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.