It's only money - but it is ours!

Boston Borough Council’s spending figures over £500 always make interesting reading, as they give a clue – but nothing more – as to what the borough does with our money.
For example …
We recently read a report about a programme run by Garden Organic, a national charity for organic growing, which has been working with Boston and East Lindsey district councils to support community growing spaces - including one in Central Park.
It recruits local volunteer Master Gardeners to pass on their expertise to other locals. So far there are 17 - of which only six are listed as operating in Boston, and a new group is currently being sought.
The charity offers a two-day training session, supported by a dedicated manual and interactive website, support from the Lincolnshire volunteer co-ordinator, and “free” resources, including a badge, clothing, safe working policies, insurance, expenses, and awards.
It all sounds so mellow and green, and a perfect example of self-help at little or no cost.
Until, that is,  you look at the real cost to Boston council taxpayers.
For the period between March 1st and June 30th, the borough forked over £5,461.96 – that’s a lot of green if you’ll forgive the pun!
A far more expensive bedfellow is the also one of the borough’s favourite needy causes - the South Lincs Community and Voluntary Service, which once upon a time was the humble Boston and District Volunteer Bureau.
Last month, Boston Borough Council paid SLCVS £12,750 under a service level agreement covering July to September this year.
The organisation is by no means hard up.
Just five years ago it got by on an income of £350,000 – but last year took in nearly £800,000, and also has generous surpluses in the bank.
Perhaps a review of whether Boston really needs to chip in so much money – equivalent to an annual contribution of £50,000 a year – might lead to some savings to taxpayers.
It may be, of course, that no one thinks to query such things - because so many staff now appear to work for agencies.
July’s figures show more than £20,000 was spent on agency staff – mainly in the finance, street cleaning and refuse collection services – although one single charge of almost £5,000 was for development control “assistance” in June alone.
Although it is no doubt cheaper to hire staff than to keep them on the books, there are some areas where we think that someone with more commitment than a week or two might be better for the job.
In the way that more information might be helpful to see where some of our money goes, we wondered what a housing court desk is, and why the council paid the Ringrose Law Group £5,000 for it  for the period between April and June.
At that rate it’s a yearly cost of £20,000 – but for what, exactly?
Is there a clue in a document published by Boston Borough Council in May last year, under the snappy headline: “Having problems paying for your home? Are you threatened with repossession due to mortgage or rent arrears?”
It asks: “Did you know that FREE representation is available at Boston County Court for all rent or mortgage possession cases? The duty desk is hosted by Ringrose Law in partnership with Boston Borough Council.”
The Ringrose logo and web address also appears in the brochure, and a visit to their site refers to “Our newly established Housing Department” which offers help to clients with issues including possession and repossession.
However, we can find no mention of free representation – or of Boston Borough Council.
If this is indeed the same thing – and has to be the case – then £5,000 a quarter seems a lot to pay.
Might it not be better to see if it was cheaper to pay case-by-case,  rather than a fixed fee?
Finally, we note that Liability Orders – issued to recover money owed to the council using the court system, cost £6,642 between May and July.
Some of these orders are used to obtain unpaid council tax – but they are also used to hound further the desperate local business owners who have not paid their levy to the equally but differently desperate Boston Business Improvement District.
It would be interesting to know how many orders are put to this purpose – and also how much money in total that the orders will claw back.
Tomorrow, we’ll be looking at one particular payment where the borough clearly doesn’t bother to see if it is getting value – and finding an unexpected link between Boston and the West Country

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

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

After all the trumpeting about the deal to “save” the Geoff Moulder Leisure Centre training pool, it seems that the plan isn’t quite as original as it was cracked up to be. Frampton and Holme’s Independent Councillor Brian Rush, writes to say: “It is ironic isn’t it, that this ‘new idea’ was put forward by the Better Boston Group way back? We had many meetings with Adrian Reed (executive headmaster of the Witham Schools Federation) and the Swimming Club, regarding just such a take over at the time. Had this idea not been talked down by Boston Borough Council officers, but taken forward - instead of running with the Leisure Connections debacle - so much time could have been saved, along with lots and lots of taxpayers money. I know success is never guaranteed, and I do hope the Conservatives will be big enough to give credit where it is due. Sometimes local people do know best, and maybe, just maybe, if our officers began to listen to local ideas, Boston might just be a better place.”
After our attempts earlier in the week to clarify exactly what the election of a mayor might mean for Boston, a reader sent us details of developments at Labour-run Leicester City Council – which recently abolished the post of chief executive. Directly-elected mayor Sir Peter Soulsby said the post was "redundant" because his role included most of the responsibilities of a chief executive, and that the council could save £175,000 a year by abolishing the post. Critics who say that changing the system would be more expensive, please take note!
What a funny old world it is when freedom of speech is threatened in a place like Boston! We accept that some people don't like what we say about our local politicians - invariably the politicians themselves - but have always remained satirical, and nothing more.  We once said that if identified we would cease blogging, and until recently that would have been the case. However, earlier this week we were confronted by something quite sinister.  An e-mail apparently from a senior councillor - couched humorously, but unambiguously -  claimed to know where a team member lived and included the words "be careful what you write ... "  We replied and questioned the implied threats in this communication and sought clarification, without success. We are not scared by bullyboy tactics and claims of knowing things which can be no more than guesses.   It is sad when politicians stoop so low to avoid criticism, but Boston Eye is made of sterner stuff. We would also be grateful if whoever has been repeatedly trying to hack our site would call it a day!
There seem to be some strange attitudes where our so-called visitor “attractions” are concerned. We note that the Guildhall – one of our few historic buildings – will close at noon tomorrow, then again at 12.30pm on 3rd September and 1pm on 24th September. The reason is that it has been booked for private functions on those dates. The Guildhall’s opening times are already pathetic – just 10-30am to 3-30pm Wednesday to Saturday. Surely an accommodation could have been made so that the private events started a couple of hours later to avoid the possibility of  potential visitors being disappointed? Apparently not.
But it gets worse. Now, the Maud Foster windmill has closed its tearooms after months of disruption from roadworks that made no difference at all to the traffic problems on Spilsby Road that they were designed to alleviate. 
Much further down the chain, we note that the giles52gallery  -which cost taxpayers so much money when it was created as part of a “community hub,” has been closed for the last fortnight – during what is probably the busiest time of the year for visitors. It seems that the goal of wrecking the town’s small businesses by closing the Market Place for at least  eight months is not enough. The plan now appears to be to run down what few visitor attractions we have as well.
Talking of the Market Place, we note that this week’s Boston Standard claims credit for the opening of an information centre to keep business owners abreast of developments. It was planned anyway, but according to the Standard came “just days after we called for a meeting.” Unfortunately, we can’t quite trace this call being made in the "newspaper" or on its website. Not only that, but as businesses can see their livelihoods being destroyed before their eyes, we see little to be gained from the presence of  a mostly unmanned information centre and a comments book – though some of the comments might well prove interesting!   Staff from the contractors will be available for three hours each Wednesday and Friday – but what can they say to make people feel better?  They can sympathise - possibly - but nothing is going to change. Hurrah for the Boston Standard. File the story under the same category as its “demand” for answers concerning North Sea camp made three weeks ago – which apparently have yet to materialise.
And still with the Market Place refurbishment – we have raised the point several times that works such as this seem to take far longer than they once did. An especially good example was the previously-mentioned Spilsby Road fiasco – which took twelve weeks to complete – possibly because on some occasions there were as few as three workers on site.

A  reader sent the picture on the right, which goes a long way to explaining why it will take  at least eight months to complete the Market Place works. Two men prepare for the arrival of a two foot length of kerbstone - which is being manoeuvred into place by a third man using a mini crane. How long it takes to lay each kerbstone is anyone’s guess – but we bet that in the old days of manual labour it would have taken a fraction of the time.

We are sure that the change of name from the Boston Bypass Independents to the Boston District Independents will do much to win the hearts and minds of the borough’s electorate. Accompanying the news is the same old waffle about independent thinking - and the suggestion that individual independents have little influence ...  whereas combining "independence" wins places on committees and greater power. Going it alone doesn’t seem to have harmed our individual independents so far, as they are well represented on committees. It sounds to us like the mixture as before – and as far as we can tell, the BBI/BDI hasn’t exactly blazed a trail at Worst Street since May’s elections. But now that it has finally thrown in the towel, it might find time to delete the BBI blog which began on 12th May 2007 and ended fifteen days later - and which still lists all the founder members of that ill-starred council  ... despite the claim that “this blog will be updated regularly to keep you informed on our progress…” Its earliest broken promise perhaps …?
Finally, in a move which could come back to haunt him, Skirbeck Ward Labour Councillor Paul Gleeson is inviting Boston people to name their local “grot spots.” He says – quite rightly – “We feel it is essential to run an all year round campaign on cleaning up our town and our estates.” The idea is that we send in photos of our grot spots and the reasons why we have nominated them. The details will then be highlighted on the local Labour Party website. We hope that they are prepared for the site to crash due to the sheer volume of contributions!
That’s it for this week – we’ll be back on Wednesday after a a slightly extended Bank Holiday break – but we’re not going away - and if you need us,  you can get in touch by e-mail.

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

Booze - and cheers
- Boston drinks
to it all!

It was interesting to read a recent item about Boston’s Street Pastors – a group of volunteers of whom few people in the town aged twenty-five and over will probably have ever heard.

Their job is to patrol the streets of Boston late on Saturday night - and watch for unfortunates who get into difficulties through too much drinking.
Interestingly, they see a slice of Boston life that many of the town's great and good - who should know better - are keen to deny exists.
The pastors carry bottles of water, flip-flops, foil blankets, sick bags and face wipes, and patrol the town’s nightclub areas into the wee small hours.
If you wonder about the flip-flops, they are issued to young women who shed their shoes when booze overtakes them – and so risk treading barefoot in the broken glass that litters our town these days.
The pastors also carry dustpans to collect glass from the streets – and pick up the empties left so they don’t join the deadly debris.
Their co-ordinator says: “We are very much part of the peace-keeping in the town.”
It makes Boston sound like Dodge City.
Whilst it is good to know that there is help available to frame this dystopian portrait – it highlights one more problem facing Boston.
The pastors have become another tier of society that helps people who can’t – or won’t – help themselves.
They represent a safety net for those whose sole aim is to hit Boston town centre on a Saturday night and get legless, regardless of the risk.
Whilst they don’t take on a policing role, the pastors take the weight off the police and avoid charges of drunkenness which would otherwise end in a short sharp shock for an offender and a few hours in the cells with a fine next morning – once enough to prevent a second offence.
We’re sure that the police are happy because it makes their job easier, and according to one nightclub owner, the pastors “do a great service for the town at night time. They look after our customers and other people’s customers.”
And that, of course, spares club owners the trouble of looking out for the best interests of their clients.
By way of illustration, this week’s local “newspapers” carry the story of a judge who wants an investigation into the selfsame nightclub whose manager was quoted – regarding its fitness to have an alcohol licence.
His comments followed evidence about the amount of alcohol served to four people who later carried out an unprovoked attack on a total stranger.
Between them, they consumed jugs of vodka based cocktails; WKD – an alcopop – lager and bitter ... serving one defendant who had already drunk twelve pints of beer.
Doubtless, this manager was comfortable with the Street Pastors “looking after” his customers – but who “looked after” the assault victim was probably not his concern either.
It’s all so brainless.
What do you make of the man on a night out whose best quote was: “I really respect the Street Pastors, because their job is rubbish?”
Or the women who approached them to ask if they would be distributing flip-flops later – making their intentions for a good night out completely unambiguous.
Boston’s attitude to drinking and public order is ambivalent at least.
We have a Designated Public Place Order, which bans drinking in the town centre – but as our picture sent in by a reader clearly shows, you can tip a tinnie within yards of the town’s police station without a problem.
And whenever someone comes up with an idea to sell Boston, by staging an event in Central Park – which always seems to require a beer tent ... the borough council cynically and hypocritically waives the DPPO and looks the other way.
Increasingly, public order in Boston is in the hands of non-empowered individuals, and not the police who represent law and order …
We have the Town Rangers, who appear to spend most of their time loafing about in shop doorways, chatting; we think that we still have Police Community Support Officers – though these days they are never seen – and their “real” colleagues are also invisible.
It appears that we are making no effort to curb the problems that occur on Friday and Saturday nights in the town by trying to educate people to moderate their behaviour.
Instead we encourage a lifestyle that cossets them if they don’t – even though … in a worst case scenario – they could end up in intensive care or as a victim of rape.

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

It seems that when it comes to bypasses, nothing is too good for the people of Lincoln. The Tory leadership of Lincolnshire County Council has just taken what they call a “calculated risk” with a last-ditch £48 million offer towards a 4.88-mile Lincoln eastern bypass.

It represents an increase of £33.9 million on the previous figure of £13.8 million, and if the government takes the bait, the county council expects to take the money from reserves rather than borrowing. The extra money will be blagged back over twenty years from housing developers, district councils and other groups who will benefit from the bypass.
Astonishingly for a £10 million a mile price tag, the road has already been downgraded from a dual to a single carriageway to try to keep the government onside.
Some bypass!
The county council’s desperation has been noted by Boston’s Labour councillors, who want to know when our local Tory administration is going to put pressure on “their Conservative friends” at County Hall to make the same kind of commitment that they are making to Lincoln.
“What we don’t want to see happen in the next four years is Boston’s new administration staying silent to the County Council, similar to the previous administration,” they say. “So let’s see some action, as the recent benefits will soon be lost again by the ever increasing amount of traffic on our roads.”
The councillors also comment on the ironic situation in Spalding, which has a choice of two routes for a Spalding Western Relief Road. But both routes would cut through local allotments - which has provoked objections to the plans.
“Wouldn’t it be wonderful to have that option?” says the Labour group. “Isn’t Boston just as deserving of a bypass as Lincoln and Spalding for our economic success?”
Of course it is – it’s just that our local leaders appear willing to be led by their masters in Lincoln – which means we’ll probably never hear about a bypass for Boston again.
At the same time as the Spalding bypass issue, comes news of cash help to revamp and renovate historic shops and offices in Spalding, Crowland, Holbeach and Long Sutton
Traditional work to reinstate the authentic look of properties could be part paid through a something called the Partnership Schemes in Conservation Areas, which is run by South Holland District Council and English Heritage - and since 2007, more than £600,000 has been handed out.
Twenty-five buildings have been worked on - with an average grant of more than £24,000.
What intrigues us is that whilst South Holland District Council can walk the walk – all Boston Borough Council seems capable of is talking the talk.
As long ago as 2004, the Heritage Lottery Fund granted the council a Townscape Heritage Initiative worth up to £860,000 - but it was withdrawn in 2008 as it was unable to be delivered.
More recently, but still as long ago as 2008, the council was talking to English Heritage about investing in just such a project as the one that’s operating in South Holland.
An English Heritage spokesman said at the time: “We don't invest massive amounts every year but when we're interested in a place we'll consistently invest over a period of time. It might take seven or eight years to regenerate a place. In Boston it might take longer" In one town they spent 15 years helping shop owners do their places up and convert space over shops for residential use.
How is it that other local authorities seem able to short circuit the system and get money released in quantity for essential projects, whilst in Boston, they sit on their backsides while absolutely nothing happens?
In the time that Boston has been talking, South Holland has spent more than half a million pounds.

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

H'Angus won in Hartelpool

Let's see if Boston wants an elected mayor - and no monkey business!As the debate rumbles on about whether Boston needs an elected mayor - which would replace the shambolic system we have at present – it seems that people are unclear on what it means.The confusion was compounded in the Observer column in last week’s Boston Standard – but since the writer needs a card with his name  written on it stuck in his hatband as an aide memoir, we are not especially surprised.
When a borough appoints an elected mayor, the historic office is not affected.
The “electricians, truck drivers and businessmen” can still potter around in their ermine robes and silly hats as they have for centuries.
Fortunately in most cases, the mayor has little to do with the real running of a council – except to “impartially” referee a tied vote.
The real power is in the hands of whomever a council elects – or otherwise – as its leader, who then appoints a cabinet of like thinking individuals unlikely to do anything than his or her bidding … but who can be sacked if they don’t.
Defined like this, we can see why the concept of an elected mayor is appealing.
The functionary in this post is put there by a majority vote of local people – in other words, people who consider the candidate the best for the job.
Again the difference from the current system is quite distinct.
At present, a leader's power  comes from the combined votes for his or her party - not as an individual.
And let’s not forget that, often,  elected councillors who won the votes don't  necessarily support their leader’s appointment.
More significantly,  a leader is often unknown to the electors he represents.
Another misconception – which seems widely held in Boston - is that the person campaigning for a referendum will automatically get the job.
All that is happening at present is that local people are being petitioned to call for a referendum which – if one is held – will cost £50,000, and not the £70,000 being touted.
If the petition succeeds, and a referendum is held and a majority votes to elect a mayor,  the next step is open to anyone who wants to throw their hat into the ring.
For example, it could provide an interesting opportunity for a council leader to see if he or she had the real support of the electorate; for a prominent business person to stand; or even – and it’s been done before … in Hartlepool … for the local football mascot to stand; and the man who wore it  it to be elected (see photo at top of page.)
The cost of an elected mayor is, of course, an issue  - and opponents are quick to say that it is unaffordable.
But this year, the "historic" office of mayor  - which is a token piece of pantomime these days - will cost  taxpayers £80,000 ... and even when the budget is trimmed, will be £60,000 a year  - more than £1,000 a week.
Certainly, some improvement to the way that Boston is managed is clearly needed.
The previous council voted for a government structure called “the new Leader and Cabinet Executive (England) Model.”
This required that  “the Leader is elected at the annual council meeting after his/her election to the council and he/she will remain in office for a 4 year term corresponding to his/her term as councillor.”
This key provision regarding tenure in office was designed to ensure that councils were run more harmoniously, more smoothly, and most importantly more efficiently and professionally – but it has already been rejected by the current leader.
Surely then, all bets are  now off.
If voters want  a referendum, they should have  one.
Perhaps the money could come from the reserves – as it has for the up-front funding of the Moulder training pool deal.
And as for the result – all we can say is that it could be interesting!

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

Pool plan to

make splash

with reserves

We were pleased to see that a special meeting of Boston Borough Council’s cabinet of curosities has been called for Wednesday - particularly as the previous meeting for the month was cancelled.
In our mind’s eye we pictured their bath chairs creaking off the sundecks and squeaking down Worst Street for a session doubtless to be filled with pith and moment –  probably mostly pith, given the track record of our leaders to date.
But, no.
The meeting will only consider the reopening of the training pool at the Geoff Moulder Leisure complex – plans for which have already been announced in some detail.
Flying in the face of their promise of openness and transparency – one of the few pledges the Tories made to bamboozle Bostonians to put them in charge – after a standing item snappily entitled "Recommendations from Overview and Scrutiny," the meeting will go into secret session.
In fairness, we have to say that a short "public version of the report" was slipped on to the agenda a few days after the initial details appeared – but it tells us next to nothing.
More than that, it creates confusion.
According to the original announcement, a five-year partnership between Boston Borough Council, the Witham Schools Federation and Boston Amateur Swimming Club, is looking at a service level agreement “which will cover the £100,000 a year cost of running the pool and lead to cash generation to help fund the facility.”
But later on, the same statement says that under the deal, the federation and the club will jointly invest £30,000 a year "to help with improvements and refurbishment at the pool."
That was the situation reported around three weeks ago – but now we see a different version ahead of Wednesday’s meeting.
Cabinet members will be asked to approve spending £195,000 from reserves, with £150,000 being repaid over five years from third party contributions, and the remaining £45,000 funded from the capital reserve – in other words, written off.
So what exactly is going on?
The original statement contradicted itself – firstly by saying that third party contributions would cover the pool’s running costs – then saying they would be used for improvements and refurbishment.
Now, it seems the plan is to dig into Boston’s reserves to the tune of almost two years' worth of running costs - of which £150,000 appears to be an “advance” on what the partners will be expected to repay over five years.
It would be nice to have all this explained more fully before the cabinet rubber stamps it - as it assuredly will – but sadly that is impossible, because the public and press are banned from hearing the discussions.
We learned last week that the borough’s record with sports facilities was worse than previously thought.
Veteran Boston journalist George Wheatman disclosed in his column in the Boston Target that trustees at the Peter Paine sports centre –  which was recently given away amidst great fanfare by the borough council to Boston College – were threatened that the centre would be closed if they didn’t spend £400,000 on refurbishment … or hand the lease back to Boston Borough Council.
It’s known as a carrot and stick approach – but without the carrot.
The iron fist in the iron glove.
Given the record of Boston Borough Councils and sporting facilities over the years, we get very nervous.
Are we looking another PRSA in the making, we wonder?

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

Week ending

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

There was an ominous phrase among the e-mails in circulation earlier this week from the portfolio holder for town centre development and management, Councillor Derek Richmond. Take a deep breath and read on – the italics are ours, but not the punctuation  ... “I too have the interests of the people and businesses of this Town at heart, that's why I put so much time trying to improve Boston in order to achieve more footfall, more spending and ultimately more businesses opening in the future, unfortunately despite everybody's efforts I can't see any of this happening whilst the Market Place is being re-furbished and the economic situation remains as it is, but at least we will have everything in place ready for when all this changes.” Given that the Market Place refurbishment is going on at least until March – and who knows how long the economy will take to recover - we are sure that Boston businesses will go from being gloomy to positively suicidal at this news. If we ran a Market Place business, we’d shut up shop here and now, rather than endure a steady decline and ongoing loss of profits.
Still with Councillor Richmond, we were heartily cheered by the news that the great and the good in Boston Borough Council’s cabinet are working so hard on our behalf. In another e-mail, he wrote: “We are already making great inroads in the Council thanks to everybodys hard work as I am sure the Officers would be only too pleased to tell you. I would say every member of the Cabinet are putting in in excess of 40 hours a week.” We’re sure that he would say it, but we have to say that somehow, we doubt it – unless someone would like to convince us !
We mentioned last week the scruffy plaque that allegedly marks the place where the famous explorer George Bass grew up. However, it appears that not only is the historic plaque in bad nick – but it’s in the wrong place! Reader Robin Smith tells us: “With regard to the state of the Crown and Anchor sign and the plaque with details of George Bass - just one thing concerns me, if the Placecheck/council are keen to spend our money on refurbishing them, can they at least re-install them at the correct location? Yes, George Bass did indeed spend some time residing in Skirbeck Quarter at the Coaching Inn/Posting House under the sign of the Crown and Anchor, but this property was situated at number 16 Skirbeck Quarter. This formerly fine building with its coach arch, on which the sign was originally installed, still stands. The sign, the name and the licence were relocated to the building at number 20 Skirbeck Quarter in around 1850 - approximately 50 years after Bass had died. This building was demolished in 1968 and the sign and plaque placed on the adjacent wall. But this is not the site of the inn where Bass grew up.”
We were pleased to see another list of local “surgeries” being held by Boston councillors appear on the borough’s website – although some of the events appeared to be out of date when they appeared. The list comprises three Conservative councillors, three Labour, and two Independents. That represents only a quarter of the total number of councillors. Surely the people who elected them deserve better than that?
Whilst there was no reason for Boston to have expected trouble during last week’s nationwide riots – the events certainly brought back uncomfortable memories of 2004, when the town did suffer in just such a way. This may well have been in the mind of our MP Mark Simmonds when he declared how appalled he was by the scenes in London, adding that the riot criminals must be confronted. What a shame, then, that he couldn’t apparently make the effort to attend the recall of parliament that debated the matter. In reply to a constituent who asked whether he had been present for the debate, his office said that he hadn’t, and “there hadn’t been any riots in Lincolnshire.” The phrase let them eat cake comes to mind.
There appears to have been a lot of gloating by both the Boston Standard and the borough council because BBC’s Look North came to town to feature their “name and shame anti-litter campaign.” It’s really no big deal, as lazy regional TV programmes check out the front pages of our local papers and proceed accordingly. Add to that the fact that the Look North edition in question is a local programme within a local programme, and we wonder what all the fuss is about. It should be routine for stories about Boston to appear on local television – not something to be regarded as exceptional. Also, wouldn’t it be great if the stories were good news, rather than the reverse? And before anyone objects – a story about a joint effort to punish people who drop litter (a scourge according to the council,) is not a good news story - as it highlights the litter problem in Boston and the extreme measures needed to combat it.
There is surely a message to be taken from this week’s court appearances in our local “newspapers.” Without exception, the surnames for the entire sitting read like an Eastern European telephone directory – Slivinskas, Balans, Lezdins, Moskal, Kaicenko, Jucys, Zielinski. And of these seven, some were repeat offenders, who clearly haven’t taken the hint. In its welcoming message to newcomers to Boston, the borough council says: “More people are moving into Boston from outside the area, and this information has been collected to help all newcomers, especially economic migrants from the European Union, to get information about public services they need, integrate into the community and play a full part in the borough's life. One of the council's main priorities is to ensure Boston is a place for everyone - a place that values diversity.” Boston is also a place that should value law and order – and surely the time has come to explain to newcomers that integration requires a certain standard of behaviour. Perhaps our local solicitors could also try to refrain from coming up with laughable excuses in so-called mitigation.
When Boston town centre was placed under a Designated Public Place Order – a fancy term which just means you can't drink in public – joy was unconfined. Despite the fact that it hasn’t really made much difference, there’s another less pleasant aspect for people who live beyond the DPPO area, whose opinions were pooh-poohed when they expressed fears that the order would simply shift the problem elsewhere.

We encountered these two bins within yards of each other during what should have been a pleasant weekend stroll alongside the Maud Foster waterway. Nearby, a council-owned bench had been uprooted and dumped on the river bank – although by now it is probably to be found full fathom five below old Maudie’s waters. But at least a town centre problem has been addressed – which seems to be all that the council is really concerned about - and why should it care about the poor devils living just a few hundred yards further away … after all they’re just council tax payers.
We mentioned a while ago the apparent determination of Lincolnshire County Council to ensure that the town remains as hard to travel as possible because of roadworks. One such problem has been highlighted at the A52 junction with the Boardsides, where the bridge that leads out of town to Tesco and Oldrids Downtown has been made one-way. The so called “diversion” back to town, is apparently over 20 miles and takes more than half an hour. Why? Another question that we have raised is why it takes so long to complete what ought to be relatively minor road schemes. Yesterday as we headed to Tesco, there were two men working on the bridge, whilst a third watched. Could that be the answer?
Isn’t 20:20 hindsight a wonderful thing? Once again former BBI councillor Sheila Newell has raised her head above the parapet - this time to tell us that Boston is “not as welcoming as it ought to be” and that a mere four-day a week opening of the Guildhall is inappropriate. She adds that the Market Place refurbishment should have included the Assembly Rooms - which are dirty inside and out, poorly presented, and underused. And as for the toilets – only those at Park Gate meet modern standards. How strange that during her four years in office Mrs Newell made little, if anything, of these issues. When she had to opportunity to act, she didn’t – so why is she now so gung-ho about the need for the town to be improved and promoted?
Businesses that must have been cheered when the free concert in Central Park – free to visitors, but at a cost of £10,000 to them if they were members of the Boston Business “Improvement” District – had been called off, may now be less sanguine. Apparently the event has merely been postponed – so their money will be needed next year instead. Not only that, but the event may well be spread over two days, not just one. At least it gives people longer to protest - and perhaps curb the BID’s generosity. Meanwhile, we are still baffled as to why the event reached such an advanced stage before Boston Borough Council ordered its postponement on 'elf and safety grounds - because of the proximity of Boston Market and the park. The event was approved by the BID’s board, which includes a senior officer of Boston Borough Council – so why wasn’t the conflict of interest spotted earlier, particularly as the officer concerned was also responsible for the relocation of the market?
Good to see after our mention last week that the Boston Community Showcase has found its way on to the borough council’s website What’s On Diary. Not only that, but another event is also listed for September. Two things going on in Boston in a whole month – phew … it make us feel quite giddy!


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

Don't let Boston get trapped in time

We’ve mentioned before the perception that Boston is seen as being in something of a time warp – a medieval town trapped in amber for visitors to come to enjoy, where tourism holds the key to prosperity.
But is this really the image we should be settling for?
Time and again, we see Boston’s “heritage” trumpeted – but what does it really comprise?
Whilst comparisons are made between Boston and York – often by people who really should know better – this is really comparing chalk and cheese.
We have Boston Stump, the Guildhall – now sadly spoiled by its “restoration” - and … er … Fydell House, which is nothing much to write home about, and the Maud Foster Windmill.
In Lincolnshire as a whole, 80% of the workforce is employed in one of just six areas.
Twenty-seven percent are in government services – which means the council or district councils) 18% work in the retail and wholesale sectors – shops - while 14% are in financial and business services – banks and building societies.
The agri-food industry accounts for just 10% of the workforce - almost three times the England average, followed by non-food manufacturing at 8% and tourism at the bottom of the list with 7%.
The employment situation sums up Boston problems in a nutshell – and if we are to avoid unemployment rising in the years ahead, the time to do something is now.
Government services are a contracting rather than expanding area – as is the financial sector.
Shops will always be there – but don’t we want better for the next generations than an eight hour grind behind a Tesco checkout?
Manufacturing has never been a Lincolnshire industry in this part of the world – and even if we got our bypass at some distant point in the future it seems unlikely that serious manufacturing will ever find its way here.
Even the food industry in slowly becoming less labour intensive, and more jobs in this area are being taken by migrant labour rather than the traditional gangmaster core.
Tourism – with such a small share of the jobs market – is not really the basket in which to put Boston’s eggs.
The attractions that we mentioned at the start are unlikely to employ many more people, even if we attract more visitors.
The shops – and therefore the local economy may benefit in increased sales – but with declining “truly local” businesses, most of the money will head out of the borough and into the coffers of the national chains.
The Lincolnshire Local Economic Assessment recognises Boston’s difficulties.
“Job creation will need to be achieved in the places where the need is greatest.” It says. “This includes areas such as the east coast, Gainsborough and Boston, where levels of worklessness are higher and the skills of the workforce lower than the county average.”
Boston does of course have opportunities for development on the jobs front.
The much trumpeted Endeavour Park which was built by Boston Borough Council still has plenty of capacity – and we are sure that there are other such estates with room for new business.
Yet we never seem to hear much about the opportunities available.
This week saw the announcement of major government investment in rural broadband – with Lincolnshire in the top five areas in terms of the cash allocation with an allocation of £14.3m.
All the signs are there.
A sea change could occur in Boston if the right people seized the initiative now.
Lincolnshire is conspicuously absent from the latest list of Enterprise Zones announced by the government yesterday morning. There are now around thirty counties on the list of locations to benefit from initiative which could see tens of thousands of jobs created.
Soon, our part of the world will be famous for nothing at all – unless someone gets a finger out to improve local work and business opportunities.

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

"Momentum for referendum

on elected

mayor is there"

We have been taken to task for suggesting that the campaign to hold a referendum on whether Boston should have an elected Mayor was in the doldrums.
English Democrat Councillor Elliott Fountain, who is spearheading the campaign - which needs 2,400 signatures to force the referendum -  says he is sending 250 letters to local businesses and organisations in support of his campaign.
“There are many things going on behind the scenes that are helping me build a strong foundation and build the network I require,” he told us. "I have opened an office on West Street and have been dealing with solicitors to open an English Democrat supporters club.
“There have been two or three big write-ups in the Boston Target in last few weeks, so I think the momentum and awareness is there.
“There is no major rush for me to collect names, so I am not trying to burn myself out because I need to pace myself for the petition, referendum and then the Mayoral election.
“I can easily collect 200 signatures a day myself, and have not yet met one person who has not signed the petition.
“The people/network I am trying to build will give me a strong base, and allow me to use many other resources. I have got over 100 organisations to deal with just with the learning communities for Boston area, who have been supportive, then I have all the retailers who are against Boston BID to see how they are going to support me.
“I have been to meet all the big gangmasters and landlords, and they are willing to help with the campaign. I have just bought a large printer and opened a printer’s just so I can produce my own leaflets and petitions quicker.
“Honestly, I could get the 2,400 signatures by the end of the month if I really wanted to, but I don’t think this would be to my advantage. I want the residential care homes, Mayflower, the police and everyone involved.
“The petition has been downloaded off www.elliottfountain.co.uk  on many occasions already, and I would expect these to get signed by the people then dropped in or posted back to me.”
Councillor Fountain also addresses the matter of offering payments to people who collect signatures, which brought comment from Boston Eye readers.
“I would expect the offer of cash to get a response from many of the people who don’t support me, and this I imagine is what has happened - any excuse to try and paint it in a negative light.
“I am truly disappointed with the Boston Standard’s article and think it is taken out of context, and very poor journalism.
“I was happy for the Standard to report one of my groups on Facebook, which has 1,250 members who all show their support. I did not know the Standard was trying to look for a very poor news scoop on there.
“The main reason I want to save Boston is because of what it has become.
"If the media and other people don’t want to support me, this is disappointing to say the least.
“The momentum is there, I promise you.”
In an email to the paper, Councillor Fountain protests that the headline “paints me in a unfair and negative light for no apparent reason.”
He adds: “The Standard should be interviewing myself and reporting on things I have said, not Facebook statuses where I would compensate and reward someone in the economic recession who has taken lots of their own time to support me and to gain over 500 signatures.
“I would not expect anyone to sacrifice their own time knocking on doors, talking to people to explain and collecting names. I had not even thought any further about what I had put on Facebook until I saw it in the Standard.”

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

Tories caught napping
in first 100 daze

Four years ago, the Boston Bypass Independents issued a press release to mark their first hundred days in power.
Rightly or wrongly, they were proud of their achievements, and wanted voters to know.
Four years on, and the new tenants at Worst Street - the Big Blue Dragon Corp - are slumbering in their aerie.
When the Tories stormed to power 100 days ago, no one was more surprised than they.
Their manifesto – such as it was – promised to maintain front line services, end “behind closed door” policies, push for cleaner streets and green waste collection, improve safety in Boston and the villages, and share resources with other councils.
They were pedestrian promises, from a party which expected to form a substantial opposition, then be able to snipe at whoever really ran the show without the need to put their money where their mouth was.
The election changed all that.
The Tories won Boston for the first time since local government reorganisation in 1973 – but their victory left them wrong-footed and short on ideas.
The man who led them to victory – Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire - “decided” to cede the leadership to Councillor Peter Bedford … an experienced “leader” having just spent the previous year as the boss of Lincolnshire County Council  - and who had obviously enjoyed the experience.
Councillor Singleton-McGuire’s explanation was that the borough’s finances demanded so much attention that it would take him a couple of years to sort things out - but then they were signed off as ok within a few weeks.
Since then the formerly ebullient and vocal Councillor Singleton-McGuire has become a political hermit – seldom heard from, and mute on his previously active blog for months.
The party had barely got its carpet slippers beneath the tea table … just 60 days in … when a councillor who dared to challenge the bosses, found it impossible to go on  - and joined the independents.
That led the leader to declare that there was no room for “mavericks” in his posse – a clear suggestion that individuality was not tolerated.
Strangely, Councillor Bedford had already shown “maverick” tendencies by rejecting the government’s “strong leadership model,” which says a leader must serve for a council’s full four year term – the idea being to give it a solid grounding and strengthen it by removing internal political wrangling.
Instead, Councillor Bedford  clarified his position saying he was dedicated to the job for two years at least. After that he would rethink once Lincolnshire County Council elections were held.
So much for the politics to date – now … what about the promises?
"Maintenance of front line services" is hard to define, as it depends on what you call a front line service.
But within the past week or so we have heard about hiving off the borough’s bereavement services to the private sector. We have also seen a “partnership” at the Geoff Moulder training pool which will let selected groups access the facilities in exchange for a £30,000 a year “entry ticket.” Similarly, the borough has given away the Peter Paine sports centre to Boston College in a peppercorn rent deal which will also almost certainly reduce the access formerly enjoyed by the public.
So the services side of things is contracting all the time – and another election promise, to share working with other councils, may well result in reduced levels also.
Then there was the pledge to end “behind closed door” policies – the infamous “pink paper” agenda items that saw the public and press excluded from meetings.
Despite being in power for more than three months, meetings have been cancelled – including one that would have been the first cabinet session to discuss “real” business – so it is not yet possible to make much of an evaluation.
But what we noticed on the agenda which debated selling off bereavement services, was a warning that if the discussion strayed into “confidential” areas such as staffing implications, then the public would be thrown out.
Note the absence of a pink paper – but also note that, inevitably, the discussion went that way – and the exclusions took place.
The promise on green waste collection was delivered in a sloppy way with a pilot scheme that completely upended the rules on which bins are used for which waste and confused many people. Whilst it is succeeding, there is a clear need to introduce it borough wide and to provide dedicated wheelie bins as soon as possible – and to turn the savings that benefit Lincolnshire County Council into tangible benefits for the people of Boston.
The only other concrete pledge was to work with communities and the police to improve all areas of the borough. To date this appears to constitute the resurrection of a three year old scheme to name and shame litterers – done in conjunction with the Boston Standard.
It’s a start, but there are so many more areas which need to be addressed – especially the reverberations from the Boston explosion and sale of illicit alcohol in the town – and restoring a visible police presence to our streets.
Then there are areas where promises were implied, rather than made.
High on the list was the issue of the Into Town buses using Strait Bargate as a rat run – something condemned by the Tories in opposition.
But now that push has come to shove, they say that nothing can be done until the contract for the service ends in two years’ time – presumably to placate their masters in County Hall - something that they previously accused the BBI of doing.
The Tories also threw their weight behind the Market Place refurbishment scheme – not that they had any choice - but now it is proving such blight on local businesses, they are reluctant to address the problem.
Still, it’s only been a hundred days – so perhaps that’s why there’s not a lot to write home about.
Perhaps we should not have expected too much.
In that case, we wouldn’t have been disappointed.
Instead, we’ll be charitable and call it a honeymoon period.
Whatever,  it’s over now   - so we expect to see something positive emerging for the people of Boston.

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

From BID to worse...

Boston’s beleaguered Business Improvement District is at the centre of more controversy after a weekend which saw the announcement of the cancellation of the free concert in Central Park – on the orders of Boston Borough Council - into which the BID had intended to pour £10,000 in levy payers’ money. (See our Saturday blog for details.) 
Given the length of time since the concert was announced, and the fact that the event was fully planned and ready, there is speculation that the call to postpone it at such a late stage was more an attempt to defledct the anger of local businesses by saving them money, rather than the “health and safety-ish” pretext of the relocation of the market.
After our reports last week, one of the members of the Task and Finish group set up to look into the affairs of the BID – Independent Councillor Richard Leggott – wrote to Councillor Derek Richmond … the portfolio holder for town centre development and management, car parks, BID, markets and public toilets.
The e-mail appears below.

click to enlarge the image

His reaction was to suggest from the outset that the information in our report was untrue – but that has, of course, subsequently proved not to be the case.
Here’s what Councillor Richmond – a former right hand man of Boston MP Mark Simmonds, and one time chairman of Boston and Skegness Conservative Association “which has given me experience of local politics” – had to say …

click to enlarge the image

Among the achievements listed, we were especially taken by the BID “Area Champion Scheme.” In which “Eight area champions volunteered to represent their areas. Held first meeting in June - but only one Champion attended.”
Champion!!
Councillor Leggott was quick to pick up on aspects of the reply – including the apparently large amount of levy which has gone unpaid.
His reply left the ball firmly in Councillor Richmond’s court.


click to enlarge the image

Over the weekend, Councillor Leggott responded to a request from Boston Eye to comment.
“For a start, let me say that I would like our BID to be successful for the town and individual retailers,” he said.
“As a member of the Task and Finish group that looked into matters BID approximately eight months ago, I have kept up an interest in the reactive outcome to the borough council considerations, findings and recommendations.
“The recommendations were for a really serious attempt to address the communications problems within BID, expressing a hope that a two way flow of information could be implemented.
“BID is a member organisation and I know, from other work in such spheres, that unless members are part of a good two way communication system then members cannot appreciate what is being done and why. Nor can they express their approval, or otherwise, at the relevant times and place.
“Communication in such organisations should allow members to input right to and from the core.
“On hearing what has actually been happening since the Task and Finish group made its recommendation regarding this issue, I contacted Councillor Richmond expressing some concerns.
“I have been told that Councillor Richmond is aware of the ongoing communications problem and has been raising the issue at his monthly meetings with (unidentified) BID members. He has also assured me he will be raising the matter again at next Friday's meeting. Well done.
“However in such correspondence it transpires that two other problems are also 'dogging' BID.
“First; there seems to be much activity in the preparation of lists of 'forthcoming attractions.’ Whether such lists ever get turned into actualities is hard to say as a non BID member. Possibly BID members are better informed but ---?
“Second; it would appear that BID funding can be seen to be procuring services that would normally be provided by Boston Borough Council, paid out of council taxes collected. Am I wrong in thinking that the extra 1% levy was all supposed to be used to provide extra services?
“I feel sure that even if Councillor Richmond does not read your column (as he claims) then his fellow cabinet members, three of whom sat on the BID Task and Finish group, will be able to 'fill him in' on these matters.
But I fear that addressing other issues will be for nought if the lack of communications continues to sour BID members' thinking.
“And that would be a great shame.”
A much lengthier – and in some ways even more telling - email dialogue has taken place between Councillor Richmond and Boston businessman Darron Abbott – a strong critic of the BID – and it has led to some interesting disclosures.
There are too many to publish them here – but what they do show is that Councillor Richmond (pictured below left) appears badly out of touch with some of the issues he is supposed to be knowledgeable about.

In one message, Mr Abbott told Councillor Richmond: “I really do hope that you and the borough take the opportunity to call a meeting and ask the businesses what they think is wrong. Surely you and the council have a duty to listen to all parties; if you fail to do this it will demonstrate to the life blood of this town that they are not important to you as portfolio holder for the town centre, the conservative administration and the officers of the council.
“I hope you will consider my comments as I feel the businesses have had enough and could start to become vocal.
“Remember: ‘Conservatives are the party for business.’"
The response – whilst apparently conciliatory – was also barbed.
“I no objections to a meeting, and am willing to chair it, in fact I welcome every thing being out in the open, I will talk to BID about this.
“I can tell you that BID do a lot of stuff that is necessary for the Town and that in these times of financial constraints, we as a Council, can't afford to do, Boston would be a poorer place without them, what they do need to do is communicate better as I tell them every time I see them.
“If you knew the amount of work I am putting in with other parties to try and revive Boston after four years of neglect I am sure you would not be making offensive remarks regarding the Life blood of Boston.
“We are already making great inroads in the Council thanks to everybodys hard work as I am sure the Officers would be only too pleased to tell you. I would say every member of the Cabinet are putting in in excess of 40 hours a week.”
Note the line: “BID do a lot of stuff that is necessary for the Town and that in these times of financial constraints, we as a Council, can't afford to do…”
The rules governing BIDs are explicit – they are to use their resources to enhance the status quo – not to pay for services the local council can no longer afford.
In an earlier exchange about the number of business which had not paid their levies, when Mr Abbott raised the issue of the outstanding levy payments – which Councillor Richmond has described as “colossal” he retorted (with a copy this time sent to two of the council’s most senior officers) “Yes but that will change very shortly” – a line taken to mean that prosecutions may well be launched against non payers soon.
Readers will recall that Boston Borough Council is the BID’s “enforcer” and issues summonses for non payment which could see refuseniks fined and criminalised.
Councillor Richmond’s comment prompted this response from Mr Abbott: “Would it not be better to call a meeting to find out why people are not paying, there must be a reason. Perhaps people want their day in court, and I would advise caution. In a recent case the courts said the levy must be paid but would not allow the costs to be passed on. This set a precedent and could be very costly to BID and the council. Remember whose name will be on the demands and court summons and will look the bad guys. It will not be BID.”
Clearly, the council is now on the horns of a dilemma.
The situation surrounding Boston BID has deteriorated to a ludicrous degree – helped in no small way by a portfolio holder with responsibility in that area.
Perhaps a cabinet reshuffle would help?

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

Council orders BID's

"free" concert postponed

It’s emerged that Boston Borough Council was behind the move to cancel next month’s free music festival in the town’s Central Park.
An email to the local band Audio Tap from Jo Moscrop, the project manager for the concert at Infodex Events, broke the news.
It read: “Unfortunately Boston Council have requested that Boston BID (the funders) postpone Boston Beat in September due to the temporary relocation of the Market (just outside park gates). We are awaiting a reply back to confirm the new date for the Festival (next year sometime).
“As I'm sure you will agree this is a huge blow and one we could all have done without.
“We are absolutely gutted here and are so sorry that we have to give you this bad news.
“We had everything in place for the event; all the work had been done, just a matter of turning up on the day.”
A comment posted on Audio Tap’s Facebook page (picture below)  reads
“Well, no live music in the park this September. THANKS BOSTON COUNCIL.

click on photo to enlarge

“Unfortunately Boston Council have requested that Boston BID (the funders) postpone Boston Beat in September due to the temporary relocation of the Market (just outside park gates).
“I’d have thought it would have helped trade in Boston, with the extra people in the town.”
What we don’t understand is why the project was allowed to develop for so long before the council decided to intervene – thus raising people’s expectations and wasting a lot of the organisers’ time.
Boston Borough Council has an officer on the BID board – and even if he was not present at the meeting which took the decision, he must surely have been aware of it.
The Boston Beat event was announced in the local papers two and a half weeks ago on June 27th – so a decision was clearly taken well before that.
So why did the council take so long?
Was it an indirect way to stop the BID blowing £10,000 of levy payers’ funds after a week of protest against the use of the money for such a project?
If so, it has backfired - as feeling against the BID is now running higher than ever.
See Monday’s Boston Eye to read some interesting e-mail conversations and admissions about Boston BID.

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

Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

We’re told that Boston BID has backed out of its planned sponsorship of a pop concert planned for Central Park on 11th September which it planned to back with £10,000 worth of members’ levy fees. Meanwhile, as the turmoil goes on, it appears that the BID is set to get its third chairman in just over a year. It also appears that many traders have refused to pay their levy - leaving the BID with a huge amount in arrears. Last Night BBC Look North featured the BID issue, and among the people interviewed was local butcher Terry Dawson, who said he ignored the BID’s initial letter because it looked like junk mail - but then found that his silence had been interpreted as a vote in favour of its formation. And Judith Meadows, a former director of the company, said that whilst the BID made lots of lists it never did much. Look out for more on the BID debate on Monday’s blog.
The campaign for a referendum to see if voters want an elected mayor for Boston appears to have got off to a sluggish start. Five per-cent of the electorate – just 2,400 people – need to back the idea to force the referendum, which critics say is an expense the borough can’t afford. This week’s Boston Standard makes much of the fact that the man behind the campaign – English Democrat Councillor Elliott Fountain – is offering payments to people who collect more than 500 signatures. It’s something that’s also exercised some of our readers. We guess that it depends whether the payment is compensation for time spent going door-to-door with a petition form, or "buying" signatures per se. Perhaps some clarification would help.
Despite the mutterings about the way it is being conducted, the green waste pilot scheme is said to have collected 70 tons of garden refuse in its first week and been a great success. It’s estimated that that more than £45,000 will be saved in disposal fees during the project. However, the beneficiary is not Boston, but Lincolnshire County Council, and it is unclear whether the borough gets anything out of it or not – although estimates show Boston paying nothing at all if the county council foots its costs to the extent of the savings. One slight problem in all of this is what on earth to do with all the compost created. Within our team, we own something like six compost bins, all working flat out, and producing more compost than we can cobble dogs with – magnify that by hundreds of tons, and it surely becomes something of a problem.
Refurbished or not? The latest edition of the Boston Borough Council bulletin devotes quite a lot of space to local-ish hero George Bass, one of the early explorers of Australia. It makes mention of the plaque in the High Street which marks the place where Bass grew up, and which was erected almost 20 years ago. Sadly as the bulletin picture of it shows, the plaque appears in a dreadful condition.We hope that the picture is merely out of date, as project number six of the High Street South Placecheck scheme announced in January last year included the refurbishment of the memorial. But as this is Placecheck, anything is possible.
A novel idea to make Boston a greener place appears on a website called PledgeBank. The idea is that an individual makes a promise that will be carried out if a specified number of others lend support. The one in question is called Trees for Boston, and the pledge reads: "I will plant five trees a year in the town, but only if 20 other local people will support the transfer of the Victorian Cemetery to a local volunteer trust. It is signed by Jonathon Carr-Brackenbury, a “Bostonian concerned resident.” The deadline for signatures is 27th May 2012, and so far only two people have signed up. A footnote to the appeal adds: “The Victorian cemetery is badly mismanaged by the council and needs transferring to a local volunteer trust to be maintained as a Grade 2 listed cemetery park and garden.” It’s a good idea apart from one small snag – by May next year, the cemetery may well have been hived off to the private sector.

click on photo to enlarge

It’s a sad fact that Boston is at the bottom of so many lists that we’ve lost count. But now it seems that our puny status extends even into the corridors of power. A local talking shop called the Conservative Policy Forum for Lincolnshire has four local MPs giving after dinner talks around the county. As you can see, the session with MPs Karl McCartney and Stephen Phillips will set you back a tenner, followed by £8 to hear Nick Boles. But the buffet supper with our very own Mark Simmonds is a mere £6 a head.
It sounds like it won’t be worth taking a doggy bag!
We note that the Boston Standard has dusted off its big idea of three years ago and teamed up with Boston Borough Council to name and shame litter louts who drop their rubbish in our streets – which the council now admits is a “scourge.” Ideas like this are all well and good, and it is claimed that the scheme was very effective when first tried out three years ago. What we don’t understand was why it was dropped. Presumably, the novelty wore off, but had it continued it might well have all but eradicated the borough’s litter problems by now. We hope that this time the campaign will prove to be more than just a publicity stunt for the council and the Standard. And while they’re about it, how about using the cameras to name and shame the dozens of drivers who jump red traffic lights around the town every day – before they kill or maim some hapless pedestrian.
People who live in glass houses … This week’s Boston Standard has a new comment columnist, who - in the absence of anything much to say - decided to highlight the following.

Aside from the fact that these misspellings could have been picked up by the local staff who theoretically have greater local knowledge, the dangers of highlighting such errors became apparent just a few pages later. In the Standard’s regular stroll down memory lane, the following appeared …

Lindus Road? Surely, Lindis!
Next week will see the first 100 days of the Conservative administration at Boston Borough Council. A time for celebration? We’ll be taking a closer look, as you might expect – most probably in Tuesday’s blog. So if anyone would like to write and tell us what a great job they've been doing, then there’s still time. But we won’t hold our breath!
In a paid for advert in this week’s Boston Target, Independent Councillor Carol Taylor extends her thanks to a couple who helped her out with the price of a car park ticket.

Last week she had a letter in the paper praising the police for their quick response after she tried to disperse a group of drinkers in the town centre – some of whom wouldn’t take the hint. Councillor Taylor recently rose to our challenge to compare councillors with characters from the Bash Street Kids – and nominated herself as Toots. But in light of recent events, we somehow feel that Beryl in Peril would seem nearer the mark! One final question – it may look different in our enlargement, but why does the Target apparently use a drawing of a carrot as a means to say thanks?

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

Who will help

poor old Boston?

Given the glittering incompetence of Boston Business Improvement District - which we make no apologies for banging on about these past three days - we thought that we would take a look and see whether anyone, anywhere, was flying the flag for Boston.

It seems that there are plenty of places, but none of them show much, if any, interest in our part of the world.
A quick search around comes up with Lincolnshire Enterprise “an independent, business led partnership between the private sector, local authorities, public bodies, voluntary and community groups across the (sic) Lincolnshire.”
It calls itself a “key vehicle” through which Lincolnshire County Council engages and consults with partners to champion economic development and regeneration in the county, which has worked with other business leaders and local authorities to develop a proposal to create a Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) for Lincolnshire.
A trawl though its web pages finds little mention of Boston – except in the context of its heritage value.
Whilst heritage is important, it butters no parsnips, as the bard might have said on an off day.
So what of this Local Enterprise Partnership?
It met for the first time in December – and although it was initially intended to be based on the Lincolnshire County Council area, it now includes North East and North Lincolnshire and will work closely with the LEPs covering Nottinghamshire and Greater Peterborough.
We’re not sure this is a good move.
In the LEP’s own words, “Greater Lincolnshire is largely rural, with much of the population living in market towns, coastal communities and isolated rural settlements. Individuals and businesses looking to grow in these areas face particular challenges, and the LEP will work with partners and local businesses and entrepreneurs to provide support they need to thrive.”
It sounds good – but partnering with the four far more industrialised areas mentioned previously can do nothing but divert much needed assistance from the area the LEP was once intended to serve.
And again, there is an element of secrecy in all of this. The board will meet quarterly – in private – but unlike Boston BID, will publish the minutes of its meetings.
Having said that, we can find no trace of any meeting to date - although by now there should have been at least two - nor any sign of the Prospectus for Action that was promised after the first meeting.
The founding board has 12 members - six from business and six civic leaders from across publicly-funded organisations – and guess what? Boston is not represented.
But the good news for one member at least - Neil Corner, Siemens’ Director of Service – is that the LEP’s first bid included money for a transport infrastructure and to facilitate Siemens’s turbine operations move to Teal Park in North Hykeham near Lincoln.
Oh well, there’s always Visit Lincolnshire, the former tourism quango now run by Lincolnshire County Council after funding was withdrawn.
But even this only pays lip service to Boston.
A search of attractions comes up with 15 places – some of them outside the borough – and does not include Boston Stump. Doubtless it listed elsewhere but ….
The website also lists what’s on events.
We looked for next month’s Boston Community Showcase – a major event that draws thousands of visitors – but it wasn’t listed. Having said that, it doesn’t appear on Boston Borough Council’s website list of events, either, as September is totally blank.
As we mentioned the other week, the draft economic strategy report produced by Boston Borough Council recognised the “poor marketing and image of Boston.”
It’s taken long enough, and we hope that this serious omission is addressed as soon as possible.
But it is also clear that we can look for little, if any help, in funding or promoting the area from the various quangos that are supposed to be taking our needs into account.
We think that one of the best things that could happen would be for Boston to set up its own promotional organisation – but staffed by professionals who know whereof they speak and who have the strength and ability to get things done.

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