Friday 18 January 2013



Despite the closure of even more stores in Boston town centre, we note that the powers that be apparently remain relaxed. The manager of Boston Business “Improvement” District tells the local papers: “It’s symptomatic of the economy,” adding that the BID is trying to promote the town to attract new business. What form this is taking is not explained, neither is there any sign yet of the drop-in sessions announced last September that promised to make it easier for BID levy payers to talk to board members. Nor is there any mention of the BID’s plans for spending the £10,000 consolation prize awarded to all failed bidders for a Portas Pilot Grant. This year the BID is hoping to be re-elected for a further five years – but we feel that it  has a lot more to do to have a chance of success. Meanwhile, Boston Town Centre portfolio holder Councillor Derek Richmond says the borough council is trying to push Boston’s history to help local businesses. “Come to Boston, it’s very old.” Now there’s a slogan for you! Or how about “Empty vessels make the most noise?”
Meanwhile, Market Rasen’s Mr BIG project continues to show Boston BID how the job should be done. Rasen was one of twelve successful bidders who received £100,000 from the Portas Pilot scheme with an imaginative application including a video presentation which put Boston’s drab and depressing effort to shame.  Since being awarded the money last May, Mr BIG has got on with the job, and has now applied for another £70,000 from the Future High Street X-Fund which is awarded to “creative and effective schemes” that have been completed to rejuvenate town centres. Rasen wants to continue to tidy up the town and needs more money for marketing and future ideas including a "blitz" on unkempt areas, and working with landlords to fill empty shops. Why is Boston BID so pathetic by comparison?
One shop of which there appears to be no shortage in Boston  is of the betting variety. We were surprised to read that the former butcher’s shop in the Market Place is to become a branch of Ladbrokes in a move that will give the company two betting shops in the town. Meanwhile a take-over of two local businesses will see Corals with five betting shops in the town centre, and we also have a branch of William Hill.  This strikes us as overkill, and we wonder whether so many bookies are really necessary.  Fairly soon the town centre will be dominated by betting shops, mobile ‘phone shops and charity shops. No wonder people choose to go elsewhere.
Amidst all of this, the papers report that some new shops could be on their way with the conversion of the Market Place public toilets into a shopping arcade.  The point that it being missed here is that at the moment, we do not need new shops – what we need are tenants for the empty ones. And we suspect that most people would prefer to have the toilets restored more than anything else. Empty shops are becoming a problem that detracts from the look of the area. A few years ago part of a plan to improve the appearance of the town centre included window sized self-cling pictures that would distract the eye from the empty shop behind. Sadly, this never happened – but the need is now becoming urgent.
Boston Borough Council has been bragging about its membership of “an exclusive club” of just 14 authorities out of 46 in the East Midlands to qualify for a Councillor Development Charter. However, membership doesn’t appear to have been entirely on merit.  Boston’s Labour group reports on its blog: “What the Tory councillors forgot to tell you was that they paid over £1,000 to get this charter –which means they have used your money to buy themselves an award.  They also forgot to tell you that this is such an exclusive club that all of the Tory councillors only vote when their leader tells them to, and they often sit in meetings and don’t speak or ask questions … because if they do, you can see them getting “dirty” looks from their colleagues. Yes, a very exclusive club – opposition councillors views were completely ignored during the accreditation visit.” Something that made us smile when the membership was announced was a quote from Councillor Mike Brookes, the chairman of the councillor development group. "Gone are the days when councillors got elected and just turned up at meetings,” he said. That’s true. These days some of them get elected and then don’t bother to turn up to meetings at all!
Accompanying the news that Labour Councillor Paul Kenny – chairman of the task and finish group which studied the impact of immigration on Boston – is to address a House of Commons parliamentary group about its findings, is a somewhat tepid piece of support from local MP Mark Simmonds.  Announcing that he had sent a copy of the report to Local Government minister Eric Pickles, he added: “While I have previously made clear my commitment to the government’s deficit reduction programme and am under no illusions about the state of the UK’s finances we inherited, I hope the secretary of state will read the report and agree that Boston requires the appropriate level of funding that relates to the population now living in Boston.” How much more positive might  he have sounded had he not bothered to cover his back by letting his big bosses know that he was still onside for all their cuts.
By something of a contradiction, Boston Borough Council reports that it has worked tirelessly to ensure the Government recognised the impact of migration and an ageing population on council services and believed this – along with the increased census figures – was partly reflected in higher than expected government funding for 2013/14. However, finance portfolio holder, Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire has isisued  a health warning for the next five years during which  the council must save around £1m.
Meanwhile, things are not going Councillor Singleton-McGuire’s way outside of his Worst Street fiefdom. Regular readers will recall that an application to use his private residence as a wedding venue was turned down by a planning committee dominated by his Tory peers – but he was unwilling to accept their word for it, and took his case to a government inspector … who has now dismissed his appeal once and for all.  Anyone with half an eye to the possible problems could easily predict the potential difficulties. The inspector went further, and spoke of a “harmful effect on living conditions in nearby houses and on traffic congestion and highway safety.” As one local put it: “On a cold, wet, Monday, it put a big smile on my face. The whole idea was silly anyway; it does actually give you some faith in the process that a majority Conservative committee would ensure by abstention or voting against it that an inappropriate application, as the inspector has confirmed, was not allowed to go through, even if it was one of their own who was the applicant.”
After our comments on the number of times Boston Borough Council agenda items have been debated in secret, and throwing out members of the public and press for various shonky reasons, we were interested to note that the number of freedom of information requests  to the council continued to increase -  with 149 received in the  second quarter of 2012 compared to 93 for the same period in 2011.  You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but it remains satisfying to know that you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. Honesty is still the best policy –  but we doubt that the Tory leadership will ever embrace that idea!
In an age when the powers that be claim to be trying to cut down on paperwork, we noted an interesting item in Boston Borough Council’s November spending on items costing £250 or more.  The amount is £4,300 for “A4 White Paper – 2,000 reams.” Of course, reams now rank among groats, ducats, farthings, chains and furlongs as ancient items of measure or quantity. But the general calculation is that a ream of paper amounts to 500 sheets. Ergo, 2,000 reams equal one million sheets of paper. What on earth will it all be used for, we wonder.
Still with Boston Borough Council …  its website amuses us very often  - but this week we think it really lost the plot with an item concerning the freeze on council tax (at least it wasn’t referred to a zero per-cent increase for once.)  Announcing “Council tax freeze for third year running” and telling us “Residents should not have to find a penny more in council tax in 2013/14 to pay for services provided by Boston Borough Council,” it uses the illustration (above right.). Do you see anything odd about it? Well, it suggests that council tax is going through the roof … when in fact the reverse is the case. Ah well …
And finally … our on-going criticism of the Boston Standard and its contemptuous attitude toward people  who have taken up the “loyalty” opportunity to subscribe to this steadily decaying  publication, will be disappointed if they try to take advantage of the latest offer to read the paper in its entirety using an App on their tablet computer of choice. That’s because this week’s  issue starts on page nine. Perhaps this is the first move to make people pay for it, but it is so ill thought out that it beggars belief.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Our former blog is archived at: http://bostoneyelincolnshire.blogspot.com

 

No comments:

Post a Comment