Week ending 5th March

Our Friday miscellany of the week's news and events
Desperate ends ... Who knew that we had elected such cosy councillors? According to Boston Borough Council's website: "Care and concerns by councillors have led to approval of £141,470 for repairs and maintenance to Boston Stump." The reality is in the minutes. A report to the cabinet tells us: "The Council has a legal obligation to pay for repairs to the Chancel." And when the question of what options existed to wriggle out of the commitment, was raised, the answer was: "Not to pay for the repairs to the chancel - although the Council may face legal proceedings to enforce payment." We rate the website piece as the best bit of cynical hypocrisy aimed at whitewashing the BBI to date. And let's not forget they turned down a request to throw a meagre £4,000 towards illuminating the Stump for the year ahead for all to see for miles around on the grounds it was too expensive. Now that would have shown care and concern.
Spring into action ... As the merry month of madness tottered in on Monday, it occurred to us that it is high time for Council Leader Richard Austin to refresh his message on the borough website. It has been stuck in New Year greeting mode for so long, that the year will soon be over unless he comes up with something new in the not too distant future.
So what's your point? ... In a matter of weeks, the common or garden chrysalis known as Paul Kenny of Bradford Road, Boston, will will turn into the colourful butterfly known as Paul Kenny the prospective Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Boston and Skegness. Meanwhile, aside from his hobby of making pointless complaints against Boston borough councillors, he is continuing with the second string to his bow - that of writing pointless letters to the local papers. His latest, which like so many before them makes no mention of his partisanship, appears to revel in the fact that the Audit Commission has nothing good to say about Boston Borough Council - he even goes so far as to thank the Commission for doing so. But at no point does he offer anything constructive. Not for the first time, we are baffled by the position that Mr Kenny takes in the local political arena. If he carries on like this, his Tory opponent Mark Simmonds will be able to fight the election campaign from a beach in Barbados whilst sipping a pina colada and double his majority without having to lift a finger.
Lost in cyberspace ... Mind you, we suspect the Lib Dems won't give too much trouble either. If Mike Sheridan-Shinn is planning on standing for parliament, someone should tell him that the fight for the Boston North West seat on Lincolnshire County Council is over and won. According to his website, "Its now time to launch phase two which is very exciting and i know my supporters will like it......." As Paul Daniels might say: "Not a lot, not a lot...." Mr S-S reminds us of those Japanese warriors who are still lurking deep in the tropical jungles unaware that the ware has been over for 65 years....
Penny hal'penny dreadful ... This week's highest priced least read Boston Standard can claim an interesting distinction. If one counts the number of stories on the pages laughingly labelled "News," they total 30. In a paper priced at 45p pence, this means that we are paying the equivalent of one and a half pence per story. With most papers, sad sacks like us would lose count and get bored before they were able to complete a count such as this. Aside from the usual clutch of spelling errors this week, we notice little of interest. But our attention was drawn to an advertising feature in last week's issue in which one of the sister-principals of "I heart Food" was named as Vicoria, Victoria, and Vistoria in the same story. And that in an advertising feature, which the buyers seek for the prestige it brings.
Hard to chew ... In its endless quest for things to put on the website, Boston Borough Council has an interesting item on food safety. It allocates awards of gold, silver and bronze to each of the 200+ places in and around the town where one can eat. Note that we say "where one can eat" rather than "restaurants and cafes." Many of the places are not open to the general public (try turning up for a bite at H.M.P North Sea Camp and see where it gets you) - and sadly they tend to be the handful that get the higher marks. Far and away the most get a bronze award, which more or less means that the staff use clean hankies to wipe the tables. Oh yes, and at least one of the places has been converted from a pub into flats, and we suspect a few others are have probably closed. Is it just an unhappy coincidence that the Food Safety Award Scheme, is backed by the Boston Standard.
Nul points ... We fear that Boston BID is going off the boil. An item on the organisation's website tells us: "Whilst I am sure many of you are already aware of the council's budget proposals from other sources, it is important that you have your say. To achieve this you can complete an online survey by following the link below." This item, the headline tells us, was "written on Monday 15th February 2010." and goes on to tell readers: "Please be aware that the closing date is this Thursday 14th January so if you want your views to count complete the survey now."
B-TACky ... As the council struggles to find savings, we think that they could have hung on to £1,500 by not bothering with this year's BTAC Community Grants Awards. When only two applications are received, and one at least is from a group that could well afford to pay its own way itself, we think such schemes have run their course.

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

Making monkeys of us all

In nature monkeys spend hours mutually grooming each other, and once again a similar exercise is planned for Boston. It's called the Big Boston Clean-up, and it's looking for 500 volunteers to tackle the borough's "grot spots."
This is, in itself, a challenge.
There are many (and we number ourselves among them) who regard most of Boston as a grot spot.
Apart from the town centre, which is kept moderately clean - most probably for the benefit of visitors, as locals count for very little - the condition of the rest of Boston is deplorable.
Any area that is regularly trafficked on foot is regularly littered - despite the presence of litter bins.
Any area within the town that is faintly bucolic, becomes a repository for animal faeces, and when the grass becomes cluttered with them, the pavements will do.
Most of these animals are allowed to run loose (no pun intended) by their owners - in fact they are often encouraged to do so by being released unattended - usually after dark - so that their owners cannot be identified and punished.
And if you think that's harmless, remember: doggy poo, as most people call it to make it sound less of a problem, contains roundworm, giardia, campylobacter, leptospira, tapeworm, cryptosporidium, e.coli and fecal coliforms. It can kill people.
In some ways, things like the big clean up serve a purpose - last year's event won the Community Engagement Project of the year award at the Environment Agency’s Communications Awards But any element of community spirit is rapidly lost because the event is a once a year affair.
The litter problem is underlined by the fact that every time the gung-ho Placecheck scheme erects its tent in a neighbourhood to waste another shedload of taxpayers' money all that most people want is the rubbish removed from their streets.
We are paying once through our council tax to keep our borough tidy.
We are paying again through the Big Boston Clean-up.
We are paying again through the Placecheck scheme.
And what do we get?
For a few days, the streets of Boston are like they should all year round.
Then the litter louts return them to the state we see them in most of the year round.
We don't need tokenism to fight litter and dog fouling.
We need PCSOs and dog wardens, and members of the host of uniformed armies that have bred like flies all around Boston, out on patrol looking for offenders - and when they find them, punishing them.
Let's not forget the downside to this littapickathon.
Many young people are going to be involved in this, and where there's litter there is danger, in the form of broken glass, or worse, discarded hypodermic syringes - and we've already spelt out the risk of coming in contact with Bonzo's biggies.
What safeguards and precautions are being taken to protect litter pickers from the litter itself?
At the end of the day the fact is that once again, Boston Borough Council is getting the townsfolk to do its job for them, when it should be doing more to tackle the litter and fouling problem and stamp it out.

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

Zeroes - not heroes!

Twelve months on, and still the Boston Bypass Independents fail to get a grasp on mathematics.
On the borough's website, under the headline: "Council Tax: What YOU pay" the BBI leader Richard "Papa Dick" Austin tells us "the Cabinet has agreed a zero per cent increase in the council tax...."
As we pointed out when this fatuous phrase was first uttered this time last year, you cannot have a zero per cent increase in anything - but then, it's only English, isn't it so why not mangle it like you mangle everything else?
In fact, as is so often the case, the council contradicts itself by saying; "Less than 4p a week – that’s how much Boston Borough Council’s increase in the council tax looks set to cost an average band D household."
Given that the bulk of properties in Boston are in Band A, we wonder why the council doesn't use that figure to explain the true cost to the taxpayers, rather than the preferred Band D measure, but that's probably just to add to the general confusion.
In fact, there will be an increase in council tax, but the purpose of explaining it to the great unwashed (that's us) is to blame the drainage boards for the rise. As Councillor Austin goes on to tell us, without a 1.1 per cent increase from drainage boards, Boston borough residents would have had a second year with no increase in their council tax at all "in view of the difficult circumstances which many families find themselves in..."
By way of damning with faint praise, he adds "The work the drainage boards do is vitally important in keeping the borough flood free."
And just in case we are still unsure of where to place the blame for any rise in council tax, we are reminded that although the borough council collects the tax, 75 per cent of the total bill is kept by Lincolnshire County Council, 12 per cent goes to Lincolnshire Police, and a drop in the ocean to parish councils.
Don't blame us, Guv, a big boy did it and ran away.
For some peculiar reason, although savings of £58,000 in the coming financial year and £65,000 in 2011/12 could be made if the laughable money-wasting  Haven arts centre was mothballed, talks are still going on with Lincolnshire County Council to try to safeguard the centre and possibly let the Friends of the Haven (apparently they have some) continue to use the building.
Mothballing the public toilets in Wide Bargate for two years would save £52,000, and increasing the cost of dying as well as living by upping adult fees at the crematorium would bring in an extra £84,000 by 2012/13.
We think the obsession with keeping council tax rises at zero is stupid.
The council is strapped for cash, and had it followed the lead set by Lincolnshire County Council and imposed a reasonable and acceptable 2.5%, no one would have been seriously out of pocket, and there would have been more cash in the kitty to spend for the benefit of the borough - perhaps obviating the need to increase crematorium fees and mothball the toilets.
It really does seem that all the BBI is interested in is its image - but as we all know there is nothing of substance beneath the surface.
Amidst all of this there is also a recommendation that councillors' allowances should rise by 4.6%.
You may be surprised to learn that we have no problem with this.
Many members of Boston Borough Council (and we stress the word many) work very hard and if they don't mind the shirkers among them sharing the benefits, then nor do we.
In fact allowances on Boston Borough Council are 40% below the national average - again partly due to some unnecessary showing off by the BBI in the early days when they voted against a reasonable increase just to show how in touch with the voters they were - so 4.6% is just a drop in the ocean.
What a shame we can't drop the BBI in the ocean as well.

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

Empty shops plan leaves councillor "aghast"

We're not alone in our criticism of the plan before Boston Borough Council's Cabinet to deal with the problem of empty shops (see "Plans for empty shops are not enough," Thursday 25th February.)
Councillor David Owens, BNP member for Fenside, has moved quickly to bring the idea back to the council for it to be reconsidered, rather than let the Cabinet pursue its usual policy of steamrollering matters through without further discussion.
Councillor Owens tells Boston Eye: "For the record, I read with utter amazement when last week the agenda and associated report appeared on the council website for last week's cabinet meeting (these always take place during the day and never during the evening). I eagerly scrolled through the report relating to empty shops in the hope that there was a cohesive and sensible plan to try and get our town centre off its knees and take some positive action to help remove the plague of empty retail units.
"The report states there are 25 empty shops in town, but I think whoever wrote the report has only walked through Strait Bargate, as there around that number there alone. However it gets worse.
"My views on the matter are as follows; the short term 'fix' of placing graphics in empty shop fronts is at least doing something to remove the mess that many ex-tenants leave behind when they close the doors for the last time, so I can see some merit in doing that. The cost of which is expected to be £12,000 or 23% of the grant.
"The medium term measure is one that has really got my goat, once again we see the 3rd sector sniffing around. I am sure they can smell a fool and his money a mile away and it would appear they have landed a big fish this time!
"My reasoning for this view is simply this: the 'community hub' idea, in my opinion, is simply another means of passing the buck on to the third sector rather than the council coming up with a plan to help resolve the issue, and is a disgrace. We already have a Charity HUB in the Medlock centre - why do we need any more?
"I challenge how on earth this is going to assist or help any prospective business to set up shop in Boston. I am aghast that somewhere in Boston Borough Council this even saw the light of day, let alone permitted it to come to Cabinet as proposal, I am shocked but not at all surprised it has been approved and the spend is to go ahead.
"A grant of £30,000 - or should I say 58% of the available funding - is to be used to open ONE or maybe TWO shops in the town, that’s to say that 58% of the money is being utilised to deal with 8% of the problem (i.e. two out of 25 empty shops).
"Absolutely ridiculous! This lion's share should be spent on what is classed the 'long term measure' as outlined below.
"The long term measure, which is getting the least amount of money, is probably the best option and the one into which most effort should be put. This may go some way to encouraging new enterprises into the town, and after all that’s what we need, not another charity-style outlet. This aspect of the plan sees £10,000 - or 19% of the funding - and just goes to show what an upside down back to front bunch we have running this council, but then again I think the residents already know that!
"Given the strength of my feelings surrounding this, I tipped off fellow councillors on the opposition and asked them to pay particular attention to this when it came before cabinet.
"I can inform Boston Eye that, within 30 minutes of the decision being taken, I started the process to call this in ( i.e. bring it back to council for scrutiny) as at no point in time were the elected members consulted on how this money should be spent. The cabinet need to be aware that the £52,000 is still TAXPAYERS MONEY no matter from what government department it comes from and needs to be spent prudently and wisely."

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

Local loyalty "more important than experience"

A week ago today we published comments by Councillor Brian Rush of the Better Boston group ("The future’s blight… the future’s red!") who fears that history will repeat itself at next year's Boston Borough Council elections.
He predicted the Boston Bypass Independent party being thrown out and asked: "Will the chamber once again be dominated by inexperienced councillors - this time from the Conservatives?"
This provoked a response from Conservative Councillor Myles Larrington who writes:
"I have to say that I do not recognise the image that is portrayed of the Conservative Group on both the Borough and County Councils by Councillor Brian Rush of the Better Boston Group, and indeed his article does not reflect the true situation.
"I do not share Councillors Rush’s concerns regarding the 2011 Borough Elections. True, many members of the council are likely to be newly-elected. That said (as a former BBI member) Councillor Rush is a lot more responsible for the current situation we find ourselves in, than any member of the Conservative Group.
"I would also strongly challenge his assertion that 'inexperience' is a major disadvantage.
"Surely the approach of the members in question is more relevant than political experience?
"Firstly, is Councillor Rush seriously saying Boston would be better today if the 'experienced' councillors from the previous administration were still around?
"To me, 'experience' when referring to the previous council, is now largely a byword for 'out of touch.'
"Those members who delivered the PRSA, the Haven, etc, in my view were surely totally out of touch with the people of Boston who elected them.
"Have we ever wanted any of these hugely costly white elephants?
"True, the current council has its own problems, but surely these pale in comparison with what has gone before.
"In addition, he is completely wrong about the Conservative Group.
"Whilst some of our members do carry great experience, what the rest of us lack in that, I believe we make up for in our approach to local politics.
"That is, that as Conservatives, we have a strong record of standing up for local people by voting as Bostonians first, above all else.
"If you look carefully at the real issues (i.e. the training pool, etc) we are hardly silent voices.
"I honestly believe the same cannot be said for any of the other groups on the council.
"Surely a willingness to truly stand up for local people and to put party interests aside is more important than 'experience?'
"Finally, I would also like to say that the reason there has not been, as Councillor Rush says a 'real battle' with Martin Hill and Lincolnshire County Council is that it is the BBI in Boston, not the Conservative administration in Lincoln, that is the problem.
"Progress is being slowed by the BBI, not the other way round.
"I am surprised that Councillor Rush seems not to realise this simple fact."

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