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.