potentially dangerous both in the long and short term, and it therefore follows that any right thinking local council would move heaven and earth to end the use of the precinct as a rat run for a bus route.
Indeed, all parties apart from the BBI* have condemned the decision to run the service through Strait Bargate.
The former leader of the Tory group, Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire, was in the vanguard of those critics during a pre-election debate on local radio.
“The option for the buses to go through the town centre itself was not put out to open debate or even to other councillors. It was a decision made in private behind closed doors by the leader Richard Austin, of which we knew nothing, and it was actually implemented. I think it’s disgusting.”
But, autre temps, autre moeurs from autre dirigeants.
About the only thing to have happened in Boston in our absence was for the council’s new leader Peter Bedford, to tell a local newspaper that while talks about the bus service will be held, there will be no change of route in the near future as “the contract still has 18 months to run.”
We may seem a bit simple here – but what has one of these things to do with the other.
The contract and the route are surely not inseparable.
The route could use alternatives to reach its destination – in fact it does, as the use of Strait Bargate can somehow be avoided on occasions such as May Fair.
Using the contract as a reason for maintaining the present route simply sweeps the matter under the carpet for a further 18 months – to roughly the time when the present leader will be considering whether or not to complete his remaining term of office.
Should he choose not to, the issue would then become a problem for his successor.
The reason for not doing something now is unconvincing.
It is also defeatist.
Bostonians do not want the Into Town bus service using Strait Bargate.
We would have hoped that a party elected on a promise of listening to the electorate would have got off to a better start than simply to tell us that whilst there are to be talks, the decision is set in stone.
It has the feel of the County Hall pulling the strings at Worst Street.

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

*BBI. Remember them? A party widely criticised for ignoring the wishes and opinions of both council colleagues and members of the public. Good job we’re rid of them, then.

But even though we're not blogging for a bit, 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 10th June

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

It’s good to see Independent group leader Councillor Richard Leggott’s letter to the local “newspapers” proclaiming a “must-do” list to pursue with the new council leaders. It’s topped by the call to stop the noisy, smelly, polluting, dangerous Into Town buses using Strait Bargate as a rat run when there are alternative routes available. We think we see a glimmer of hope here that this much desired goal could be achieved. The Independents are all for it. Labour is all for it, and we would think that the English Democrats are onside as well. That gives nine votes. The Bypass Independents, who snuck the precinct route in by the back door, would oppose it – but if a proposal was made, and enough Tories voted with their hearts rather than for their whips, there is every chance that it could succeed – and we hope to see actions rather than words as soon as possible. This is a good start, and we look forward to reading more such letters in the press from Councillor Leggott in the future. Meanwhile, just one word of caution regarding “must” do lists. The dictionary contains numerous definitions of the word. Whilst the most common is “to be required or compelled,” another refers to “mould or mouldiness” – which is something we would not like to see happen to this important issue.
Whilst the doubtfully beneficial roadworks at the junction of Spilsby Road, Freiston Road and Willoughby Road will doubtlessly show their true worth eventually, we have to wonder in the meantime how quickly they could really be done. As we crept through town along John Adams Way one afternoon this week, we noted that the problem the works seek to end - ie the thoughtless behaviour of drivers who refuse to recognise the merger of two lanes into one - is simply being replicated half a mile sooner. Worse still was to note that only two workmen were present on the site - and neither of them was doing anything much at all. This is why the job is taking twelve weeks – which which the powers that be seem to think sounds much shorter than the three months that it really means. We fondly recall the days when roadworks such as this saw workmen descend on a site like bees to a honeypot, start at eight in the morning and soldier on until four. Good old days, which would have seen a job like the Spilsby Road epic take no more than a couple of weeks
Boston Borough Council recently got a name-check in a Daily Telegraph story about local authorities playing fast and loose with their council credit cards. All local councils were asked for details of their spending over £500 on these cards, and we were initially heartened to read that the figure for Boston was a nice, round zero. At first we thought the council had been very well behaved. Then it crossed our mind that maybe its credit rating was so poor that it had been denied a card. The answer was in fact more typical. It simply hadn’t bothered to reply. Welcome to the new age of openness and transparency!
Visitors to Pilgrim Hospital may have noticed the failure of one of the lifts to the wards. It would be hard not to. Some while ago, three of the four lifts were simultaneously out of order, and whilst two have been mended, a third has now been out of commission for weeks. We wondered why it takes so long to carry out such basic and essential maintenance. Then a little bird told us that that the engineers who carry out the work have to travel from Germany. Presumably, the policy is to wait until at least a couple of lifts have packed it in to save on the obviously higher cost of such a bizarre arrangement.
The other day we passed one of those seldom seen “Town Rangers” leaning up against a shop doorway – but in a vigilant and alert manner of course. We were struck by the fact that he was wearing piercings in the form of what appeared to be two ball bearings punched through the flesh at the side of his eye. The first thing that struck us was that this gave him a distinctly intimidating aura – which is not something we would expect to see in someone who is supposed to approachable by the public. The second thing that crossed our minds was that in the unlikely event of his becoming involved in any form of rough and tumble – say in the pursuit of a shoplifter – the piercings present something of a danger if grabbed or pulled. Is it too much to ask that adornments like these are banned during working hours?
The news that St Bede’s secondary school is to close can scarcely have come as a surprise, given its poor record of achievement. But it does seem fair to add that the rush some years ago for schools to specialise, saddled it with a heavy burden.  As a result, we now have a “technology” college, an “academy” specialising in visual arts, whilst poor old St Bede (673-735) – although a great scholar - was an historian who wielded a quill, and therefore an odd choice for a “science” college. We also note a quote from the school’s new boss which says that the “vast majority” of staff will continue in the same roles as before when the school is merged with Haven High. We hate allocating blame, but surely, many of the staff must take responsibility for the school’s problems to date, and we can’t see that retaining almost all will improve things much.
The honours are evenly shared between both our local “newspapers” for this week’s comedy cuttings awards. Of the two, the Boston Standard just takes the edge, though, with this little gem …

We wonder whether they brought their own projector, or just passed their album around.
Secondly, we think that the Boston Target should realise that simply because a little old lady is partial to an occasional glass of sherry and a bag of crisps, it does not mean that she lives on the stuff, as this story suggests …

A “diet” of sherry and crisps? We hope not, but if true, may we say we’d hate to be the duty Dyno-Rod engineer in the Georgians’ area of town!
That’s it for this week. We’re off on one of those holiday things for a few days and will be back on Tuesday 21st, which is the day of the first cabinet meeting of the new council. Join us again then. But please keep in touch by e-mail between now and then. We look forward to hearing from you.

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

Attendance should

be a matter of record

We wrote yesterday about the momentum being gained by opposition parties on Boston Borough Council, whilst the Conservative leaders apparently sit around the tea table crunching their digestives and sending out for more hot water.
And whilst it’s probably just co-incidence, we’re pleased to see that many issues are the same as those where we have pressed for similar action.
The council’s Labour group has posed an important question which we have also raised before - that of attendance.
“Are we going to allow councillors to get away with the awful attendance record that was so prevalent during the last four years?” asks Labour.
“To help solve this problem Labour councillors will be urging the council to adopt an electronic record of attendances, available for all to look at on the Boston Borough Council website.”
This is something that is long overdue.
Several times in the past four years Boston Eye highlighted the attendance record of councillors.
A number of them were getting money for jam – if you’ll excuse the ongoing allusion to the tea table.
And we suspect that a poor attendance record is doubtless replicated at ward level, as we know of several cases where councillors who failed to turn up to meetings were equally invisible in public in the areas they purportedly “represented.”
Other authorities round and about publish the attendance record of their councillors, and we think that it is essential so that voters can have the chance to see how well served – or otherwise – they are.
Boston’s joint deputy leader Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire told us in his parting message - before descending into the bowels of Worst Street to confront the council’s accounts - that he had arranged and instigated to have cameras in the council chamber to stop “any future personal bravado or outbursts and to retain the respect and diplomacy expected.” He began organising this before the election, and told us that he hoped it would be approved,
We hope so too – and we also hope that the full council meeting will be shown as a live webcast – just as Lincolnshire County Council meetings are.
Somehow, though, we doubt it.
Already, and despite promises of openness and transparency, the Tories have shown a preference for the shady side of the street rather than the sunny side, and for their work to go on without taking the electorate into their confidence.
Going back to Labour, interestingly, they want to go one step further with the information they give to the public.
“Let’s also include attendance at outside bodies, so that over the next four years, we will be able to see whether councillors are fully engaged in representing their communities on behalf of the borough, and show us their declarations of interests as well - what is there to hide? “
Again, we would agree – particularly after the recent news that one former BBI councillor could not even manage to attend twice yearly meetings of the Rural Commission - not once, not twice, but six times … a non-attendance record spanning three of his four years in office until he was replaced on the committee. And even then his replacement was because of a change of office, rather than a Damascene conversion.
The Boston Labour website sums it up nicely.
“When we have our peer review in the autumn, let’s show the Improvement Board that we have gone the extra mile, but more importantly, let’s show the people of Boston that we are now an open and transparent council.”
Again, it should be hard for the Conservatives, who are key to all this as only they can make it happen, to disagree – but somehow, we feel that the workings of Boston Borough Council will remain as mysterious as they were before.

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

Where do Tories stand

on Bargate bus lane?

As the newly-elected Boston Borough Council settles into place, one might expect to see something by way of action even at this early stage – if nothing else as a way of saying “this is us, we’ve arrived, and we mean business.”
Instead, the Conservative leadership has maintained a lofty silence – leaving the minor parties to take on the role of saying what they think is best for Boston.
Whilst we’ve said before that such vocality is a piece of cake when you are not in the political position to deliver, that doesn’t alter the fact that all the major parties – and some of the minor ones as well – seemed in total accord on some of the issues that cropped up in the pre-election campaigning.
One such piece of unity was the issue of diverting the Into Town bus service along a route that does not take it through Strait Bargate.
We recall the consensus view that buses through Bargate were a bad thing being expressed at a round table local radio debate, and somewhat naively pictured the addressing of this issue as something that could be done as an early demonstration of good faith with the electorate.
A fortnight ago, we reported that the Labour group on Boston Borough Council had pledged to campaign to make Strait Bargate a pedestrian area once again, and the news has brought a wry smile to the face of one of the most vocal campaigners against the buses using the pedestrian area – Independent Councillor Brian Rush.
“I was mildly amused by our newly elected Labour group’s recent suggestion that they would be pushing to get rid of the horrible buses in the precinct, and of course they will receive my support for such moves,” he says in an e-mail to Boston Eye.
“But I seem to remember, that there was little reaction to the route, save for members of the pressure group.
“During this time I only remember (Mr. then) Paul Kenny did give his support to both myself and the then Councillor Anne Dorrian, as we suffered the slings and arrows of Lincolnshire County Council, and the compliant Richard Austin with his BBI Hate Squad.
“It was only when this noisy public protest was organised by us, that other councillors were alerted to this very unwelcome invasion.
“Followed then, by a day of collecting signatures from the public in a ‘Buses Yes,’ or ‘Buses No,’ campaign.
“We were of course massively supported by the public, in fact the enthusiasm of many brave souls brought somewhat over-reaction from our local constabulary, but it must be said that our local Conservative ‘politicians’ were not quite so visible or supportive of the demonstration.
“It was only when they were shown the rage of the people and the media attention the campaign received, that they realised just how live the issue was, that they began to even whisper about it.
“More importantly, I was excited by my Conservative colleagues in opposition, who assured me that they, too, were now against the invasion, and would welcome an immediate re-routing.
“Soooo ... now our Conservative councillors have control of the council this gives them an early and wonderful opportunity to show the people of Boston that they will hastily rectify this terrible Lincolnshire County Council mistake.
“I am confident that all members will be getting behind the proposal, and the precinct will belong to the people once again in the next few weeks, or ok, maybe a month! But no more, Mr. Bedford.”
Boston Eye has already said that we doubt that the Tories will do anything about the route.
We think that they will very much play second fiddle to their masters at County Hall – and we are certain that they will not even consider looking at re-routing the service.

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

Rocket science

- not rocket salads –

will make Boston better

If you think that nothing could be worse than living in a deprived area where life expectancy is low and drug taking rife, then call your estate agent now and ask him to sell your house in Boston and find you one elsewhere.
A turgid but terrifying document called Lincolnshire Joint Strategic Needs Assessment: Draft Overview Report 2011* has hit a computer screen near you, and it makes depressing reading for local people.
The assessment is the way primary care trusts and top tier local authorities “describe the future health, care and well-being needs of local populations and strategic direction of service delivery to meet those needs.”
This then helps them “to provide personalised services, promote health and well-being, prevent ill health and reduce health inequalities.”
Given the number of times Boston has previously appeared at the lower end of statistics like these, history suggests that whatever is being done – if indeed anything is being done – is having little, if any, impact on Bostonians.
Some headlines:
Twelve per-cent of Lincolnshire’s population now live within the 20% most deprived areas of England compared with 11% in 2007 - this figure is 29.8% for Lincoln, 22% for East Lindsey and 16.7% for Boston.
Female life expectancy is 82 years in Lincolnshire with Lincoln and Boston having the lowest life expectancy of 81.1 years.
Male life expectancy is 78.3 years with Boston having the lowest male life expectancy of 76.6 years.
Disability-free life expectancy at age 65 varies across the county, but the smallest gap is in Boston - which ranges from 16.7 to 19.3 years of disability-free life expectancy.
The infant mortality rate in Lincolnshire is 4.3 deaths per 1000 live births – but in Boston it is 8.1.
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is affected by lifestyle factors which show that it is higher in areas of deprivation which also have the highest rates of adults reported smoking. In Lincolnshire these areas include Lincoln, Boston and East Lindsey.
Teenage pregnancy rates in Lincolnshire have continued to drop in line with national and regional rates but there are still areas within the county where levels
remain significantly higher – in particular East Lindsey, Boston and Lincoln City.
Areas with higher levels of deprivation also tend to have higher rates of sexually transmitted infection – and again, Boston is high on the list – following only Skegness and the coastal area.
Finally, although estimates of drug misuse in Lincolnshire are lower than both the East Midlands and England estimated levels, the figures mask wide variations across the districts. Lowest is West Lindsey with an estimated 3.5 problem drug users per 1000 people – whereas in Boston the estimate is 12.6 per 1000.
Whilst district councils have a peripheral role in the well-being of their residents, Boston tends to go further than some.
A while ago there were talks about creating a “healthy eating café” which struck us at the time as being not only a waste of money, but also a drop in the ocean of dealing with Boston health problems.
Thankfully, it appears to have died the death along with the Bypass Independent Party.
But a legacy of their nannying rule is the community “hub” which devotes most of its effort to trying to prevent people from smoking – usually involving the staff dressing up in silly costumes, which we are sure will have a real impact.
The problem is a classic example of the chicken and the egg – and which came first.
Hand in hand with that is the claim that Boston currently has the lowest standard of education in Lincolnshire, and problem areas such as Fenside - the most deprived
ward in Boston - which is ranked 923 out of a total of 8,414 wards in England placing it in the top 11% of most deprived wards in the country.
Against the context of reports like this we wonder why the world and his wife seem so keen on bringing back the Party in the Park – which seems to be dominating minds in the council more than anything much else.
Generally speaking, Boston is in decline.
The evidence is in the appearance of the town centre – the sameness of the drab, unimaginative poorly maintained shops, which include three mobile phone outlets in a row in Strait Bargate, and the excess of charity shops in and around the town.
The evidence is in the litter which abounds in our streets.
The evidence is in the total absence of a visible police presence.
We could go on.
Top of Boston Borough Council’s list must be to make the town a better place.
This does not mean selling rocket salads to reluctant fatties.
It means rounding on those responsible and getting them to focus on Boston and its trouble and come up with a cure as soon as possible.

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

*You can read the full report by clicking here

Sponsors are key to bringing back Party in Park

Party on or party off – the debate goes on at any rate!

After last week’s blog, we have received two follow up e-mails – the first from the man who would be Boston’s elected Mayor, Councillor Elliott Fountain, and the second from a former employee of Boston Borough Council.

Councillor Fountain tells us that he and his party colleague (political, not in the park) Councillor David Owens, now have all the information they need, and have met with two “high ranking” officers to discuss bringing the party (in the park, not political) back.
“We are now just awaiting some information from people who provided services to past events to get a cost breakdown and quotes for future events,” he writes.
“The talk so far is that these service providers will provide their equipment at a reduced rate if they are classed as sponsors, and in some cases there will be no fees. I have been in touch with Boston BID, and they are putting this to their committee because they are keen to get involved and back this event.
“I have been in touch with a number of large sponsors to receive funding (in the past there were big sponsors, but in recent years these have not been forthcoming).
“My personal opinion at this time is - even if Boston Borough Council wanted this event to take place - they are going to be reluctant to put in any funds into it at present.
“The alternative is for it to be run privately with the backing and support of the council, and this is the route we are looking at.
“We believe it should be a two day event held on Saturday and Sunday and not be run on the Friday - when the attendance is lower but still needs the same amount of costing regarding staff, etc.
“There are many things we need to look, at but I think hopefully and collectively all of us can pull together to put on this great party for all the people in Boston and the Lincolnshire area.
“The Party in the Park is the only annual event in the Boston area that brings everyone together, young and old, and gives everyone a chance to see old friends and have fun. There are many cohesion and community funds in the Boston Council and I believe there is no better community event than this to bring all the communities of Boston together as one.
“This event is truly for everyone and our utmost efforts should be taken to stage it annually and give something back to the people, who deserve some happiness in these gloomy economic times.
“The English Democrats are pleased that so many people are now raising this issue and trying to help, as we prioritized this in our manifesto.”
Meanwhile another reader, who has requested anonymity, writes to say: “I had a senior role in the management and safety of the event during the early years of its existence.
“I can categorically state that stewards did have the relevant training, but as in all walks of life, there were some individuals who were unable to apply the theoretical instruction to the role on the day when some members of the public were intent on in engaging in anti-social behaviour.
“I can’t recall too many ‘accidents’ occurring or problems arising where the council were held to be liable. There was a de-brief exercise afterwards each year when particular incidents/issues, which were logged, were discussed at length to improve the event the next time around and make it safer.
“In the latter years of the event, when I was no longer involved, it is true to say that staff became entitled to be paid their usual rate of pay rather than the flat rate previously enjoyed.
“I could never understand the logic behind this, and it inevitably increased the costs of the event.
“A far more significant increase in the costs, however, was the introduction of charges by Lincolnshire Police for providing resources, a greater insistence on Health and Safety support/supervision and the award of contracts to suppliers/contractors outside of the local area (in line with the Council’s tendering procedure) or to those who no longer had best interests of the event at heart.
“In my view the major factor leading to the ever-increasing costs was the lack of the support of sponsors. If greater effort, time and expertise had been spent on marketing and publicity we would probably now be looking forward to another ‘Party’.”
By the sound of things, we may still will.
But we say again – in these tough economic times such an event must be privately funded as it is out of the question that taxpayers’ cash should be put towards such a project.
Time will tell.

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 3rd June

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Everywhere we turn, we seem to encounter demands to dispose of our green waste more considerately. This is all very fine, but the impression we re being given is that it is wrong to put garden waste into our green wheelie bins. Although it is inconvenient for Boston Borough Council, for many residents it is the only solution and it is not unllawful. The so-called garden waste collection service calls at fewer destinations these days. Visitors to the Slippery Gowt tip are instructed to rip open their waste bags rather than just throw them into the skips. Many people are rightly reluctant to use their cars to cart garden waste. Many do not have cars to use – or cars that are too small. Many are disabled, and simply unable to undertake the struggle needed to comply with any of these requests. We have said it before – the answer is the introduction of a third wheelie bin into the system – one exclusively dedicated to garden waste. Other district councils in the county can manage this, so why not Boston? We suspect that people may even be prepared to pay for the privilege. Such an idea was proposed some years ago, and we do not recall huge howls of protest at the idea.
There’s some consternation at Westminster this week with the publication of a list which ranks MPs

according to how sexy they are. Boston’s member, 47 year-old Mark Simmonds  (pictured left) comes 177th out of 648 MPs on the list. We’re not quite sure what this means – either Mark is sexier than we previously thought (although to be honest, it’s not something we’ve spent much time thinking about) – or the numbers from 178 onwards are a pretty gruesome bunch. It gave us pause for thought, though. Does anyone fancy drawing up a similar list for members of Boston Borough Council? It could be quite an eye-opener! It’s just a shame that so many of those of-so-sexy BBI councillors are sadly no longer with us.

As Boston Borough Council issues a warning about the e.coli outbreak, it also highlights a link to a helpful list for the town’s bon viveurs which makes “awards” for levels of hygiene and management. These range from gold for “excellent standards of hygiene and management” through silver and bronze, to a refusal to make an award due to “unacceptable standards of hygiene and management.” Six of the borough’s dozens of eateries fall into this latter category – including a well-known local pub and a busy fish and chip shop. The question we think needs asking is: - why are these places still allowed to open? If, as we assume, the awards accorded by the borough staff are for a different level of hygiene than that required under health and safety rules, then what is the point of doing it? Be that as it may, the borough’s food premises are being inspected on a regular basis which seems largely pointless – but something that costs time and money.
We appreciate that it must be a struggle when it comes to filling Boston Borough Council’s monthly bulletin. The content can’t all be worthy stuff – although it mostly is – and the occasional lighter feature helps to leaven the mix. But we do wonder how great enthusiasm is among Bostonians to learn about the joys of owning veteran MG sports cars. The latest bulletin is the fourth out of fourteen issues to feature them – and more than 2,000 words have been written on the subject accompanied by no fewer than ten pictures. Time to put it in the garage, Morris.
How times change as they move on. Every so often, a website called Political Calculus analyses what the opinion polls are saying and produces a prediction of who would be running the country if an election were to be held tomorrow. Readers may be surprised to learn that the overall average gave Labour a lead of 4% over the Conservatives, down from 5% last month. The Liberal Democrats continued to poll at around 11%. The new national prediction is that Labour would have a majority of 34 seats, winning 342 seats - down 9 seats since 1 May. Let’s hope that figures like this are heeded at a local level – especially by parties that think they rule the roost.
For some while there has been an entertaining local blog on the internet called Watching Lincolnshire County Council. It was run by staff past and present, and was something of an eye-opener from time to time. Sadly, a visit earlier this week produced the message "watchinglcc.wordpress.com is no longer available. The authors have deleted this blog." It doesn’t take much imagination to imagine why. A lot of the items uncovered things going on behind the scenes that we are sure the council wished would rather have not found their way into the limelight. Sadly, their response seems to have been not to try to clean up their act – but to pressurise the publishers into silence. We’ve been on the receiving end of this sort of treatment ourselves, and are sorry that watchingLCC succumbed. History is full of examples of organisations which preferred to use bully-boy tactics on anyone who dared to criticise them – and we are sure that you don’t need us to remind you of some of the more unsavoury examples from, the past 100 years.
Good news for people living in Spalding, who are being asked for their views on plans to reduce traffic congestion in the area. Lincolnshire County Council wants to build a new road linking the B1172 with the A151, to ease the impact on traffic flow of the town's six railway level crossings. Although the route of the planned road has yet to be decided, discussions with affected landowners are continuing, and public consultations will be held in July. It’s not such good news for the people of Boston, though, as we see another few millions that might have gone towards a Boston bypass going on cosmetic surgery for Spalding. We said a long time ago that Boston has now received all the traffic monies it is likely to for the foreseeable future, and this latest news serves only to underline the fact.

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

How council staff

could help fund

Party in Park

Although Boston Eye is a bit sniffy about the Party in the Park, it appears that we are something of a lonely voice.
Last week, we reported the Labour group’s promise to resurrect the issue of the party which it suggested could appropriately be done next year – to coincide with both the Queen’s Golden Jubilee and the Olympics.
Mention of this prompted an e-mail from Darron Abbott, a Conservative candidate for Boston’s South ward in the recent elections, who was “defeated” by Councillor Alison Austin.
“I remember standing next to Paul Kenny, Jane Stewart, Paul Goodale and Sally Gall (all councillors at the time) in the Camra beer tent, I think around year four of Party in the Park, when Paul Kenny said: ‘It is a good event, but we will have to find a way of making it only every two or three years, as we cannot afford this,’” he wrote.
“But I think we can afford it, if you let me explain.
“Paul Kenny receives £10,000 of government funding via Boston Borough Council's social cohesion fund for his pet project, the Community Showcase. He could give this up and the event could, I am sure, be woven into the cohesion plan- and Boston BID were prepared to chip in £5,000 for the celebration of European culture.
“One of the major costs was for stewarding the event, the majority of which was carried out by municipal buildings staff, who were paid their usual rates for this service.
“I am not sure how events like this fit in with the Taylor report and having trained paid stewards, but I know the staff did not receive any training. I am sure we could find cheaper stewards and thus reduce the costs.
“Now for the radical bit and a way for the council officers to show they can connect with the ratepayers.
“Each member of staff and councillors receive a permit which allows them to park in the borough’s car parks free of charge. This is unfair, as everyone else who parks in the town has to pay.
“The last time I looked into this there were in excess of 200 permits issued to staff. “These staff should be encouraged to buy a season ticket at £320 per year, which would raise in excess of £64,000.
“So much given by so few for so many - now that's not a paid slogan, but I think I have heard something similar before!
“Adding these amounts up this would give us near on £80,000 - now think what we could do with that!”
But – large sum though it is – it may not be anywhere near enough according to figures from someone else campaigning for the return of the party.
English Democrat Councillor David Owens, confesses to being frustrated in his efforts to find out more about the costs which he says have spiralled from £40,868 in 2001/2 to £124,809 in 2008/9.
He tells readers of his blog that whilst the information has been drip fed, he still has no detailed breakdown of how this cost managed to escalate out of control.
”Call me a cynic but I don't buy it!” he says.
“Of course when something becomes so expensive it becomes more and more difficult to justify the spend and perhaps some interesting expenditure has found its way into the cost centre for party in the park, just to help it on its way ... OUT that is!
”Some may recall I stood alone in trying to get funds used from the £660,000 Community Cohesion money, before it was squandered away on officer salaries and charities. This was to no avail. Subsequently the event was binned, and some shifty nasty poor relation substitute offered in its place.”
If anyone else has a view on the Party in the Park – and whether such a publicly funded event is past its sell-by date, then please let us know.

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

Whodunnit? Credit where credit is due, please ...

Here at Boston Eye, we are great believers in giving credit where credit is due. Sadly this has not often been possible in the past four years, as the Boston Bypass Independents achieved little that could be deemed creditworthy.
But we did something of a double take the other day when Boston Borough Council broke the news that the Improvement Board which has been monitoring its progress since it sailed into choppy waters some while ago no longer felt it necessary to meet.
There has always been contention over the establishment of the Improvement Board.
The record says that it was announced at the end of September 2009 at the instigation of former leader Richard Austin – but others claim that had this not been done there would have been more serious government intervention, and that the action was little more that a face-saving exercise to keep the wolves at bay.
Whatever the reason, the board’s life has parallelled that of the previous administration.
Which is why we were surprised at the phraseology of the announcement.
“The council has received final official recognition of its newly improved status” it read. “The Improvement Board declared it would not have to convene again, satisfied with all progress.”
So far so good …
The announcement continued: “Leader Councillor Peter Bedford said the board was satisfied that the council had political leadership and said the timing could not have been better.
“It’s excellent news – we have a new council, a clean bill of health and a new start,” he said.
Hang on a mo ...!
It doesn’t take much reading between the lines to interpret this as saying that the arrival of the Conservatives meant that the board considered that its work was no longer necessary.
The council’s status is surely not “newly improved.”
It has been achieved over 18 months, and has doubtless involved considerable effort and sacrifice on the part of the staff.
To say the board was satisfied that the council had political leadership seems to suggest that this is something of a miracle, which only occurred on the morning of Friday 6th May.
The BBI might have been a disastrous, ramshackle, misbegotten political ragbag, but it is obvious that it worked with the improvement board to achieve the result announced so fortuitously (for the Tories) just as it lost its grip on the reins of power.
And the council has a “new start” in political terms only. All the old problems remain lurking in the wings, and it remains to see what sort of fist the Conservatives will make of things. Let’s not forget that they played a key role in a lot of pre-BBI decisions that created many of the problems that the borough found itself in by 2007.
We feel that this is a case when generosity in victory could have been the Tory mantra – with acknowledgement that the good timing of the announcement for them was as a result of the efforts of the previous administration. OBE's they're called by some.
And we hope that they do not lose sight of the comments by Chief Executive Richard Harbord in the latest issue of the borough’s bulletin.
Whilst he says that Boston is well placed to not only survive but to flourish in the new world now slowly emerging, it will need considerable leadership and courage to make the necessary changes to survive.
This suggests that tough times lie ahead rather than an easy ride and perhaps not the “new start” so gleefully quoted.
And in what might be seen as oblique praise for his former masters, Mr Harbord adds that “the building blocks are all in place,” but that “there is still a mountain to climb to move from adequate to best of the breed, and that is what our current improvement plan and performance monitoring is all about.
“Compared to many districts we are in a good financial position but there are further major cuts in funding to come and we will need to change considerably to meet those challenges.
“I remain however, quietly confident that Boston is in good heart and ready to move
forward to meet the new challenges.”
We hope so, we really hope so.


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