In an astonishing and unprecedented attack, a group of Worst Street councillors have ganged together to try to force the resignation of Boston Borough Council’s 483^rd Mayor, Councillor Brian Rush.

An extraordinary meeting of the council has been called for a week tonight after five fellow councillors signed a motion stating: 

“That this Council is deeply concerned with the actions of the Mayor in posting offensive and political comments on his Facebook page.

The Council believes the Mayor should reflect carefully on the words he has used.  He has caused significant personal distress to those named and demeaned the great office that is The Worshipful the Mayor of Boston.

The Mayor, who is the 483^rd person to hold this position of historic office, has sullied the role of First Citizen and champion of the Borough with petty, political point scoring that is factually incorrect.

This Council calls for the Mayor’s resignation with immediate effect.”

There are five signatories to the motion.

The proposer is the Leader of the Council, Michael Cooper.

Seconder is Councillor David Brown, a Tory representative for Wyberton, who is Chairman of the Planning Committee – and ironically listed as a Facebook “friend” of the Mayor’s.

The rump of the group comprises Councillor Alison Austin, a so-called Independent councillor for St Thomas' Ward and herself a former Mayor.

Councillor Sue Ransome, UKIP member for the Station Ward, Vice-Chairman of BTAC, and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee, and Councillor Aaron Spencer, the Tory representative for the Five Villages Ward, a deputy leader of the council and Portfolio Holder for Finance

Between them they have conjured up some tough talk – with phrases such a “significant personal distress” “demeaning” a great office and “sullying” the role of Mayor.

Sullying is a particularly hefty choice of word.

Synonyms include to taint, defile, soil, tarnish, stain, blemish, besmirch, befoul, contaminate, pollute, spoil, disgrace, dishonour, injure, damage – all apparently through a few entries on social media.

We‘ve taken a look at Brian Rush’s Facebook page.

It is quite clearly a personal document – and one which makes no reference to his role as Mayor of Boston.

Additionally, as far as we can see, there are few if any references to council business and we understand that any comments Councillor Rush may have made over time related to local councillors in their County rather than their Borough role.

We also understand that constitutionally, he cannot be made to resign or removed from office.

The only circumstances in which an enforced departure could be imposed would be in the event of a Mayor being handed a criminal conviction – and that is certainly not the case here.

Another question raised by this move to unseat the Mayor is why it was not approached in another way – perhaps through an informal discussion involving the Leader and the Chief Executive.

And if that was considered insufficient there is a long-established code of conduct which – whilst primarily available to members of the public – ought not to preclude one councillor who feels aggrieved by the behaviour of another from making a formal personal complaint – although none of those said to have been “distressed” have been named (unless they are the signatories, of course.)

Demanding a specially-called but very aptly named extraordinary meeting, the gang of five have landed the taxpayers with a totally unnecessary bill that will not achieve its purpose.

Instead the council is merely washing its dirty linen in public – and we cannot help but think that there is more by way of personal animosity towards Councillor Rush in this than there are fears for the reputation of the office of Mayor.

Another interesting point worth noting is that the agenda for the February 12^th meeting appeared on the borough’s website last Thursday – well outside the usual week-in-advance time lag before such documents appear.

***

The position of Mayor of the borough of Boston dates back to 1545 with the incorporation of the borough by Henry VIII.

In its heyday, the role included chief magistrate, coroner and gaol keeper, but today is mainly ceremonial.

One irony of these latest events is that the mayor chairs the council meetings – which puts him in charge of the meeting calling for his resignation.

Don’t forget that this is a public meeting, which it might be interesting to attend to see “democracy” in action.

***

Councillor Rush was appointed Mayor of Boston in May last year.

He was born and raised in Omagh, Northern Ireland, but the Boston area has been home for most of his life.

He joined the RAF at 18 and when he settled in Boston formed his own company, Boston Signs in 1980, and ran it for about 30 years.

He served as an elected member from 2007-2013 representing Frampton and Holme Ward and was re-elected in 2015 to represent Staniland Ward.

During his time in office he has had a chequered political history.

He was first elected as a member of the Boston Bypass Independents. He later left the party and co-founded the Better Boston Group.

He was re-elected for UKIP and united the party as leader after the now familiar internal wrangling before leaving and is now associated with no political party in particular.

***

Election fever is again griping Boston (shouldn’t that be gripping? – Ed. No – author.)

Just 17 days from now, on Thursday 22^nd February, the eyes of the world will be focussed on Old Leake and Wrangle and a by-election created by the sudden and inexplicable departure of veteran Tory Maureen Dennis who had represented the ward since 2003.

***

Four candidates are contesting the seat:  Local farmer Tom Ashton is standing for the Conservatives; Joseph Pearson, also from Wrangle, represents Labour; Don Ransome of Boston is standing for UKIP and Richard Thornalley – also of Boston – represents the recently formed Blue Revolution Party.

***

Statistics for the ward estimate a population of about 3,360 with 2,730 of voting age.

At the 2015 election the seat was contested by two Tory and two UKIP candidates. Maureen Dennis won for the Conservatives, and Barrie Pierpoint was elected for UKIP.

However, he quit the party that same evening and was styled as unaligned until a year ago when he threw in his lot with the so-called Independents Alison and Richard Austin.

At the 2011 election aside from Mrs Dennis, another Tory claimed the seat from the Boston Bypass Independents in a three cornered contest between the Tories, UKIP and the BBI.

And at the 2007 election­ – in a similar three corned fight between the same three parties, the BBI candidate ousted one of the two Tories.

Before that it was a two-Tory ward after the 2004 election.

***

There is a forbidding feeling that the result is most likely cut and dried and that we may well see a return to the days of 2004.

Certainly the Tory candidate Tom Ashton couldn’t be keener.

His is already a well-known party activist.

According to the local party website he has been the East Lindsey District Councillor for Sibsey and Stickney since 2015.

He was elected to the Lincolnshire County Council Tattershall Castle ward in 2017, and along with these jobs is also chairman of the Boston and Skegness Conservative Association. 
Oh, and he’s a parish councillor as well.

In fact in 2015, we noted that his enthusiasm to serve was so great that as well as standing in Sibsey and Stickney for a seat in East Lindsey,  he campaigned alongside former Boston Borough Council leader Peter Bedford in Worst Street’s Coastal Ward as well – falling to a UKIP candidate.

Some might question his ability to serve so many areas, and think that adding yet another political notch on his gun might be biting off more than he can chew.

We couldn’t possibly comment.

***

So what of the other candidates?

We asked either the candidates or their local group leaders to send us a pen portrait – but by the time this issue went to bed last night, only one had been received. The other three ignored our request, which speak volumes about their attitide.

The response that came was from the Blue Revolution Party, and told us: “Richard Thornalley is a local man and attended local schools.

“He is a taxi driver for a Boston-based company and as a result of his occupation understands the challenges confronted by local road users and the importance of stimulating the local economy.

“He hears a lot of comments from people he meets who have strong views about Boston and the surrounding areas so whilst not a resident of Old Leake and Wrangle he has knowledge of the area and local people's concerns.

“If elected he would bring an ordinary person’s point of view to the business of Boston Borough Council. 

“Richard is a down to earth individual and wants to be the ordinary voter's voice on Boston Council.

“Like all supporters of Blue Revolution Richard thinks the two-party system and the way we are governed nationally and locally are out of date and need reform to better reflect the concerns of ordinary people.”

***

We hear that a solution has been found to the problem of the Christmas in Boston accounts.

Regular readers will recall that the group’s treasurer was sacked after he raised concerns about the way that some assets had been used. 

This left the committee with the problem of having to submit a set of accounts to BTAC-ky – which provided match funding for the project – whilst airbrushing out the report’s criticisms.

We are told that the solution is along the lines that we predicted last week.

The accounts alone are being sent to an independent auditor for verification.

As they have already been professionally compiled, they will certainly be in order.

But what the auditors won’t see is the criticism that accompanied the figures.

Pretty neat, eh?

***

Boston MP Matt Warman was all a-Twitter last week at the news that the government’s Housing Infrastructure Fund had stumped up £3.5m towards Boston’s Quadrant housing, bypass and stadium project.

It follows a £4.75 million grant a couple of years ago from the Greater Lincolnshire Local Enterprise Partnership, which it was said “will enable the first phase of the Quadrant scheme in Boston to be delivered” The project completion date was given as “March 2017.”

The full cost of the project was given as £23.1 million – so the developer, Chestnut Homes, seems well on the way to getting its profits from public funding.

By an interesting co-incidence last week also saw the Quadrant development officially launched with the opening of four new show homes. 

The first phase will include 147 homes with 100 under construction already and 22 already sold to a local housing association.

However, it seems that everything is not yet plain sailing.

The Boston sub-Standard told us that Chestnut Homes Managing Director David Newton said funding was still an issue for the Quadrant Stadium, with an increase in costs and the project being turned down for grant funding from Sport England, but said he had fingers crossed for further help.

“He admitted that he regretted saying the stadium would start last year, but promised he would. (sic)

“’We will start building this year, we've said that, I know I said that last year but that was when, you know I don't normally say something I can't back up but last year we were 99.9% and I said we would build and I regret that because we weren't able to do that but this year we will start building.(sic)

 “’Where we're at is, if we don't get the funding in place we've got seven or eight million and we will build the stadium for that amount of money.’”

What we find hard to understand is how so much grant money finds its way into a scheme planned by a private developer and clearly designed to make a massive profit.

Or does the developer plan to hand some of the profit back to the taxpayers who are building the project?

***

Remember our words of worry last week about Worst Street’s contract with 3GS – a private company that manages its environmental enforcement … i.e. issues tickets to litterers, fly tippers and the like.

We raised an EYE-brow at the news that Worst Street issued only seven fixed penalty notices for environmental crime offences in 2016/17 – whilst 3GS handed out 514 between April and December 2017.

“What does this tell us?” we asked.

“Either that Boston Borough Council failed dismally in its task, or that very few offences were committed.

“Or that 3GS – if nothing else – is being over-enthusiastic where the reporting of offences is concerned.”

***

Scarcely had our comments appeared when we read reports in a national newspaper about a woman living in the Brighton and Hove council area who was caught putting a single piece of rubbish into a communal recycling container after 3GS went through the rubbish – and fined £600.

She called for an end for what she called intimidating tactics employed by 3GS, who told her over the phone that she could be taken to court and face a £2,500 fine or a prison sentence. 

The story appeared after a Daily Telegraph investigation found that the number of councils employing "litter police" to issue fixed penalty notices for a range of minor offences has tripled in three years. 

The newspaper said: “Members of the public are 20 times more likely to be hit with a fine in one of the 39 areas which contract out the work to private enforcers, in some cases allowing them to keep 100% of the fine as payment in a system which critics say acts as an “incentive” to hand out tickets.  

"Brighton and Hove issued no fixed penalty notices in 2014 or 2015, but this rose to 2,133 in 2016 after 3GS were employed.”

***

This week’s shooting yourself in the foot award goes – not surprisingly – to Boston Borough Council.

Last year, a Worst Street cock-up saw thousands of garden waste stickers valued at £30 each for a year’s collection sent out in error due to a “purely human error, compounded by a complicated computerised process”

This year – perhaps by way of making amends – users of the service paying by direct debit received an e-mail asking: “Want to be in with a chance of winning your garden waste service for free?

“Simply reply to this email with the answer to the following question:

“How many tonnes of garden waste were collected in 2016/17?”

But within hours, the a second message followed the initial e-mail.

“Dear Garden Waste Customer,

“There was an error in relation to the competition question in the email that we sent today about your garden waste. Please accept our apologies and see the correct information below. If you are happy with your answer you do not need to do anything, however, should you wish to change your answer please reply to this email….”

“ … Want to be in with a chance of winning your garden waste service for free?

“Simply reply to this email with the answer to the following question:

“How many tonnes of garden waste were collected in 2016/17?

 A)    5,000

B)     9,000

C)     15,000

“Not sure, take a look at our website for the answer ...”

After all this nonsense, we wonder whether Worst Street actually knows what the answer to the question is!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com   

E– mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Our former blog is archived at: http://bostoneyelincolnshire.blogspot.com  

We are on Twitter – visit @eye_boston