Watching democracy in action and watching paint dry have many things in common.

They both take a long time, they both become tacky after a few hours, then they suddenly dry up – and the job is over.

Oh yes – and despite your best efforts, there are always a couple of unavoidable drips around the place.

Thus it was with Tuesday night’s meeting of Boston Borough Council’s Planning Committee.

It moved from its usual comfort zone in the Worst Street committee rooms to the Haven High Academy,  supposedly to accommodate the vast numbers expected to attend – although by the morning of the meeting, fewer than 75 public tickets had been requested.

Not only that, but the meeting was webcast, and viewers were confronted with the dramatis personae of this video nasty perched in chevron formation on a brightly lit stage like the opening scene of one of those modern dramas that you switch off almost immediately – all of them nominally supervised by vintage Councillor Mary Wright … to use the word chaired would be a misnomer.

So, following a ten-year gestation, the Quadrant planning proposal was delivered after four hours of labour.

Not being a regular attender at occasions such as this it was an interesting event to observe.

Three members of the committee sent apologies and substitutes were put in their place.

Councillor Maureen Dennis was replaced by Councillor Gloria Smith, Colin Brotherton by Stephen Woodliffe and Alison Austin by Helen Staples.

Two members of the committee declared an interest because they were season ticket holders at Boston United.

The lion’s share of the opening of the meeting was taken up with an almost page-by-page account of his report delivered by Boston’s Development Control Manager Paul Edwards.

We wondered about this, as – assuming that the members should have already been word perfect on the contents of this ponderous tome – the proffered  gloss was nowhere near enough for them to grasp the complexities of the plans.

And if they had not read it the same applied.

Mr Edwards seemed as much out of his comfort zone as the rest, and single-handedly provided body language experts with enough activity for a thesis, treating viewers to an almost non-stop procession of distracting activities – running his fingers inside his collar, adjusting his spectacles, wiping his hand across his gleaming pate, and regularly sipping water, which was invariably followed by a thunderous detonation as his glass banged down beside the microphone.

The recommendation to the committee was that it should support the Quadrant development – which at this stage is solely for a football stadium shoehorned in to a site to the east of the A16.

The rest of the plan – for 500 houses, plus a superstore, other shops, an hotel et al –  is called an “enabling development”  which means that the location of buildings, their appearance, scale and landscaping, for example, are all “reserved” for future submission and consideration.

In other words, your guess is as good as ours.

The meeting followed a strict pattern, with lower echelon champions and antagonists from the public allotted the same bite-sized amounts of time – three minutes – to make their case.

We heard of fears regarding the health of people living alongside a 7,000 seater stadium, fears about traffic congestion and accidents, concerns about flooding, and many more besides.

As far as flooding is concerned, there seems to be a problem – and whichever way you cut it some existing properties are likely to be at risk of more significant flooding when the estates are built – as this slide from the presentation makes clear.

But this appeared to be brushed aside as – at the very worst – the  water level would only be four inches higher than it otherwise might be.

Then there were concerns over school places – apparently, the “experts” reckon that 500 new homes will only require 76 more primary school places – and the added strain on local health services.

Proponents from the football club made out that without it, Boston would be a bleak and discouraging place – perhaps they should get out more, then they would see that these fears have already been realised.

After a “comfort break” the meeting heard longer presentations, from the developers and the parish council.

At various points throughout, where objections were made, the wrecking ball was passed back to Mr Edwards for demolition.

Then it was the turn of the Planning Committee members, and we heard variously from Councillors David Witts (Independent Group 2)  Bob MacCauley (Lincolnshire Independent)  Alan Lee  (Independent)  Steven Woodliffe (Conservative)  Ossy Snell (Independent) Yvonne Gunter (Conservative) Michael Brookes (Conservative)    Gloria Smith (Conservative)   Derek Richmond (Conservative)   and Helen Staples (Independent Group 2.)  

We heard some concerns, and also much support, including phrases such as “we have to be a town that aspires” and that “sometimes there are sacrifices that we have to make.”

Then was also the need to tell people “we are open for business and want to move forward,” and that “Boston is going somewhere.”

Generally, where councillors had concerns they soon wound their necks in and only one additional condition concerning the timing of a management plan for the stadium was imposed.

The voting took just 30 seconds – and that included a lot of faffing around.

The proposal was passed by ten votes in favour and two against – the opponents being Councillors Smith and Snell.

After four hours, a jury of our peers had sat through the trial of the Quadrant One proposal – and many people will feel that the verdict was a death sentence for Wyberton.

Our overall feeling was one that can best be summarised by the famous quotation often attributed to Samuel Johnson – that the road to hell is paved with good intentions

We came away from four hours glued to the screen with the impression that whilst some councillors tried their best, they were simply not well enough equipped to understand and appreciate such a complex issue.

What did emerge was that unlike most councils, Boston does not have a local plan – although why this should surprise us, we do not know.

The nearest that it got to one in “recent” years was the Interim Plan (Non-Statutory Development Control Policy) February 2006.

This was intended as a replacement for Adopted Plan 1999, which was the subject of public consultation from March 1993 through to July 1997. It was adopted in April 1999, but withdrawn from the statutory adoption process in February 2006. “Nonetheless,” says Worst Street, “we adopted a revised version of the replacement local plan for development control purposes - this document is known as the Interim Plan (Non-Statutory Development Control Policy). However, little or no weight can be given to the policies of the Interim Plan that were the subject of significant objections to the first draft or re-deposit draft Local Plan stages.”

We hope that this clarifies things for you.

If not, bad luck – as  an internet link to view this plan, whilst mentioned, appears to have been removed.

The report approved by councillors on Tuesday notes: “There is conflict with or certainly a failure to comply with the development plan as a whole. This is since the Local Plan is not up to date or complete across all the necessary topic headings and it is thus not possible to consider this application only against the Plan.”

The knock on effect of all this is that Boston lacks of a five year supply of deliverable housing land across the borough.

Had the council been more attentive to such crucial detail, the development just passed might not have been needed

Finally, we are proud to announce the Boston Eye awards for Tuesday’s marathon.

The Captain Mainwaring - “Right then. Pay attention, men” Award goes to the so-called chairman of the committee, Councillor Mary Wright, who not only declared that there were no proposals on the table at the end of the meeting when there were, but also got the names of the proposers and seconders wrong.

The Dr Who Lost in Space Award goes to Councillor Yvonne Gunter, for the quotation: “We are living in the 18^th century and we need to pull our socks up …”

The Here today, gone tomorrow (well at least after the comfort break) Award goes to Boston’s Chief Executive – or his double – who was spotted in the audience in the first half of the meeting, but not in the second …

The Sleep of the Just Award goes to … well, we won’t name her but we are sure that the councillor in question briefly parted conscious company with the meeting, although returned with a start before beginning to snore.

And the Cap and Bells Award goes to Councillor Gloria Smith for seemingly missing the point –  although we have to say, that  as a replacement for Councillor Dennis, Councillor Smith completely lived up to our expectations.

In the Music Category, there is only one candidate, and our award goes the haunting air played during the test transmissions ahead of the webcast, and also during the show itself – we think that the title is something about an iron bedstead being put through a grinder.

And the Missing Person Award goes to western film star Roy Rogers’s horse Trigger (pictured left) – who was mentioned so often by Mr Edwards in particular that we expected him to clatter in and join in the whinnying at any moment.

***

In his most recent Epistle to the Bostonians, our saintly leader has been bragging about how “well represented” Boston borough has been at “major meetings of minds from central and local government” in the past few weeks.

Quite correctly, he says: “I know that some critics view our representation at such events as a waste of time,” and continues “but these are the opportunities we seize to ensure Boston, the borough and its burning issues are placed before the people who matter – and nothing beats face-to-face.

He cites a sit down with Eric Pickles, the communities and local government minister, and Owen Paterson – recently sacked as environment minister.

Certainly these two qualify as “minds” in terms of their position in government – although any promises from Mr Patterson are, of course, no longer worth the paper they are printed on.

But whether these “minds” felt that they had met with intellects comparable to their own is another matter.

Moving on, the leader mentioned the attendance of  “councillors and senior officers” at the Local Government Association's annual knees-up, the All Party Parliamentary Local Government Group and the Coastal Communities Alliance.

All of these are regular meetings of  the “club” that councils belong to – and in the case of the first one listed, the cost of attendance is £500 per head … and that does not include hotel and travelling expenses.

But don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story.

“For the first time three of our recent successful projects were highlighted by the District Councils' Network – Fly Swat, garden waste collections and our swimming partnership at the Geoff Moulder Leisure Complex. These best-practice case studies can be seen at http://districtcouncils.info/ where other councils are invited to see how ‘district councils are changing lives and shaping places.’ It is gratifying to see that some of ours are among the best ideas in the country.”

It sounds good, doesn’t it?

But the fact is that almost all of the 200-plus district councils have published details of schemes – and all that seems to be needed to qualify for a place in the league is to post your boast.

Submissions can be made for each year from 2011, and this is the first time that Boston has made any. It sounds more as if a window of opportunity was noticed and the chance  to blow the council’s own trumpet was irresistible than to promote anything of novel or great significance.

Operation Fly Swat, for instance, relies on forced prison labour (didn't we once call them chain gangs?) and using volunteers to do the job that we pay the council to carry out.

Bragging about the garden waste scheme, the council boasts proudly of “a carrot-and-stick approach” to encourage residents to stop putting green waste in with their wheelie bins waste.  Surely, that’s really just another way of describing a threat for non-compliance.

The carrot was the chance to buy a £20 bin to use for garden waste. The stick was that, once the service was up and running, residents were no longer allowed to put garden material in their green bins.

Whilst effective, this took no account of ability to afford to buy a bin or of people with very small gardens who generated such little waste that such a bin was unnecessary.

Carrot and club, rather than stick, wethinks.

Finally the Moulder Pool initiative – which awarded special “club” status to the Witham Academies Federation and the Boston Amateur Swimming Club in exchange for money, and which was backed by council contributions far in excess of the promised amount which appear as big sums rubber-stamped in the council’s monthly spending rather than apparently being subject to approval and debate by councillors.

The report also mentions “additional” solar panels for energy production (tens of thousands have already been spent on this) and a biomass boiler.

No price has been quoted for this – but we are told that as a rule of thumb you should expect to pay £400-£500 per kilowatt for a fully installed boiler – although a figure as high as £800 per kW has been mentioned.

This means that a 200 kW boiler could cost between £80,000-£100,000 but might be as much as £160,000.

Easy come, easy go, seems to be the motto here.

***

As a sidebar to all this – we were reminded in the braggadocio  that subscribers to the garden waste service make “a one-off payment” per wheelie bin with the promise that the service would not attract any extra charges.

Not all that much later the idea of an annual charge for the service was talked about among our cash-strapped leadership and only dropped after a member of the cabinet (most likely at the cost of a considerable amount of popularity) reminded his colleagues that a promise is a promise – a claim that made us smile where our so-called politicians are concerned.

But, having consulted our crystal ball, we are willing to speculate that this pledge will become history after next year’s election – using the excuse that the promise is yesterday’s news and not binding on the successor leadership.

***

At the end of his triumphal rant, the leader assures us that although “we live in uncertain times … I can guarantee is Boston Borough Council will never stop moving forwards.”

The choice of phrase is an interesting one.

Many years ago we had a discussion with a senior management wanabee who had just emerged from an evaluation session with flying colours.

Obviously, he was proud, and wanted to share with others the details of what had made  him stand out.

Apparently, one of the pointless exercises conducted in those days – and probably still being practiced today – was to ask candidates what sort of animal they would most like to be if they had a choice.

Our man had thought for a moment and then  – correctly guessing the sort of response required –declared that he would most like to be a shark … because if sharks stopped forever swimming forward they would die.

How apposite that our leader should compare his operation with a shark – which is defined as large, voracious, and sometimes dangerous to humans – we thought.

But how far adrift can you be when you preside over a cabinet of minnows and guppies with a backbench made up of small fry?

  

***

In one respect though Boston has moved forward and maintained progress – when it comes to paying big salaries to senior officers.

The latest edition of the Town Hall Rich List published by the Taxpayers’ Alliance covers the 2010/11 and 2011/12 financial years – the most recent full years for which data is available.

The figures show at least 2,525 council employees out of a total of 2,647,000 staff received more than £100,000 in 2011-12, and the TPA says that the figure is almost certainly an underestimate.

The latest figures show Boston has two such highly paid staff – the same as last year, and one more than in 2011.

 

click on photo to enlarge

 As you can see, the two big earners are Chief Executive Richard Harbord and his deputy and Strategic Director Phil Drury.

But as well as that, we note the arrival of newcomers whose pay excluding pension contributions falls into varying brackets.

 

click on photo to enlarge 

There are two newcomers in the £50-£55,000 band and another in the £85-£90,000 group. Presumably, some of these are the result of pay increases – but hang on a mo’ … wasn’t there supposed to be a wage freeze in force?

It depends where you are on the greasy pole, we suppose.

***

Our report last week about the council which ended up on  the losing end of a court case  when it summonsed  an elderly disabled man for non-payment of a footling  amount of council tax  dating back to 2006 struck a chord with at least one of our readers.

Robin wrote in to say: “Ah, the report of the £3.75 debt court case that has cost taxpayers a considerable amount of their cash.

“Well I do know this gentleman quite well and he told me first hand of his court case and the outcome.

“Your report is exactly the same as what he told me about it.

“As he lives in a street off Carlton Road I think it safe to say that it’s our good old Boston Borough Council acting true to form yet again.”

We’d ask them at Worst Street, except that we know what the reply would be – but if any other readers can shed light on this sorry tale, then please send us an e-mail.

As always, confidentiality is guaranteed if requested.

***

It seems that Friday is definitely TOOTTS day – ticket out of town, tomorrow’s Saturday – rather than POETS day for our county council traffic wardens.

For the second week running we noted a warden well out of his usual discomfort zone and far away from the usual melee of parked cars, placidly ticketing a car in York Street which – whilst parked on a single yellow line – was in no way causing any problems for other road users.

As we strolled further towards the town, we notice a second – and that means the remaining warden – heading away from town as well.

Meanwhile in the Market Place itself, the chaos and confusion created by the dozy and apparently illiterate parkers continued unabated.

Not only were a good (should that be bad? – editor) dozen cars parked alongside the jumbo window boxes that fail completely to make the area safer for pedestrians, but two cars were actually double parked.

But of course, there was not a traffic warden in sight.

This week we are commemorating the outbreak of a war.

As any general will tell you, it is better to fight on the main front and mop up isolated pockets of resistance later on than to do things the other way around.

But not in Boston, it seems.

***

Last week we mentioned yet another promised crackdown on cycling in pedestrian areas by Lincolnshire Police and Boston Borough Council.

As we pointed out, this is just the usual mouthing-off, as such pledges have been made since Noah was a lad and have never come to anything at all.

But as well as doing nothing about illegal cycling, Boston Police are extending their sphere of inertia to tackle what they have dubbed the big three crimes – domestic burglary, theft from motor vehicles and theft of bicycles.

The farce has launched three “focussed initiatives.”

In the first two categories officers will be looking for unattended, insecure properties and posting crime prevention leaflets through the door – and similarly with vehicles that are left insecure or with valuables in view – will try to locate the owners or write to them.

Community Inspector Jim Manning is quoted as saying: “Some people say that if someone wants to steal something they will anyway, whatever the measures taken to protect it.

“This simply isn’t true. Many thieves are pure opportunists who don’t set out to steal but when confronted with something that is an easy target, they can’t help themselves and steal it.

“The harder you make something to steal, the less chance you have of it being stolen.”

Q: So what are the police going to do?

A: Make it very easy for an impulse thief to nick a bike.

A sting bike, which contains a tracking device, will be left at different locations around the town and police will simply wait for it to be stolen.

“As soon as the thief moves the bike, it sends a message to us and we can follow its movements, allowing us to capture the thief and recover the bike,” said Inspector Manning.

We are sure that this will do wonders for the crime figures, and make many officers proud to be bringing these desperadoes to justice.

But the internet’s fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia, has a word to describe this.

It is called entrapment.

Entrapment is defined as “a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offence that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit. It is a type of conduct that is generally frowned upon, and thus in many jurisdictions is a possible defence against criminal liability.

“Sting operations are fraught with ethical concerns over whether they constitute entrapment.”

There are no such worries here in Boston, though, it would seem.

If it is true that “many thieves are pure opportunists who don’t set out to steal but when confronted with something that is an easy target, they can’t help themselves …” then this brilliant “initiative” is nothing more than a cheap trap which may well ensnare some poor devil whose benefit has been cut and sees an irresistible chance to make a few quid out of a feeling of desperation that would otherwise have never crossed his mind.

Is this really the way we want our policing in Boston to be?

***

We have similar concerns about a private scheme – helped with a £900 grant from our Police and Crime Commissioner Alan Hardwick – under which local shops share photos of “known town troublemakers” in what we are told, is “a bid to kick offenders out of Boston’s high street.”

Apparently the pictures are often taken from CCTV images – which suggests that they are furnished by Boston Borough Council –   and are supposedly of thieves or what are called “nuisance shoppers” – with firms sharing details of the people so they can be closely watched or barred from stores if necessary.

The so-called Facewatch scheme began in April – since when 34 users have reported 44 incidents and circulated 53 photographs.

Mr Hardwick is quoted as praising the toughness, lack of bureaucracy and paperwork of the scheme – which means of course that it makes still less work for his boys and girls in blue.

“It’s not always that you want them locking up, it’s you don’t want them in your business, you don’t want them in the town,” he is quoted as saying.

Interestingly, the Facewatch pictures will not be made public “since some of those targeted have not been found guilty of an offence,” but shops are supposed to have “some evidence” that a person is suspected of crime or anti-social behaviour before circulating their photograph.

If ever an idea reeked of an assault on personal freedom with the potential for abuse and victimisation, then this is the one.

***

A recent report praised Lincolnshire Police for the value for money it gave council taxpayers – but we are uncertain that the issues mentioned above reflect that everything is as it should be.

The great barometer of good policing – in the eyes of the public at any rate – is what is laughingly referred to as the number of bobbies on the beat.

But in the last year Lincolnshire Police allocated only 58 per cent of its police officers to visible roles, which is two percentage points lower than the number in 2010, although it is higher than the figure for most other forces … which doesn’t say a great deal.

A report on the force goes on to say that “Police visibility is further enhanced by PCSOs, who principally support community policing.

“Looking at the proportion of police officers and PCSOs, Lincolnshire Police allocated 62 per cent to visible roles. This is 1.6 percentage points lower than it allocated in 2010, but higher than the 60 per cent figure for England and Wales” – which again, is damning with faint praise.

More worryingly, Lincolnshire Police was recently forced to defend the use of tasers,  after coming  third for the highest usage of the devices in England and Wales.

Officers used tasers 259 times in 2013 - more than double the amount in neighbouring Nottinghamshire.

Shocking!

But if you want cheering up after all that, take a look at the PC Savage clip from the vintage comedy show Not the Nine o clock News featuring Griff Rhys Jones and Rowan Atkinson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BO8EpfyCG2Y

There’s a job for that man in Boston

***

Political anoraks will doubtless be interested in the latest trends from “the UK's top general election predictor” Electoral Calculus, which calculates the next general election result using scientific analysis of opinion polls and electoral geography

The organisation reports an update which shows a weakening of UKIP support, which seems to have gone back to both the Conservatives and Labour.

In a prediction based on opinion polls of more than ten thousand people between 11^th July and 1^st August, Labour's lead over the Conservatives has remained steady at around 3%, though very slightly lower than the previous month.

“Overall the position is not much changed over the month, probably reflecting the summer holiday season and the lower level of political stories,” says Political Calculus.

The average of the seven most recent polls published in July is Conservative 33 (+2), Labour 36 (+1), Lib/Dem 8 (unchanged) and UKIP 14 (-3).

The new national prediction is that Labour will have a majority of 40 seats, winning 345 seats (-4 seats since 29 June).

How all that might pan out locally is anyone’s guess at this stage – but it looks as though the so-called leadership of Boston Borough Council can most likely skip the drawing up of a manifesto for the second consecutive campaign!

***

Finally, we appreciate the need to put Boston at the forefront of everything we do.

But … 

Isn't this headline the wrong way round … ?

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