New Boston Eye

Last Friday we observed how poorly things were going for the “Boston – a great past and a bright future campaign” launched by Mayor Richard Austin.

And as if in rebuttal, Monday’s edition of the Worst Street Goody Two Shoes News (circulation 784) came up with the blistering headline: “Why we think Boston’s great.” alongside the claim that “more have risen to the challenge” thrown down by the once-Independent Councillor Austin.

This list comprised four entries – two of which appear in the original and therefore cannot be claimed as “more” names.

It’s around two months since Councillor Austin launched his appeal, since when – from a borough with a population of 66,000 – just 24 people have written in, of whom almost half feature among the local great and the good, who would be expected to toe the line.

Pretty feeble, isn't it?

***

Apparently hand-in-hand with this lacklustre effort is another Worst Street campaign called “Memories are made of this” – another “new” project that wants your memories to “help inform” plans for new and improved heritage signage in the town centre.

And, “as a spin-off” it is also hoped that fond memories of Boston past will be retold in published form, together with any photographs which are made available.

Boston's memories will be gathered on large-scale map in the Stump, a “Boston Memories” drop-in will be held at the Guildhall and Fydell House next week, there are also plans for a young person's' postcard design competition and a social media campaign – #MyBoston “where selfies outside your favourite heritage spot in Boston and the surrounding area can be posted.”

Unfortunately, as far as the latter is concerned, that hashtag already seems to have been claimed by our bigger, younger sister in Massachusetts – which might have crossed someone’s mind.

All this was launched on an unsuspecting world in a Boston GTSN (circulation 784) which tried – and as always not quite succeeded – to press the idea home via a Proustian analogy in the style of “À la recherche du temps perdu ( aka Remembrance of Things Past) but with Cherryade replacing the famous madeleine.

The only redeeming thing about the Boston piece is that it didn’t run to the seven volumes that it took Proust to tell his tale.

***

The idea of involving the public is always a good one – although in Boston’s case we suspect that it has more to do with getting other people to do the work.

But the sorry fact is that by and large most ordinary people seem not to be interested.

And those who have responded alternate between seeing Boston through rose-tinted spectacles or else damning it with faint praise.

Examples include mention of Blackfriars and the Sam Newsom Centre in the same breath as “culture” (don't forget that Worst Street closed what might have been a decent art gallery some years ago) and the suggestion that the appallingly bodged and lifeless Market Place “competes on an international scale.”

Perhaps with the likes of Chernobyl.

Another comment about sums it up: “I would certainly consider the facilities here as good if not better than some towns.”

The “campaigns” referred to are totally out of date and reek of a lack of imagination.

They serve only to highlight how lacking the Worst Street Munchkins are when it comes to creative and positive campaigning both to improve the town’s “offer” and to tell people about it.

***

We wrote last week about the borough council leadership’s determination to sleep through the present term and hope that doing nothing will make the world go away

So it was pleasing to learn that the disenfranchised UKIP members are planning to rattle a few cages.

The Kippers have been stung by what they perceive to be a cosy arrangement between the so-called council leader Bedford and Labour Leader Paul Gleeson under which the chairmanships and vice-chairmanships of the two overview and scrutiny committees – Environment and Performance, and Corporate and Community, were shared out between their two parties.

UKIP argues that – as it is the role of these committees to scrutinise the work of the ruling executive and hold its actions to account – then the opposition party which has twelve councillors as opposed to Labour's two would be best placed to hold these positions.

A similar argument could be put forward with regard to the Audit and Governance Committee where Conservative councillors are both chairman and vice-chairman.

By an interesting irony, the manner of these appointments was seen as less than appropriate some 2½ years ago when former Independent Councillor Richard Leggott resigned as chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee.

He told Boston Eye at the time: “My resignation was to distance myself from the present exclusive way that local government is being operated in Boston.

“The BBI operated somewhat similarly after their first year and I declined then to be part of that system, taking no chair or v/chair positions offered, on principle.

“The present administration has become so like the last administration in its decision making process that I again felt it necessary to adopt the same position.”

And readers with long memories will also recall how the late Councillor Paul Mould claimed to have been “offered” a committee chairmanship if he withdrew his support for an Independent councillor of whom the leadership disapproved who was seeking the chairmanship of another committee.

***

We’re told that reserved matters on the first phase of houses to be built on the Quadrant site in Wyberton are being consulted on at present – and that despite a promise to build low level properties alongside the existing homes the plan shows no bungalows and even a block of flats to maximise the number of homes that can be squeezed in.

A local tells us that the urgency has apparently gone out of the building of the new Boston United stadium and that many residents have sold up at a reduced price – in some cases dropping their asking prices by as much as £30,000 whilst properties on the east side of A16 cannot sell at all.

***

Talking of planning matters – word on the street says that Lidl may have had second thoughts about building a shop in Tawney Street.

If it's true, remember that you read it first on Boston Eye.

WOTS also says that not all the jobs at Norprint were lost when the receivers were called in last week.

According to a former employee, “managers” at Norprint were transferred to Magnadata a month earlier using the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations.

The way the affair was handled also seems less than equitable

Reports say that Norprint staff were sacked before the receivers were called in – which we understand relieved the company of redundancy payment obligations and transferred them to the government redundancy payment scheme.

It would seem that Magnadata was confident of being rescued, which is why the Norprint staff were ditched ahead of calling in the receivers.

What a fine reward for years of loyal service by scores of Boston people!

***

Much whooping at Worst Street over the news that something has gone right for once.

A job created a year ago to track down unpaid business rates has trousered an unpaid £1 million for the borough to share with the wastrels at Clownty Hall and the government.

Whilst it is good news in its way – and will probably be spent on monogrammed Crown Derby coffee mugs for the Geoff Moulder Leisure Pool caff – our only disappointment is that once again, we see ordinary people trying to run a business being tarred with the brush of criminality.

For instance, Boston’s answer to George Osborne – Aaron, Councillor Spencer (think Alfred, Lord Tennyson) – is quoted in Worst Street’s GTSN (circulation 784) as saying: “This is about detecting and remedying deliberate or accidental rates avoidance.”

Later, the story says: “If the premises are not rated (perhaps because they have never been picked up or were previously exempt), or if you think that the rating assessment is out of date ... please call our Business Rates Assurance manager.”

The report ends by saying that it is “important” for owners, tenants and occupiers of premises “to keep us informed of any relevant changes that could affect their rates bills .... Therefore, please help us to keep our records up to date by contacting our business rates service..."

So far, the new department has uncovered 61 new businesses and 111 under-rated business premises in their trawl for more money.

As far as we can tell, there is no legal obligation on a business owner to inform the borough council about matters to help it collect business rates – though clearly there will be people who know of their responsibilities and either ignore them or turn a blind eye in the event that they don’t receive a bill.

But once again, in the matter of diplomacy and good public relations, Worst Street falls short.

Those who have not paid inadvertently are made to sound as guilty as those who have deliberately dodged their tax.

A simple tweak in the wording would show courtesy rather than contempt for these people and perhaps win them over ... but they still might wonder why they should be doing the council’s job for it!

***

The Boston Barrier apparently took “another important step forward” with the opening of a Community Hub at the beginning of the month.

Residents can visit the hub to find out the latest information about the tidal barrier and meet with the project team to ask any questions.

To begin with, the Environment Agency plans to open every Wednesday from 10am to 4pm – although it may open more at “key periods” as the scheme progresses.

In the past, events about the barrier have usually been staged at the Black Sluice Lock Cottages – which are difficult enough to park up for at the best of times.

They were once fittingly intended as the site for a new heritage centre about Boston’s waterways – displaying artefacts and memorabilia as well as becoming a community information point signposting users to local businesses and events.

But somehow, they became subsumed into the TaylorITEX “personal community development company” – which presumably means that they can’t be used by the Environment Agency on a more regular basis.

So where has the EA set up its hub?

Somewhere in Marsh Lane on the Riverside Industrial Estate – as far as we can discover no directions have been provided!

Far be it from us to suggest that the EA wants to make it as hard as possible for local people to keep tabs on the progress of the Boston Barrier by opening a community hub infrequently and in the middle of nowhere.

Suffice it to say that we are reminded of the inability of the hero of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Arthur Dent, to find the planning application to destroy the planet Earth to make way for a pan-galactic superhighway.

“The plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes, I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

***

A while ago we mentioned the upset caused to a member of the public concerned that his presentation to a meeting of Boston’s “parish council” – B-Tacky – had been received with a snigger by Independent/Conservative Councillor Alison Austin.

What a silly mistake to make!

The presentation concerned an appeal for a speed monitoring device to be used on London Road, and the council's reply to the complaint claimed that Councillor Austin “had been surprised to hear about a deer being killed.”

The letter went on: “It was a reflex action reflecting her surprise at what you said but not aimed at you.”

Not surprisingly, the explanation failed to cut much ice with the complainant, who responded: “Does Councillor Austin really want to offer the reason for laughing at a member of the public in a council meeting was that the thought of a deer being killed was funny.

“Remind me to never watch Bambi with Mrs Austin – she will be rolling in the aisles”

***

They say that every picture tells a story – well here are two, side by side, which have a lot to say for themselves.

Last week, we mentioned the preposterous diversion cobbled together by Lincolnshire County Council for the durations of the Tawney Street road works.

In a nutshell, it diverted drivers for Boston Crematorium and Tawney Street along a tortuous route that eventually brought them back to the point they had started from

Boston Eye highlighted this last Friday, and by early this week, the signs had been changed.

The sign on the left has now been moved to the Spilsby Road side of Boston, and replaced by the one on the right which makes rather more sense, but still falls short of decent information.

Whilst we would like to say Well Done to Clownty Hall, the best we can come up with is Medium Rare.

That’s because the Tawney Street junction just after the sign on the right is OPEN for access, not closed.

Quite importantly this is the only way by car to reach a major doctors’ surgery, pharmacy and an optician – and whilst locals may know to use the road, others might not.

There is also a very large car park which can only be reached via this route – although it is privately owned, and it may not therefore be in the interests of Clownty Hall and Worst Street to let motorists know about that.

As with so many things in the relationship between Boston and Lincoln, the county efforts are half-hearted, substandard and fall short of expectations.

At least we are beginning to understand why it takes a month to replace a set of traffic lights.

On a walk into town on Wednesday we noted one workman watching whilst a second laid a paving slab.

No other workers or activity was in sight.

We think it high time that Boston’s masters in Lincoln asked for a serious breakdown of the cost of work such as this.

A few years ago such a job would have been done in a week – tops.

But a time quote of four weeks means four times the cost.

No wonder there is no money left in the county’s coffers.

***

Our mention of last week’s cleverly chosen crime figures that show what a safe place Boston is – when it actually has the second worst crime figures in Lincolnshire after Lincoln – coincided with another of those annual but pointless surveys that are intended to inform the powers that be of our concerns with the implication that this will help resolve them.

The East Lincolnshire Community Safety Partnership claims to work to create “local solutions” to local problems, to tackle issues of crime and disorder and improve the quality of life for people living, working or visiting the area.

So how does it do this?

By asking a series of questions

After wanting to know where you live, how old and what sex you are, plus your ethnicity and nationality, the questionnaire asks you to grade your “perception” of problems within “your local area” – defined as a 15-20 minute walk of where you live.

Here’s where the skill of the person setting the questions begins to emerge …

It would seem reasonable to assume that most of the respondents will live in neighbourhoods which are unlikely to see much if any at all of the crimes on the list – “noisy neighbours or loud parties, teenagers hanging around the streets, rubbish and litter lying around, vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property or vehicles, people using or dealing drugs, people being drunk or rowdy in public places and abandoned or burnt-out cars.”

In most cases, we believe that people would struggle to say that the above list constituted either a “very” big, or even a “fairly” big problem.

And the clever plan to dilute their concerns still further continues with the questions: “What, if anything, are you most worried about being a victim of in your local area? followed by the option: ‘I’m not worried.’

“Do you feel more or less safe in your LOCAL AREA than you felt 12 months ago? To what extent do you agree or disagree that your LOCAL AREA is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together? Do you feel that people drinking in public places is an issue in your LOCAL AREA?”

The repeated emphasis on the words LOCAL AREA invites a level of consideration that will tend to divert people from selecting the higher problem levels – which is probably the intention.

The questionnaire has been trotted out for years now in much the same form.

Usually the claim is made that people as a whole are largely happy with the situation and the job that is being done, and we cannot recall whether any proactive efforts as a result of all these questions has ever resulted.

The final piece of daftness is the degree of agreement that it always required in surveys of this kind.

You are asked: “How much would you agree or disagree that the police and other local public services are successfully dealing with crime and anti-social behaviour?” – and can choose from “strongly agree, tend to agree, neither agree or disagree, tend to disagree, strongly disagree, or don’t know.”

What an earth are they on about?

If you agree ... you agree – there no strength or propensity about it.

Similarly if you disagree – that’s the end of it.

But again, respondents who may not wish to appear bombastic will almost certainly opt for the more wishy-washy option and “tend” to agree or disagree.

The bottom line is that a survey such as this is pointless, costs money that could better be spent elsewhere and allows the interrogators to choose the result that they wanted all along.

***

Earlier, we mentioned Boston GTSN (circulation 784 – have we mentioned that?) which we thought was supposed to offer us a daily digest of information from Boston Borough Council.

Not only is this not proving to be the case, but increasingly, the content has nothing to do with Worst Street – even though there ought to be plenty to write about.

One of the more interesting recent contributions not only had nothing to do with Worst Street, but reached GTSN by an interesting route.

The report concerned the 30^th anniversary of the Medlock charitable trust.

It was issued as a press release on Wednesday 22nd July by the Lincolnshire Community Voluntary Service and tagged as being authored “by Miranda Payne and kindly supplied for use on the LCVS website.”

A week later it appeared in both our local “newspapers.”

But readers of the Boston Bulletin were treated to the report on Friday 31^st July – fully ten days after it appeared.

In a nutshell, the report was irrelevant to Worst Street, out of date, and not even produced by any of the people paid to fill the bulletin.

Another example also involved a LCVS press release ... about the merger of two neighbourhood action groups which appeared on their website on 22^nd July and was lifted word for word to appear in the Boston Bulletin on 27^th July.

Some people argue that the bulletin is a costly and needless adjunct to the borough’s website because it has so few readers – the circulation is only 784 – and should cease publication.

Not only do we agree with that, but an increasingly compelling reason is that it tells us scarcely anything about Boston Borough Council.

And are our representatives really happy with the willingness of Worst Street to show that so little happens of interest within their walls, that they have so look elsewhere for padding?

If they are, then they are in the wrong job

***

The risk to cyclists using our local roads is constantly being brought to the attention of motorists.

But the need for them to “think bike” is no less important as that of cyclists to “think car.”

Here in Boston, velocipedists come and go as they please.

They jump red lights, scare the daylights out of pedestrians on pavements and carve their way through traffic without a care – ignoring the Highway Code and the law of the land both.

A few years ago, this young cyclist might not have behaved like this because he would have had some training in safe and considerate riding.

Had he been knocked off his machine, there is no doubt that the driver of the car would have been wrongly blamed because cyclists – especially when they are young – are always assumed to be the innocent party.

***

Finally – as is so often the case with Boston – the idea of bringing the seaside to the town is not a new one, but has been hijacked by Boston Big Local as a starter for wasting the £1 million it has been given to spend.

Sadly – as is so often the case with Boston – when an idea is half-inched from elsewhere it is always on a pared down scale that questions whether the effort was worth it.

In recent weeks, the seaside has come to Lincoln ... from Monday 20^th July to Sunday 26^th.