Monday, 29 July 2019

Where there’s muck
there’s even more
money

as well as garden bin price hike, replacement bin charges are sneaked in

Of all the many things there are to get worked up about in the saga of Worst Street’s greed and incompetence, it’s somehow not surprising that the stuff that many might regard as the least important creates the biggest waves.

***

Last week, we drew attention to the debate on the cost of collecting your garden waste – which seems almost certain to be soaring like the cloud of flies that emerges each time you open your wheelie bin at this time of year.

***

This week, there’s something new – but it’s all about wheelie bins yet again … and the charge for a replacement if yours gives up the ghost or ends up in one of our many local waterways.

***

A reader ‘in the know’ tells us that a proposal to charge £25 for a replacement wheelie bin came as a surprise to the Portfolio Holder for waste collection.
Quoted as her words were: 'I am not in the loop on this I'll come back to you, Councillor.’
We were told: “Given that many wheelies have now been sitting out in the sun for about ten years, and that sun and plastic are not the best long-term companions, this looks like a charge that will be seen, and probably challenged by many local community tax payers as a local ‘stealth tax.’ 

***


So, what’s the bottom line here?
For those of you with time to spare, Worst Street publishes a snappily-named brochure called: “Waste and Recycling Operational Procedures” – a list of 25 measures over 19 pages which points out that it has a legal right to charge for the supply of bins and will do so “in accordance with the prevailing policy of Cabinet [sic] at the time.”

***

As far as we are aware, that time has never come – until now … and it is this what is exercising the great and the good of Worst Street.

***

The first mention of charges was made and agreed in February 2013 … back in the days when Tory Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire held the finance portfolio …


... Not only that, but it was recommended for a 20% increase from the year 2015-2016 – from £25 to £30.


***

One problem seems to be that whilst the charges have been an option for the past five years, it seems that they have only just been introduced – as recently as the start of the month – with many councillors in the dark about what it going on and minded to oppose any such move.

***

Not only that, but waste collection in the borough is a game of two halves.

***

Worst Street is very proud of avoiding any of what it calls its non-statutory responsibilities – things that it used to do out of the kindness of its heart (!) but is not compelled by law to do.
But with the need for economies, scarcely anything of that nature happens anymore – except of course for things such as spending thousands of pounds on the office of Mayor, which confers great benefits on … councillors lucky enough to hold the post (which is most of them if they survive enough elections.)

***

Garden waste collection falls into this category – which is why we are expected  not only to buy the bins we use, but pay to have them emptied … despite a cast-iron guarantee that the service would always be free.

***

Domestic waste is another matter.
Worst Street is obliged to collect this and can even specify the size and type of bin that must be used.
So, not unreasonably, people are asking why – if the council has to do this as part of its council tax ‘service’ – it apparently doesn’t have to provide the bins free as part of that package.
Whatever next – will we see a handling charge for the diesel expended to drive the dust carts – sorry, freighters?
We wouldn’t be at all surprised.

***
Meanwhile, some info just in …
We hear that there’s been a request for the bin replacement charges to be considered by an Overview and Scrutiny Committee – but when that will be is anyone’s guess.
Let’s hope that its sooner rather than later, as an estimate of the money being made from the replacement bin charges is of the order of £10,000 a year.

*** 

It was sad to read comments by traders in the once-thriving West Street that more and more shops are closing because business is in a downward spiral. 
But the writer of the report found new leader Aaron Spencer in buoyant mode … as usual.
He was quoted as saying: “I think we need to be looking at making Boston a more cosmopolitan type of town.
Come again?
The dictionary defines cosmopolitan as including people from many different countries – and we have them by the truckload already.
Councillor Spencer went on: “I was recently at the opening of Sam's Fish and Chip shop and it was great the amount of people who were there.
“As for West Street, we can only do so much as a council and I believe we have a prosperous future in Boston.
“Businesses will go where the popular area is in the town and we need to change people's perspectives of the town.
“We need to encourage entrepreneurs and business owners that we have a prosperous future.
“The problem of anti-social behaviour is one that is rife across the country and I believe it's a symptom of low-income housing.
“We're looking to find a way of addressing the symptom.”

***

This sort of response has already become something of a mantra with our leader.
But analyse what he says, and it doesn’t really bear close examination.
Of course, there would be a big turn out to the opening of a new shop of any kind – because people are specially invited.
We recall the opening two years ago of the mint supermarket by a former mayor amidst great fanfare  and the deafening silence when it closed a year later.  
As for West Street – whilst we forever hear the excuse that the planning committee cannot reject applications to convert former shops into off licences  just because we have too many of them – we are sure that a cunning planning mind could come up with an obstacle or two.
Allegedly, we have highly paid council officers whose job it is to encourage entrepreneurs and persuade business owners that we have a prosperous future.
So why don’t councillors ask them what they are doing  as they have produced little by way of results to date?
Whilst we asking questions, perhaps Councillor Spencer could clarify his phrase that the problem of anti-social behaviour is a symptom of low-income housing – because it makes little sense to us.
And whilst building better housing may be a partial solution is it not something for the here and now – and above all else Boston needs some quick fixes before the town goes down with all hands.

***

Something that was mentioned by West Street traders – and others in the town of course – was the issue of street drinking.

***

But you will be glad to hear that it is no longer a problem.
A report to this week’s Environment and Performance Committee on crime and disorder included the annual review of anti-social behaviour and Public Spaces Protect Order alcohol statistics for 2018/19 tells us that: “thus far in 2019 there have been 11 incidents reported to police by the public about street drinking.
“I am not saying that street drinking is completely eradicated, as clearly it does still happen, and probably always will to some degree. However, we have come a very long way indeed from when powers were first granted to address the issue.”
That may be true – but is it the case that so few incidents are reported to the police because potential callers know that nothing will happen.
That’s what many people say.

***

One small item of interest at last council meeting was a question about where the market stall covers that once graced The Green have gone.
The issue was raised by BiG Councillor Brian Rush, who was reportedly told by Councillor Nigel Welton that he was inclined to think they didn’t actually exist, and referred to them as ‘myths.’
Brian Rush insisted that they did exist – and we agree with him, having seen and admired them in the past.
Stuff does go AWOL at Worst Street from time to time – yet we would have expected a large organisation that spends our money to buy things might have devised the simple idea of an inventory that includes the location of items as well.
Which reminds us – never having seen them since they were bought for £15,000 to hold back the masses lining the route for the 2012 Olympic torch as it passed through Boston – what has become of the crowd control barriers that we could have hired for a fraction of the price?

***

Finally, our ‘Ideas Above Their Station’ award of the week goes to Worst Street for the following transparent piece of self-aggrandising tosh.


Worst Street?
A community ‘leader?’
How on earth did they come up with that ludicrous idea?


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

Monday, 22 July 2019

Worst Street is trumpeting the outbreak of peace in the council chamber after donkey’s years of strife, antagonism and hindrance to progress caused by petty bickering and political differences.

***

Having said that, we somehow see the news as less of a Compi├Ęgne Wagon moment – the wagon was the historic train carriage in which the First and Second Armistice were signed in 1918 – but more closely resembling the Weihnachtsfrieden Christmas truce along the Western Front in 1914.

***

Whilst in the former case it took twenty years before the Germans started another war – the truce saw a cessation of hostilities for just one day before the combatants resumed shooting the living daylights out of one another rather than kicking a football about.

***

The Damascene conversion of councillors took place a week ago today at the first ‘proper’ full council meeting after which the (eventually) newly-elected leader Aaron Spencer reportedly spoke of his vision for an end to party squabbling and criticism for criticism’s sake, saying that cooperation, transparency and communication would be the way forward.

***

If this comes about, then Councillor Spencer deserves a medal, and perhaps an invitation to intervene in other great conflicts such as Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq, whilst solving the Mexican drug wars on his day off.
Seriously – whilst we look forward to seeing council harmony happen – we can’t somehow imagine a collection of councillors whose behaviour is normally as mad as a box of frogs billing and cooing as they put aside their differences.
But time will tell.

***

Afterwards, Boston BiG spokesman Councillor Brian Rush e-mailed to say:
“Both sides of the  Chamber have committed to work together for the sake of the Borough ... and put aside all our concerns, no ifs, no buts ... my understanding is that at last, Boston has a group, of people ... who have vowed to work together with a common ambition, to stand together and make Boston PROUD!

***

The meeting took one decision in this new and enlightened spirit – the motion which had received two proposals to make Boston carbon neutral by either 2030 or 2050 – and voted to defer matters until after the issue had been discussed by the environment and performance scrutiny committee.
Given the date, it's appropriate to describe the event as one small step for Boston.
But whether it will be the precursor of a giant leap for Bostonkind is another matter entirely.

***

Almost immediately after the meeting, Councillor Spencer announced his new cabinet – although he had been quoted as saying that he did not propose changing it yet and that it would be a staged process.
He retains control of finance whilst his deputy – Nigel Welton – must be feeling giddy … having in the space of just a few weeks been portfolio holder for the town centre under the old Cooper regime, then portfolio holder for tourism under the newly-elected Cooper regime and now taking over economic development.
His former tourism job will now be done by another newcomer after the May elections – Alistair Arundell – a local landlord and businessman who owns a swathe of properties and a string of hotels.
Fellow newcomer Chelcei [sic] Sharman remains town centre supremo, and others whose roles remain unchanged are one-time UKIPper Yvonne Stevens with the environment portfolio, Councillor Martin Griggs (housing and communities) and Paul Skinner (regulatory services.)

***

Whether we will see some changes later in the year is moot at this stage.
Given his comments on inclusivity it may well be that Councillor Spencer follows the lead set by North Kesteven District Council – whose leaders have created a “North Kesteven Administration” in which the Conservative group would “no longer exist” and appointed one unaligned councillor and a Lincolnshire Independent to make it more inclusive.
If by any chance Councillor Spencer opts to follow that particular path, we are placing no bets on which non-Tory councillor would expect to be first in the queue to be offered a place.

***

One thing that we would like to see happen under this new regime would be for members of the public – who are supposedly the raison d'├¬tre for the council – to be better informed and involved.
At the moment, they are largely kept in the dark and excluded from information to which they should be entitled – and our new leader should be wary of allowing this practice to continue.

***

Worst Street’s cabinet of curiosities also met last week – though if you’d blinked, you would have missed it.
During the brief session, one member was heard to register concern about a likely increase in the charges to collect garden waste, but when asked about it afterwards said that nothing had been decided.
Another councillor was more forthcoming – saying that an option to go out to consultation was to increase charges for the service if people wanted it retained or improved and weren’t happy to see service cuts in other areas.

***


The mention of increasing charges and the fear of doing so was clearly heard by two members of the public who attended the meeting.
But subsequent online discussions of events fell victim to an impertinent after-hours intervention and lecture by Worst Street’s ‘Communications Manager’ who said: “The meeting today was held to agree to put the proposed £1 million savings required by austerity measures out for public consultation.
“After the meeting agreed this the draft transformation document (that's DRAFT as in nothing yet agreed) was placed on the council website together with the public consultation document so that anyone can register their views with the council.
“No secrecy, no slip of the tongue. It's all there, open and transparent, and the best way to get your opinions known is to comment via this, and not knee-jerk responses to social media soundbites.”

***

It seems that the new look Worst Street would rather that you didn’t believe the evidence of your own ears, and instead take their word for it.

***

That aside it is clear that there have been talks of some kind – otherwise the concerns about increasing charges would not have been expressed. Not only that, but another councillor referred to a ‘cock-up’ in cabinet because they were mentioned.

***

The so-called ‘draft’ merely adds to the confusion.
Whilst ‘nothing has been decided’ – perhaps – the list of possible savings is clearly itemised in terms of amount.
Thus, the 17 areas which have saving or earning suggestions allocated to them specify that – as a for instance – ‘Work for business’ will “utilise capacity of assets by undertaking work for partners and local businesses” and raise £10,000.

***

Most of the sums are penny ante in terms of Worst Street spending – but eventually add up to the £1 million target in increments sometimes as small as £10,000.
But there are two exceptional amounts on the list.
The smaller of these is a call for a £200,000 reduction in capital spending – which means cutting back on buying, maintaining, or improving fixed assets, such as buildings, vehicles, equipment, or land.
But the larger item – and the biggest on the list, totalling 22% of the total – comes under the headline “policy changes” and concerns “income generation” from a review of environmental operation fees.
To what can the majority of this saving refer, other than charges for taking away our garden waste which constitutes one of the main environmental costs?

***

Of course, this is just a draft  isn’t it? 
But with so much income depending on a hike in environmental charges, it is hard to imagine that it could be much reduced when so many other areas for savings or earnings are that much smaller.

***

It's worth remembering that when brown bin collections were first introduced, it was with a promise that the service would always be free.
That pledge was broken by the devious ploy of later saying that the service would remain free for the duration of the then administration.
After an election, although the political administration was unchanged, the fact that there had been a vote was deemed to have created a new one ... and thus the means to introduce charges.
Now  even though the current Worst Street annual report declares the garden waste scheme to be a continuing success   what looks like a very large price hike is almost inevitable, as there seems nowhere much else to find the money.
There is a technical term for penalising loyal customers in this way.
It is called shooting fish in a barrel.


***


As always, Worst Street tips its flat cap to the idea of democracy with a public “consultation” on the proposals which opened last Wednesday and runs until 23rd August.
First, you need to read the transformation proposals “and any associated papers.”
Then you are asked if you agree that “these are the areas the council should be looking to transform in order to save money (for example, if you feel that any areas should not be on the list, please explain why.)
“Q       Are there any other areas that you think should be added?
“The council will widen the services that it ‘sells’ to other clients including both the public and local businesses.  These will include (but are not limited to) sweeping of business land, car parks, construction sites, tree inspections, tree surgery.
“Q       Are there any services that you think the council should consider looking at selling?  What do you see as the pros and cons of the council becoming more commercialised?
“Service Modernisation.
“A number of service reviews will take place to ensure all services are working to their potential at a minimum cost.  While the services that are offered may be organised differently to how they currently are, there are no plans for removal of any of the range of services currently being delivered.
“Q       What do you see as the pros and cons to the council undertaking service reviews?
“The council will look to review fees and charges within a number of services these will include (not limited to) garden waste, crematorium, commercial waste.
Q         What do you see as the pros and cons of the council looking at more options for generating income?
Q         Please detail the impact that raising the fees and charges on these services will have on you.
Q         Are there any other services that you feel the council should look at when considering raising fees and charges?
“Policy Changes.
“The council will look to change a number of policies, these will include (but not be limited to), stop supporting out of term activities for school children, transfer litter bins responsibility to parish councils.
Q         What do you see as the pros and cons of the council making policy changes of this type?
Q         Please detail the impact that policy changes have on you.
Are there any other policies that you feel the council should review?”

***

The main thrust of this so-called ‘consultation’ seems to be to ask participants (four times) what they think about the pros and cons of the council doing what it is doing – rather than proposing specific saving or earning suggestions for people to comment on.

***

And as we know from many years of such exercises – at the end of the day, after Worst Street asks for our views … it then does just as it intended to do all along.
Can you recall a time when public opinion was acted on?
No, nor can we.
  


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


Monday, 15 July 2019

Want a booze-up organising
in a brewery?
Don’t ask
Worst Street

Step by step, Boston Borough Council is closing the door on relations with the taxpayers and retreating still further up its own backside.

***

Tonight sees a meeting of the full council – which has been put back to its traditional start time of 6-30pm after a fleeting attempt to reschedule it for 7pm – possibly something to do with the early bedtime requirements of some of the older members.

***

The minutes for approval are of the meeting on 28th February – even though the annual meeting which saw the appointment of the new mayor, along with some contentious debate, appears to have been overlooked.

***

As always, there is space on the agenda for questions from both councillors and the voters – although the latter are called ‘members of the public’ as if they are in some way different and lower in status than councillors.

***

Enter Worst Street’s latest Catch-22.
Questions are usually directed at members of the cabinet – and notably the leader. Even though they have to be submitted a ridiculous time in advance, they never appear on the public agenda and remain secret until the night, which means you have to attend  the meeting if you want to hear them.
But by a piece of administration that eloquently defines the word jobsworth, this occasional opportunity has been nobbled … as the agenda item explains.

***

“At the annual meeting of the council held on 20th May, council resolved that
Councillor Michael Cooper be appointed as Leader of the Council for the Council term from 2019/20 to 2023/24.   
“In accordance with the requirements of the Constitution, Councillor Cooper has
given notice that he is stepping down as Leader of the Council with effect from 15th July. This creates a vacancy for the position of Leader of the Council which
the Council is being asked to fill at this meeting.”

***

Why on earth Councillor Cooper put himself forward in the first place is anyone’s guess – his eleven-day term in office has proved shorter than that of the leaders of some military coups in third world countries.

***

But the ensuing cack-handed agenda planning gave Worst Street the chance to deny the public the chance to question the new leader.
The reason?
Councillor Cooper’s resignation takes effect today, and the election of a successor does not appear on the agenda  until after the section for member and taxpayer questions.
Ergo: If you want to put a question to the leader, you can’t because there isn’t one at that particular moment in time – as a member of the public who wished to do that was told quite clearly.
Presumably, this also applies to those other members of the public known as councillors who might want to quiz the leader.

***

Although this is a one-off, it does mean that those wishing to hold the leader to some sort of account will have to wait four-and-a half-months from the 4th May meeting until the next full council meeting on 23rd September to do so.

***

We believe that this is just what Worst Street wants. As we told you a couple of weeks ago, councillors are accountable in only the vaguest terms, and have no real responsibilities should they not choose to accept any.
Officers are increasingly hiding behind a feedback e-mail address which is being offered to the public as a way to get in touch rather than making a direct approach.
BTAC-ky – now the council’s most important committee in many respects – has reverted to bi-monthly meetings … another move that avoids more frequent accountability.

***

The Local Government Association ‘improver’ who is coming to Worst Street for a week during September will find the job akin to wading through treacle in order to make any headway.
Perhaps Worst Street is deliberately making things more difficult ahead of that session so that it can appear to offer concessions to modernity and good communications when they are suggested – as common sense says that they must be – merely to resume the status quo.

***

Most of tonight’s council meeting is the usual rubber-stamping – aside from a couple of motions that express similar sentiments … but different deadlines.
A proposal by Tory Councillor Paul Skinner and seconded by his wife, Judith, urges councillors to commit to make Worst Street’s activities carbon neutral by 2050.
A second motion – proposed by BiGger's Anne Dorrian and seconded by colleague Neill Hastie says the same thing (although rather more long-windedly) but with a date of 2030.

***

This is apparently deemed so difficult for councillors to take on board that they will be issued with written advice on the procedure for considering two motions on the same subject.

***

You might expect us to have some adverse comment to make about this – but we don’t.
We heartily support any move to stop the rot that theatens our environment and improve it for future generations.
But we just wish that our councillors would exercise themselves more with the here and now problems besetting Boston and get on with trying to sort them out.

***

Reader reaction to last week’s Boston Eye report on the brainwave of the new leader (that we don’t have until tonight assuming that he gets elected) were interesting.

***


One former councillor wrote: “I remember listening to the presentation being made about Merchant's Quay so many years ago.
“Lots of nice drawings, lots of opportunities for Boston Borough Council to invest, but one of the presenters rather destroyed the atmosphere when he said he was in favour because he came from Boston – or words to that effect.
“The apparent need for such a comment made the other ‘pro’ arguments look as if further judgement needed to be exercised.
“Given what happened to the project it would seem I was not alone in my thinking.
“We were, finally, told that Merchant's Quay was not to go ahead because of lack of take up by the necessary end users. (Apparently 70+% such commitment is needed to create scheme viability for developers.)
“If that was so then, is today's retail development/investment climate in Boston any better?”

***

Even more cynically, another e-mail asked: “Having heard his thinking on the way forward for Boston, would it be a (charity) fundraising idea to run a book on how long the present Boston Borough Council leader will last?”

***

While Worst Street is unaccountably trying to make the dreadful ‘Wild Bill’ TV programme a selling point to lure visitors to the town, it will still be a long time before we lose another image that we would rather do without.
In a column written around US Independence Day, Daily Mail writer Richard Littlejohn speculated as to how the UK might celebrate the first anniversary of Brexit – or “freedom from foreign rule” as he put it.

***

Almost inevitably, Boston got a mention.



Doubtless there will be the usual chuntering in the civic ranks, but Worst Street is doing nothing to improve Boston’s image and so only has itself to blame.

***

Mention of Brexit makes us wonder if the coming months may prove worrying for our MP Matt Warman.
According to reports, Boris Johnson muttered something about a snap election during a televised debate with Jeremy Hunt the other night.
It came on the same day that the organisation Electoral Calculus – “a political consultancy specialising in quantitative analysis and modelling for electoral and other market research projects” – predicted victory for the Brexit Party in Boston and Skegness, South Holland and The Deepings, and the Louth and Horncastle seats.

click to enlarge image
***

Finally – for someone who hasn’t yet been appointed as Boston Borough Council leader until tonight (assuming this will turn out to be the usual Worst Street rubber stamp) – Councillor Aaron Spencer is certainly talking the talk ...

  
... So much so that his promises of big and expensive plans for the redevelopment of Boston appear to have prompted our local ‘newspaper’ the Boston off-Target to rechristen him Councillor Spender – not just in the headline but six times elsewhere.
Its’s good that our local hacks are so well-informed, isn’t it?
Our thanks to the reader who sent in the picture.
Incidentally, the interview included a quote which read: “There’s a vocal minority online who run the town down and everything down, always nay-saying about everything.”
If, perchance, Councillor Spencer is referring to Boston Eye, then we suggest he reads the blog a little more closely.
Seldom, if ever, have we run the town down.
What we  have done .... frequently and with justification ... is to criticise senior officers and councillors for their inactivity, lack of imagination, incompetence and in some cases indifference.
If we had a decent council, we wouldn't need a Boston Eye.




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 

Monday, 8 July 2019

Deja phew!


 past  comes back to taunt us …
Strap on your seatbelts for a trip back in time …
Remember this?
Well in the way of all good fairy stories we'll begin by saying ...
Once upon a time ...


That was the big news eleven years ago.
Then ten years ago – almost to the day – came the news … 



As if to mark the anniversary, Worst Street last week announced ...
“The new leader of the ruling group on Boston Borough Council has revealed his vision for the town – a massive redevelopment project to dramatically improve fortunes and perceptions.
The draft proposals will form a joint public and private partnership plan to redesign and redevelop an area between the railway station and the river, north of West Street …
“Councillor Spencer said: ‘It will be a comprehensive and complex project over many years – perhaps as many as 15 – and involving many partners and is a long-sighted vision for the future prosperity of our town. …’
Project partners already include Lincolnshire County Council and health partners. Proposals include moving the bus and coach park to the current Staniland car park, all-new development of retail units, a hotel, housing and car parking, a major health and wellbeing hub and a green corridor linking the station and the new centre with the rest of town. It is likely that only the former Jobcentre building near St Botolph’s footbridge will be repurposed.”
He added that: “The scheme in total will completely revitalise this large area of the town.”
It could almost be a copy and paste from eleven years ago – although Councillor Spencer was probably too young to remember it the first time around.
County Hall and “health partners” are already said to be on-side.
They would be.
Lincolnshire County Council stands to make a profit from selling off two car parks for redevelopment and the “health partners” sound to be getting something for nothing.
And is Worst Street really sure that relocating the bus station to the Stanliand car park is such a good idea?
And where will the private investment come from?
We’re still awaiting the arrival of the £3 million 168-berth Gosling Marina on land in the Fenside area which was enthusiastically approved by Worst Street four years ago.
At the time, former leader Peter Bedford was quoted as saying: “Obviously we hope the marina will give the town a much-needed boost and regenerate the waterfront.
“When it is built, it should bring millions to the town, push up property prices and get people coming to Boston – it is a very exciting prospect.”
And where are we with plans to build 16 shops and 15 residential apartments on the car park site near the Centenary Methodist Church between Wide Bargate and Red Lion Street?
Meanwhile, the in-town Lidl – which according to the signs on the hoardings is set to open 'soon' – remains a razed site.
And let's not forget that a year from now, Boston United is supposed to be playing at its new stadium at the Quadrant – easily found by looking for the fast food shops being built in anticipation.

***

It always seems to be jam tomorrow where Worst Street is concerned and we find it disappointing that our latest leader should join the ranks of those making such promises so soon
Or, rather than jam tomorrow, do we mean ...



News just in …
The Worst Street announcement said that a bid for finance had been lodged with the Government’s £675 million Future High Streets Fund – but last Friday saw the government announce the 50 applicants who will  receive up to £150,000 to work up detailed project proposals based on their initial plans – and Boston was not among them.
How this bodes for the chances of another bid being worked on – to the £1.6 billion Stronger Towns Fund – is anyone’s guess, but it might be a good idea to go back to the drawing board and ‘repurpose’ the bid currently under construction.

  
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