What a good job that elections for Boston Borough Council are only held every four years – otherwise we might be due another before the fallout from the most recent one appears on the Worst Street website.

We know that the wheels of the Worst Street mill grind slow – that’s if they grind at all – but our neighbours in South Holland and West Lindsey had the full details of their new councils online within a week of the results.

Boston on the other hand had nothing – and still didn’t as we bedded the blog down at the weekend.

***

A visit to WorstWeb – surely among the poorest and most unhelpful local authority websites in the country and which still reports: “No Results Found … the page you requested could not be found” when you try to link to it – offered a series of options to learn who your representative was … and bear in mind that whilst  almost half the councillors are new to the authority this time around the rest are not and their details remain mostly unchanged..

***

The Worst Street invitation was to find your councillor – alphabetically, by party, by ward, or as a list. But whichever option you selected resulted in a default back to the same menu.

After all this time, WorstWeb blandly states “page being updated.”

But bearing in mind that we are talking more than two weeks after the election on 2^nd May – one of the few items of ‘information’  on offer was a ‘councillor attendance’ summary.

***

But this wasn’t just any old summary – it was a list of the 14 councillors who either opted not to seek re-election or who were not re-elected and their attendance up to and including 17^th May … fifteen days after they ceased to hold office.

Meanwhile, of the councillors who survived the ordeal by ballot box – and therefore look the same, represent the same parties and in most cases the same wards and have the same e-mail addresses, there was no sign.

***

This was yet another glittering piece of ineptitude from Boston Borough Council – and worryingly one that can be laid at the door of the officer cadre … something that is happening with increasing regularity, and which raises concerns about the quality and abilities of many of the more senior folk around the place whom we would expect to justify their excessively high salaries by demonstrating their worth rather than the reverse.

We are reminded of the response from an officer asked to produce a long overdue report in time for a committee meeting in a month's time who seriously suggested that this would not be feasible.

***

So in Boston, voters who may have held off contacting a councillor due to impending elections have been left in the lurch, whilst our neighbouring authorities are able to brush such difficulties aside and do the job expected of them in double quick time compared with dawdling Boston – which increasingly is looking like a pre-retirement home for senior officers.

All our councillors were photographed for WorstWeb on the day after the first May bank holiday. Creating their e-mail addresses is not exactly rocket science as it follows the pattern lazy.officer@boston.gov.uk – so why has nothing been done?

If Boston is ever to be dragged from the rut into which it is inexorably sinking daily deeper, we need a brighter, more imaginative, more enthusiastic, less lethargic bunch of managers at the helm.

But somehow, we doubt that this will happen.

***

As we have said, quite what the upshot of the elections has remained unclear for quite some while – and our first interpretation of the results was called into question by none other than the council’s top Tory – leader Michael Cooper.

***

He mailed a week after the elections to say that there seemed to be “a bit of confusion” over numbers – which we took to mean he was saying that Boston Eye had got it wrong!

He went on: “After the 2015 elections it stood at: Cons – 13, UKIP –13, Lab –2, Indi (sic) – 2

“By the end of the term we had 16.

“Now we are Cons –16, Indi (sic) –10, Lab – 2, Un aligned (sic) –2

“So, we are actually up on numbers from where we were at this point in the last term and still hold the same number of seats as we did when we finished the last term. 
“Given the national picture we did remarkably well unlike many local councils who were punished for Westminster’s inability to get a meaningful solution to BREXIT, something we have no control over at all.”

***

There is a word which well describes Councillor Cooper’s stance on the election results – Potemkin.

No, not the battleship.

In politics and economics, a Potemkin façade is any construction (literal or figurative) built solely to deceive others into thinking that a situation is better than it really is. The term comes from stories of a fake portable village built solely to impress Empress Catherine II by her former lover Grigory Potemkin. during her journey to Crimea in 1787.

The legend has it that Potemkin erected phony portable settlements along the banks of the Dnieper River in order to impress the Russian Empress; the structures would be disassembled after she passed, and re-assembled farther along her route to be viewed again as if another example.

***

But back to our e-mail correspondence

We told Councillor Cooper: “Certainly there is confusion – much of it down to the council's appalling website which a week (that’s how long it was then) after the elections has still not set out even the basics of the result nor which senior councillors have been allocated to the various executive roles.

“I appreciate that you are trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat and make the local results seem as good as possible, but cherry picking the comparison periods doesn't change matters.

“You had 16 councillors on election day, and now have 16 councillors once again.

Similarly, I note that the number of Independents is being listed as one less than on election night and that two councillors are listed as unaligned.

“This latter description is a perverse interpretation by someone in West street to refer to councillors that have not joined a political group – which in my book makes them Independent.

“When the ‘official’  details appear on WorstWeb, I will be pleased to quote them – which is one of the reasons I am taking next Monday off to allow your overworked officers to get their act together and put the details online ...”

***

Obviously, it is Councillor Cooper’s job to make the Boston Tories look good – but as we have said many times before, a scarecrow in a blue suit would most likely be elected to Worst Street in some council wards … such is the inborn and hereditary tendency to vote Conservative regardless.

Let’s remember that some obvious Tory candidates in the election didn’t even dare admit which party they represented – so scared were they of defeat – yet got returned anyway.

And others switched from their original parties between 2015 and the last election as ‘self-servatives’ for the purposes of gaining influence, or a desire to retain office whilst in some cases deserting the wards that voted them in to seek new home somewhere safer.

And as far as the promises the party made to get into power were concerned … they might as well not have bothered.

***

Their Conservative election literature claimed to have “delivered” a funding bid for a bypass distributor road.

Well, that’s true … up to a point.

At the beginning of the year a “Strategic case summary and request for funding towards business case” was submitted to the government – which basically asked for £1 million to spend on writing a bid for the £150 million required to build the sections of the road that cross over rail, other roads and water … don’t forget that the building of the bulk of the road will be a condition imposed on developers and that the thing will eventually link like a giant tarmac sausage and only go around the western side of the town linking the A16 north and south in any case.

This will add decades to seeing a result.

And whilst money has already been allocated from the Government’s £100 billion National Roads Fund,  despite an application ages and ages ago, Boston has not featured among the recipients.

***

Perhaps if we decided what we really, really want things might go better.

A “bypass distributor road” is a silly expression that is neither a bypass, nor a distributor road – although the political employment of the word bypass is clearly designed to make it sound better than it is.

***

Boston Tories next claimed to have “delivered” the Boston Barrier.

a) It hasn’t been delivered, as it is still under construction, and b) Worst Street’s involvement has been peripheral to say the least. The big players have been the Environment Agency and Lincolnshire County Council – whose most memorable act was to withdraw a promised £10 million contribution that would have allowed Boston to join the Fens Waterways Network and given business and tourism a massive boost.

Needless to say, Clownty Hall’s duplicity went unchallenged and unremarked by our district councillors.

***

Claim Three was the acquisition of a £1.3 “impact” fund to tackle immigration – which saw a £90,000 facelift for the Moulder Leisure Centre gymnasium … something vital to ease the pressures.

The rump of the claims comprised new town centre operatives to keep things clean and tidy. This was funded by BTAC-ky at great cost to those who live within its territory – and is essentially reinstating a service that disappeared some years ago due to the popular cuts that everyone votes for. Meanwhile the non-central  and highly populated area of the BTAC-ky patch remains a weed-strewn and litter logged wilderness.

Two to go – retention of council tax protection schemes, which do help people with money problems; and keeping council tax among the lowest in the country. This latter claim is bemusing – as tax has still increased year on year whilst services have declined or been cut.

A cack-handed kind of achievement.

***

The list of future plans included securing ample power and water supplies for the future to help business grow and support new jobs – this at a time when jobs are disappearing, and there are ample supplies of utilities and room for jobs in the many shops which have closed.

Another aim is to fight for local NHS services – something else that is largely beyond Worst Street’s abilities … other than to make noise.

Another listed item is to implement the local plan which runs until 2036, which has taken an eternity to draw up and which is all but compulsory in any case.

Worst Street also plans to spend £10,000 on Central Park – which hopefully might include restoring some of the yards of attractive foliage destroyed over the years … more action on homelessness and that old hoary chestnut “keeping the council tax low.”

It scarcely leaps off the page at you, does it?

***

Having said that, Labour had even less to offer – with a noughts and crosses style display on the election literature that we saw. And no solutions on offer.

***

At least one local representative of a national party admitted to such disappointment with the results that she has severed links with the organisation entirely.

Former Station Ward councillor and BTAC chairman Sue Ransome – a UKIP stalwart for years – told Boston Eye: “I have taken the decision to leave UKIP, and have submitted my resignation as a member and also as the East Midlands Regional Treasurer, a post I have held for ten years. My nineteen years as Boston and Skegness Constituency Treasurer is also finished.

“As you are well aware, I have always decried councillors etc who jumped ship to enable them to promote themselves and I would never have done that myself. 

“But the election results meant that I didn’t have to betray the electorate who had voted UKIP. 

“Therefore, when I met with Nigel Farage recently, I was able with a clear conscience to support him once again.  As you know I have been totally in support of Nigel for the twenty years since we met and have remained close colleagues ever since.

“I believe Brexit will be the catalyst to allow us to finally leave the EU!

“As for local elections, if Brexit are in a position to field local candidates then in future, I will stand for them, if not then I will stand as an Independent and if elected will work the same as I have always done.

“I have become disillusioned with UKIP over the last year and feel that a number of bad judgements have been made, to the detriment of the party and its members.

“I feel that I must say at this point, I have found over the last six years that I had the privilege to be a Lincolnshire County and also a Boston Borough councillor, I have had an enormous amount of support and help from many officers and employees at Boston Borough Council which made things very much easier for me.

“I do feel that often some of them receive a lot of stick which in many cases I haven’t considered was deserved. 

“I have also had support and advice from councillors from other parties, and I would even include yourself in this. If we have ever disagreed you have explained and given me the chance to put my point forward and then we have usually agreed at the end.  
“So, I do thank you, the officers, the employees of Boston Borough Council and the councillors for all the help and support I have received.”

***

All of which brings us neatly to this week’s election – when we go to the polls on Thursday for the European Parliament.

We are sure that our local MP Matt Warman is glad to be out of it – but that hasn’t stopped him picking up a brickbat or two along the way.

Annunziata Rees-Mogg – sister of Brexiteer Tory Jacob – who joined the Conservative Party aged five, has dumped the Tories for the Brexit Party, and is standing for the East Midlands, which includes Lincolnshire.

To make things even more locally relevant, her family home is at Welton-le-Marsh near Spilsby in the neighbouring constituency of ‎Louth and Horncastle.

***

During visits that took in Boston and Skegness, Ms Rees-Mogg questioned Mr Warman’s ability to carry out what his constituency voted for.

Local media reports said she claimed that by backing Theresa May's Brexit deal Mr Warman would be “betraying” his constituents.

“Mr Warman said he hoped the debate over a Brexit deal was nearing an end.

“Of course, Mr Warman has just been appointed assistant Government whip, which has apparently given him a ‘wider perspective.’

“Unfortunately, his ‘wider perspective’ has not changed his views on supporting Theresa May’s dead duck deal, which has been voted down by the House of Commons three times.

“The internationally binding treaty Mrs May is trying to force upon us proves she has capitulated to the EU and failed to negotiate in our country’s best interests.

“By backing May's deal, he isn't doing what his constituents voted for and it's a real betrayal.

“We promised we would leave the EU and he's backing a Prime Minister that has got into bed with the EU.

“Given the manifesto upon which he was elected said “no deal is better than a bad deal” perhaps he should be whipping his colleagues on behalf of his electors?”

***

Mr Warman was quoted as responding: “I think when you actually look at how I’ve voted in parliament, I’ve voted to leave at every opportunity and honour my constituents vote.

“I voted to keep the no deal option on the table which was rejected by the government.

“Surely anyone voting to take the no deal option off the table is in fact hindering the Brexit process making it anti-democratic.

“I feel like I can honestly say that I’ve voted at every opportunity for what my constituents have voted for.

“My role in parliament has changed a number of times and none of this will affect the Brexit process."

***

The MP also takes some stick in aa political blog called “The Commentator” whose editor, Matt Snape calls Mr Warman “An example of the disconnect between some MPs and their Conservative Associations.”

He writes: “It beggars belief that Matt Warman MP would accept a job as assistant government whip; In the SAME WEEK his Conservative Association publish an open letter calling for Theresa May to resign over her ‘failure of leadership to get on with Brexit.’”

Later, he says “It is clear Warman has placed himself at odds with his own association members and his actions are frustrating their will. The overwhelming majority of them do not support the withdrawal agreement and they are responsible for Warman’s re-selection. By ignoring their wishes and accepting a position that will enable him to force the deal through Parliament, his own parliamentary future is at stake.”

You can read the whole piece by clicking here 

***

Back now to where we started.

Just 19 days after the elections the council has its annual meeting tonight – a self-congratulatory affair which sees the election of a new Mayor and deputy, and lots of back-slapping thanks to the outgoing first citizen and deputy.

We’re sure that everyone will attend, as not only is it the first official get-together, but there are usually some taxpayer canapes on offer.

But what will be the state of the things that matter?

There appear to have been problems with the cabinet casting couch, and councillors need an awful lot of kit these days and have had very little time to get to grips with it. And is the leadership issue as cut and dried as some people think?

***

And another problem that we mentioned in a recent blog is the impact that the appointment of a Conservative Mayor will have on things.

The next Mayor is former Ukipper/BiGger-turned-Tory Anton Dani, and obviously his deputy will be a Tory too – which further imperils the stonking Conservative majority of which the leader is so proud.

This suggests that a few deals have been made so that the Tories can call on some non-Conservative irons to put into the fire in the event that some of the already anticipated patchy attendances by some new members prove to materialise.

It happened with the last administration, and we can see no reason why it won’t occur again.

***

And finally – just to lighten up for a moment …

Our he-he-headline of the week goes to the Lincolnshire Reporter for this statement of the obvious …

Severed foot not linked eh?

Well it wouldn’t be, would it?

***

There's no blog next week becasuse of the Bank Holiday. We're back next on Monday 3^rd June.

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

The Tory administration has squeaked back into control of Boston Borough Council – and hopefully will learn a few lessons from the outcome.

There were 74 candidates contesting the 30 seats in the 15 wards up for grabs – 26 Conservative, 22 Labour, 14 Independent, 4 UKIP, 4 Blue Revolution 3 ‘others’ and 1 Liberal Democrat.

At the last election in 2015. The Conservatives stood in all wards though not for every vacancy with a total of 26 candidates; Labour fielded 19 candidates in 12 wards, and 15 Independents stood.

***

The outcome after last Thursday’s load of ballots saw the Conservatives with a slender majority – having 16 of the 30 seats, the Independents on 11, followed by Labour, the Labour and Co-operative Party and UKIP on one apiece.

The average turnout was a pathetic 27.34%, but a number of wards were under 25%.

***

Tory group leader Michael Cooper decided to ignore a disastrous night nationally which saw the Conservatives lose 1,334 councillors from the 248 English councils, and chose to interpret the Boston result as snatching some kind of victory from the jaws of defeat.

He told the BBC that he didn't think they’d perform so well.

“People were pretty disillusioned around Brexit and they felt let down by the government.

“We thought that would translate into a bit of a backlash, a hit of anti-Conservative vote over Brexit, but as it turned out it didn't come that way.”

***

Despite this laughable optimism, the result wasn’t what could be described as a clear-cut endorsement of the way that Worst Street has been run these past four years, which is why we say that we hope the new-look council – albeit with ten of the old administration’s faces back in business – will think before they cut, and look to expand or at least retain services rather than reduce them.

Certainly, their six-point future plan lacked lustre if ever we saw one – but more on that in a future issue.

Their legacy after four years in power is a town that’s dirtier than ever, a place where the shopping centre is in decline – and despite paying lip service to the idea of ending an unpopular and unnecessary Into Town bus service rat-run – a once pleasant pedestrian precinct is now fouled by the noise and fumes of buses grinding through every few minutes.

***

Hopefully, the arrival of a decent supply of Independents to the council chamber, rather than councillors claiming to fly that flag whilst buttressing up the administration, may act as not only a calming hand on the Worst Street tiller but also a useful influence on the ruling group next time it decides slavishly to follow orders from Head Office at the expense of the local taxpayers.

***

What does need saying at this stage though is that independents should be exactly that.

Before the 2015 election they operated as a group because it was beneficial for the purpose of committee representation – but it was always made crystal clear that they did not have a leader because they were independent. Simples!

Our concern at this stage is that there will be a move by some to take charge and “lead” a group of people who are quite capable of making up their own minds without any third-party help.

And let us point out from the outset for anyone who is so inclined that standing as a councillor and being lucky enough to be elected is about serving – not leading.

There also needs to be clarification of which independents are members of the Bostonian Independent Group – which de-registered as a political party ahead of the elections – and which appears to subscribe to the idea of having a leader to tell them what to do.

Deregistration meant that their logo did not appear on ballot papers; so at the moment, we don’t have an inkling of who’s a BiGger and who is truly standing on their own two feet.

***

Let’s take a look at the results ward by ward now.

Two Independents now man the helm of Coastal Ward – one of them former Tory incumbent Peter Bedford who ditched the party this time around. He’s joined by fellow Independent Judith Welbourn.

This represents a loss for the Tories, as Councillor Bedford was their candidate last time around until he was ousted in a leadership coup – and the ward also saw the highest turnout on 33.0%

Whilst standing as an Independent at the county council elections saw him defeated, we understand that he remained determined to beat the Conservatives – especially after they fielded candidates from Wyberton and Gypsey Bridge, whilst he and his new colleague live in the ward.

***

In Fenside Ward – which was shared for a while between a Labour and a Conservative councillor back in 2015 – the result remained honours even, with Alan Bell winning for the Labour and Co-operative Party and Anton Dani for the Tories.

The result is especially good news for Councillor Dani who was due to be Mayor in the coming year … so long as he was elected.

Clearly voters were unconfused by his candidature even though he began his political career as a UKIPper, then became a BiGger until finally defecting to the Tories at the start of the year.

Still, at least he stuck to his ward – unlike a couple of other councillors who abandoned their voters for safer berths.

***

There were no surprises in Fishtoft Ward where Paul and Judith Skinner were re-elected for the Tories along with former UKIPper Jonathan Noble, another defector to the Tories.

No surprises either in Five Villages Ward, where the dream ticket of Worst Street’s Roy Rogers – leader Michael Cooper –  and his ‘Trigger,’ deputy Aaron Spencer, were both returned.

***

Change all round in Kirton and Frampton – where former Fenside Labour man turned Tory Nigel Welton migrated for safety won a seat along with fellow Tory, Shaun Blackman and Independent Peter Watson. The seats were previously held by two Tories who quit this time and a UKIPper.

***

In Old Leake and Wrangle, professional Tory councillor Thomas Ashton was re-elected and the night also saw the return of Tory Frank Pickett who was previously a councillor between 2011 and 2015. Councillor Ashton somehow managed to be in two places at once – being re-elected as a Tory councillor for East Lindsey District Council’s Sibsey and Stickney.

***

Skirbeck Ward delivered some surprises as well as being the ward with the lowest turnout at 22.3%. Out went veteran Labour Councillor Paul Gleeson who was first elected in 2011 and was regarded as one of Boston’s better councillors. His two Labour colleagues also suffered defeat – including former mayor Paul Kenny who has also stood as prospective parliamentary candidate for Boston at all four general elections since 2005.

Absent from the ballot paper was Councillor Martin Griggs, the Tory portfolio holder for housing, property and community – who opted to desert Skirbeck and seek a new home in the much safer Trinity Ward.

Local businessman Alistair Arundel – who describes himself on his LinkedIn profile as: “Landlord portfolio holder, letting agent and property developer. & hotels and counting.... Every problem has a solution” won for the Tories. whilst Independent Anne Dorrian emerged from the remaindered pages of Boston’s political history book to secure the third seat.

Ms Dorrian was a political chameleon during her time in Worst Street starting out with the Boston Bypass Independents back in 2007, then forming the splinter Better Boston Group which she chaired after a falling-out over who should chair the BBI. More recently, she stood as an independent at both the local and county elections.

***

In St Thomas Ward ‘Independent’ Alison Austin was re-elected as was Boston BiG founder Brian Rush in Staniland Ward sharing the honours with Tory candidate Deborah Evans.

Station Ward saw former BTAC chairman and UKIP veteran Sue Ransome lose to Labour’s Paul Goodale, who previously served on Boston Borough Council between 2011 and 2015.

Two new Tory faces have joined the council in Swineshead and Holland Fen. They are local businessman Georges Cornah and Chelcei Sharman.

Two more Tories were returned in Trinity Ward. Yvonne Stevens won another term, whilst Martin Griggs, previously ... as we said earlier ... a Skirbeck councillor and housing portfolio holder, found the safe seat previously occupied by another Tory, Doctor Gordon Gregory, who had not sought re-election.

The result in West Ward will have come as another surprise for the Tories, where their candidate was defeated by former Conservative and mayor three years ago Stephen Woodliffe standing as an Independent. Do we detect another falling out between the people in blue à la Coastal Ward?

West Ward saw the return of the UKIP’s Viven Edge – the only Kipper to survive – and the arrival of Neil Hastie … one of the few Independents to ally himself with BiG.

And finally, to Wyberton Ward – where Independent Tracey Abbott ousted Kipper turned Tory Environment Portfolio Holder David Brown by just four votes to join veteran ‘Independent’ Richard Austin – founder of the Boston Bypass Independents all those years ago.

***

So … despite the leader’s optimism the Tories haven’t done as well as all that.

Before the election the state of the parties was Conservative – 17, UKIP – 6, Independent – 4, and Bostonian Independents – 3.

Now, it’s Conservative – 16, Independents – 11, Independents – 1, Labour and Co-operative Party – 1, and UKIP – 1.

Despite the leader’s optimism, the Tories have lost a seat and their overall majority of two is not as comfortable as it sounds.

They also need to find two new members of the cabinet having already struggled to cobble together the seven people needed to hold the various portfolios in the previous administration.

***

One potential problem concerns the mayoralty – to be occupied by Conservative Anton Dani with a fellow Tory as deputy – and which could put the Tories' slim majority in danger at times.

If as may well happen the council finds itself split, we wonder how often a mayoral vote in favour of the ruling party can be cast before allegations of political partiality begin to surface.

***

Already, we suspect that behind the scenes the Tories are casting about to find Independents to vote with them as was the case with the last administration, where deals made a nonsense of political declarations of party loyalty and political independence.
Those deals were done primarily to spite UKIP – though with willing complicity in some quarters – and we wonder just how desperate the new administration is for power that it will try to undermine the basic fundamental of democracy in the form of the independent representative.

That said, doubtless the leadership is coming up with its own set of home-grown political honours in exchange for favours received – and we are equally sure that wannabees among the Independents are trying much the same tactic – even though it means that they will be seeking to make councillors break their basic election promises by asking the deny the individuality that they offered.

***

The Chinese are said to have created the curse “May you live in interesting times” – and that certainly looks like being the case in the coming four years. In particular, we can see a repetition – this time involving independents – of the farce that followed the election of so many UKIPpers in 2015

No sooner were they elected than they began to fall out, forming splinter groups and changing party allegiances – a trend that continued almost until be moment last week’s ballot boxes opened for business.

***

A couple of asides now…

You would think that Worst Street would have learned enough about elections by now to know that some council seats are held, some gained, and some lost – but that doesn’t appear to be the case here …

It would be an interesting election where every party gained every seat which is what this message appears to be saying. Better luck next time, Worst Street.

***

Still more confusion was created by the way that the results were presented on Twitter.

The complaint of bias in this case appeared to be contradicted by the fact that the candidates were listed alphabetically by surname.

But that was also contradicted by the fact that not every result tweet appeared the same way.

Looking through the messages we saw Au followed by AB, W followed by B followed by W, S followed by G and so on and so forth …

Surely, the most straightforward way to list the winners would be in descending order of votes cast as suggested in example above.

Stick with that all the way through and you are both fair and consistent.

But the powers that be only had four years to plan the job …

***

One thing we do hope is that the Tory plan for dealing with empty shops in the town centre doesn’t run to any more examples such as this one … snapped at the now vacant Clintons shop in Bargate.

Clintons clearly put some effort into leaving their empty shop neat and tidy – only for some yahoo of a local Tory to tape badly-made adverts for a craft fair to the windows – inset in greater detail .

This is the thin end of a wedge that can leave empty shop windows a mass of tatty posters and an unnecessary eyesore in a town that already has more than its fair share.

We hope that the litter will have been removed by now – and also that someone in the local party will speak to the person who put it there in the first place and ensure that it doesn’t happen again.

*** 

Finally …

A clip from Worst Street’s dire video nasty on how to become a councillor brought a smile to our face when we considered how its message might be interpreted if you had a mischievous mind.

We thought of something on the lines of … “This is where you cross your fingers when you take the oath of office so that you can claim you didn’t really mean it later on.” 

***

We think we’ll have a break next week. Join us again on Monday 20^th May.

And don’t forget, there are just 1,457 days to the next Boston Borough Council elections!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.comE– 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

How are you coping with the impending elections?

Excited?

Somehow, we doubt it – but don’t forget that unless you take the trouble to vote, it’s no good moaning about the quality of the councillors who represent you.
As we have said for some while now, don’t think that the result is a foregone conclusion – a point that has been underlined by events of the last few days when every local Tory candidate signed a letter to the national party chairman calling for Prime Minister Theresa May to quit.
Whilst ostensibly citing the travails over Brexit, a look between the lines shows that the local Tories are running scared at the possibility of a trouncing at this Thursday's polls.

***

Concrete proof if any were needed has appeared in recent days in the shape of  the ‘for sale’ boards hammered into the front gardens of party supporters to urge people to vote for their favoured candidate.
We have noted a number of them which – whilst as blue as the Tory sky – conspicuously omit any reference to the candidate's political persuasion.
Not only is this remarkably cowardly, but it is obviously a ploy that treats potential voters as stupid – assuming that they are too thick to realise that  they are voting Tory if they put their ‘X’ in the box beside this candidate’s name.
Not exactly the best way to win votes and influence ppeople!

***

In their bleat  to Head Office, our local Tory candidates claim that “local people who have supported the Conservatives, who want to vote for us, ... feel utterly betrayed by the present leadership.

“This is likely to have a real impact on blameless local Conservative candidates across the country.

“Despite our positive local messages, good record in office, and effective future plans, the damage done to our Party by the failure of our Leadership to get on with Brexit will harm the delivery of good local services, and the jobs and investment local people rely on. Only by a change at the very top might we reset the trust and goodwill which has been squandered and deliver the Brexit that was promised.” 

***

Aside from being left too late, the appeal – which was also sent to the 1922 Committee – failed to bring about any change in the rules to allow an early challenge to Theresa May's leadership, but the committee has asked for more clarity about how long she will remain in office.

***

After the details of the letter were made public, MP Matt Warman told Boston Eye that he had not been a signatory  – but did not respond when asked if he endorsed the contents.

But an answer of sorts came a few hours later, when the MP tweeted ...

We're told that this has upset the local party faithful as a whip is a doer for the government ... headed by the very Prime Minister that the locals want to see resign.

Indeed, the role is defined thus: “A whip is an official of a political party whose task is to ensure party discipline. This usually means ensuring that members of the party vote according to the party platform, rather than according to their own individual ideology or the will of their constituents. Whips are the party's ‘enforcers.’”

***

So what are the odds for Thursday's local elections ...?
Historically, Boston Borough Council had no party in overall control during the 34 years between 1973, when local government was reorganised and 2007 when the Bypass Independents took the reins and rode the horse straight through the hedge and into Becher’s Brook.

The Tories took control for the 2011-2015 term – much to their surprise, we recall – and since then the council has been listed as again under no overall control although various defections and political shenanigans have recently given the Tories back control.

According to Worst Street’s so-called “website” the council's current political composition is: Conservative - 16, UKIP - 6, Independent - 4, Bostonian Independents - 3, Unaligned – 1.

Given the state of the parties over the past 46 years we’d say it could be anybody’s race.

***

The imminence of the elections has prompted more words of wisdom from our contributor Scanner – whose closing words are food for thought for us all …

Goodbye Marks and Spencer – hello Lidl.

The loss of the former and the introduction of the latter to the town centre just highlights the problems in that area that have been festering for many years – shop closures and the cost and availability of parking.

Rising rents by absentee landlords and perpetually increasing business rates are usually blamed for the closure of shops.

What most councillors seem to forget is that if the customers aren’t there the shops cannot make the profit needed to pay their way, and that sacked staff lose income to spend in the shops.

I have mentioned the loss of IT3 and IT4 bus services previously.

I now hear that other IT services had their routes changed. In effect this means that even more pensioners are deprived of their shopping trip. As ones I have spoken to loved to get out and were regular shoppers at M&S, down goes the central footfall once more. 

Have there been protests at these service cuts from West Street or from our local county councillors? I doubt it. Yet on Look North it was reported that a Boston to Skegness bus service is to be saved from closure after protests from Friskney produced intervention and support from ‘the council.’ I didn’t catch which one – East Lindsey or the County Council. Surprising, as there is already a regular service by another company between Boston and Skegness.

The arrival of another supermarket in the centre of Boston is, perhaps, good news. but, at the loss of valuable parking spaces?

I understand from a former councillor that both the site for a multi-storey car park and Park and Ride were investigated many years ago. At that time, the figures showed that the multi-storey was not viable.

The Park and Ride vanished when the officer involved left.

What a pity that the council, when the supermarket announced its plans to build in Tawney Street, didn’t suggest that there could be co-operation to build a multi-storey car park on that site.

Would a Park and Ride solve some of the problems as well?

Finally: Charges for parking.

I sympathise with the problem West Street has juggling with diminishing finances, but, it’s a downward spiral. Closed shops = less business rates = less customer footfall = less income = closed shops. And less income from parking.

Boston has a bad reputation for huge traffic congestion, lack of parking where people need to be and high parking charges.  

Lincolnshire County Council seems impervious to Boston’s existence. “There is a need for bypasses to the north, south and west of us” (Does Spalding really need the new bypass being planned?) we are told.  LCC ‘experts’ see no traffic actually flowing through Boston. There still seems no will locally by councillors to challenge this blinkered vision.

Historical purists would love to see traffic barred completely from the Market Place – possibly filled with tables and chairs and people drinking coffee I suppose? – and kept clear for the many events we were promised – if there is money to fund them of course. 

The Market Place has been the busy hub of the town since it came into existence. I doubt that there was never a day when people crossing it had to watch out for riders, stage coaches and horses and carts as they crossed to do their shopping.  Many councils are introducing free one-hour parking to attract people back to town centres.

My friend, controversially perhaps, would like to see the present empty part of the Market Place – the part surrounded by bollards – used for one-hour free parking with a machine that issues tickets with the car number on it to prevent misuse.

The present charges there could be adapted to allow for the first hour to be free as well.

And, even more controversially, ask M&S to keep their food store open – even expand it – and create, with support from the council, a daily indoor market to complement the Wednesday and Saturday open air ones.  Then move the Bargate stalls and auction inside. This would clear The Green for more parking on market days.

Finally, do you think parking charges for evenings and Sundays really help the so called “night time” and “weekend” economies to flourish?

I am writing this with hours to go before the next Borough elections. Let’s hope the new councillors have the strength and vision to make Boston a force to be reckoned with, once more.

Big is not always the answer.

Earlier we applied quotation marks to the word website as it refers to Worst Street as we no longer regard the council’s offering as being in that category.

Since it changed address many users have reported considerable trouble in finding information – and we are certain that hundreds of pages have been deleted.

Now it is a case of not only knowing what you are looking for, but often having to know the precise (and often arcane) wording needed to find it.

Increasingly, we believe that Worst Street’s aim is to make communication with the taxpayers difficult, if not impossible.

***

Similar sentiments have been voiced by the Witham Central and Carlton Road Neighbourhood Action Group whose fears cover a major concern in Boston – that of houses in multiple occupation … HMOs.

The group says: “We share your concerns about the lack of transparency of the new Boston Borough Website. Attached is an outline of our concerns regarding its failing to provide information regarding HMO issues. The issue has been raised at our local Placecheck meeting.

The outline says:

The HMO Public Register is not available on it, although this is a legal obligation.

The council has focused on recent additional HMO regulations despite their legal obligations under the 2018 Housing Act.

There is an emphasis on tenants reporting poor accommodation under “Strengthening Consumer redress in the Housing Market and Property Sector.” They are asked to fill out a Housing Disrepair Complaint Form #3571175 and provided information on MYBOSTONUK.COM about “disrepair, Information For Tenants.” This information is not complete and does not cover HMO issues. There are some links provided and a phone number.

This practice discriminates against immigrants who have limited English and are unaware of their legal rights.

It also protects tenants who wish to sublet the property they are renting.

Landlords are given information online what constitutes a HMO and given the contact number of the Private housing Sector team.

They are given some information about management regulations but it is incomplete and does not cover such issues as room size. It is also not made clear their responsibility towards their tenants’ actions. For example, if the tenants act illegally, act in an antisocial way.

There is no information on rogue landlord registers. They are provided with links to register.

There is no information online about any fines in the area for illegal HMOs or rogue landlords or agents.

The council, unlike many other councils, does not have a policy about dealing with high concentrations of HMOs.

The Housing Ombudsman Service is now taking a more important role in regulating HMOs … a “Redress Reform Working Group.” The information available is at present limited, but is available online under the council website.”

And we thought it was difficult simply trying to get basic, everyday information!

***

Whilst Boston Borough Council now draws the line on recording meetings because it’s become too much trouble, it has no fears about embracing more complex technology elsewhere.

A recruitment video was put online recently to try to tempt applicants to apply for three well-paid and senior jobs.

But take a look and tell us – would you be interested in responding to this piece of amateur movie making?

***

Having said that, we think that the Cecil B DeMille wannabes on the Worst Street studio lot are improving slightly – a previous epic aimed at encouraging people who want to become councillors was a desperate piece of work as you can see if you click here   … but this is only slightly better.

The sound is harsh; there are a couple of jump cuts within the minute-long presentation, and the acoustics are terrible.

***

Watching it, an outsider might be hard-pressed to believe the claim that “whilst we’re small in Boston, we’re a council that punches way above our weight.”

Frankly it looks and sounds as though Worst Street is on the ropes as the referee stands by to declare a knockout.

Finding good staff these days must be difficult … though the time is long gone when council staff were poorly rewarded and senior roles demanded long hours and hard work.

***

The three jobs being advertised include a Growth Manager – another of those endearing job titles that we mentioned in a recent edition.

Notably for such a wonderful place to work and live, the post is being advertised for the second time in less than year … the previous closing date was 2^nd July 2018, and the latest closes tomorrow.

The two other jobs are IT Manager and Principal Planning Officer – and together they pay £120,000 a year.

***

Worst Street needs to get its act together if it wants to attract top-quality staff. To be honest the area has little to offer apart from cheap housing and one of the main reasons that so many people stay is because they can’t afford to move elsewhere.

Boston is one of the smallest councils in the country and has a mindset and imagination to match, and all the sloganizing in the world – ‘whilst we’re small in Boston we’re a council that punches way above our weight’ – is clearly bollocks as the state the place is in proves.

***

If Worst Street plans to use broadcast media to up its image and make itself seem attractive, then it needs to do it professionally, and not stick any Tom, Dick or Harriet in front of a microphone or camera

It is self deluding to believe and do otherwise.

The results speak for themselves.

***

And whilst we’re on about this sort of thing, a positive attitude is always a help – which is why we were disappointed at this tweet which accompanied a chart which claims that Lincolnshire is the fourth poorest area in Northern Europe ...

  

Such a ‘nothing to do with me guv’ throwaway from the £40,000+ a year Economic Development Manager at Boston Borough Council really got up our nose.

Surely a major part of his role is to try to see that such a slur is removed from our part of the world at least – not laugh it off, which is how it seems.

***

Meanwhile, Worst Street has published the results of its latest business survey – an exercise that creates a lot of waste paper and a mountain of statistical information which like much of the stuff emanating from Boston’s answer to Fawlty Towers is of dubious value.

***

Out of the 2,000-plus businesses in and around the borough only 82 completed the survey – which the council proudly declared was 64% more than in 2017/18. What a waste of time that survey was, then.

The headlines were that the top three issues identified as obstacles to business growth were: business rates (44%); in joint 2^nd place at 36% licensing and regulation (something at which Worst Street excels) and raw material prices; and thirdly, the availability of a suitable workforce (35%.)

More than half of the respondents employed fewer than ten people, and only 6% more than 100.

44% of respondents reported that they had performed either a lot weaker or slightly weaker than in the previous year – and discouragingly expected something similar for the year ahead.

Of course, since this pointless exercise was carried out, we have said farewell to Marks and Spencer, the GAME store and a Clinton’s outlet.

***

Doubtless Worst Street will seize the opportunity to turn the figures into pages of reports whilst at the same time taking no action to try to improve matters – although perhaps an inspirational tweet from a senior officer along the lines of “maybe here in Boston we need to do a little better” might well do the trick.

***

Because we had questions about wheelie bin collections over the Easter holiday, we dropped an e-mail to Worst Street.

Admittedly, our inquiry was short and sweet, as it was sent to the so-called website, with Bin Collections as the subject line and a text which asked: “Any clues about Easter yet?” –  in case the new-look, all-singing, all-dancing world-wide-wonder had hidden the information somewhere no one would think of looking.

After all, that’s what it does with pretty well everything else.

The reply we received mirrored, we thought, the changing attitudes of Worst Street towards its customers.

No salutation – and the most abrupt and cursory of replies, to wit: “The bin men work bank holidays except for over Christmas so your bin collection day remains unchanged.

“You received a bin calendar in your council tax bill which would have shown this.”

Elsewhere this is referred as telling people to stick their head up a bear’s bum.

In Worst Street it is laughingly referred to as customer service.

***

Earlier we mentioned the mistaken belief among the powers that be that Boston is the best place on earth.

It may not be that bad – but whilst Worst Street’s efforts appear alongside website headlines such as ‘Man gets boy to film him throwing mud and stones at unconscious man’ and ‘Commuters watch on in disgust as two men urinate near bus station’ then the council certainly faces an uphill struggle.

***

These headlines come to us courtesy of a website called Lincolnshire Live – the webface of the Boston Target.

And whilst we would defend their professional duty to bring such things to the public’s attention, we draw then line at making a meal out of bad news alone – such as in the piece below …

It’s now more than two years since Boston’s Chief Executive and the group leaders of the day wrote to local editors to ask for a respite from the bad news.

That was a silly thing to do – as part of the council's responsibility is for the health, wealth and betterment of the borough … and if they sit idly by as it goes down the tubes it’s no good asking for a gag on the facts.

But when the media seems to be targeting Boston with a slightly vicious streak, then enough is enough – and it’s time for Worst Street to get its crayons out again.

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

Local Tories in

'PM must go'

call to save their

own skins

OK, we said that we weren't blogging again until next week – but when an outbreak of Boskeg Soskins occurs, exceptions have to be made.

Boskeg Soskins?

It stands for Boston and Skegness Conservatives Save our Skins – a campaign launched last night after local Tories joined at least 70 other party associations up and down the country to demand that Prime Minister Theresa May resigns.

***

In a letter to the Chairman of the Conservative Party Brandon Lewis, and the Chairman of the 1922 Committee Graham Brady, our local leaders and council candidates say:

We write to formally express our complete loss of confidence in the Prime Minister; her ability to deliver the Brexit the people of Boston voted for and which she has so often pledged to deliver; and her ability to lead HM Government to deliver on the broader domestic policy agenda our Party is committed to.

While we have the greatest personal sympathy for the Prime Minister and recognise the strain and efforts she has undergone, we believe the end of the road has been reached and the time has come for her to take full responsibility for the litany of failures over the last two years which now imperils Brexit itself. It has long been the custom in this country that politicians who have their policies rejected by the people or by colleagues resign. The Prime Minister’s programme for government was rejected by the people in the disastrous 2017 General Election; her central policy on Brexit has been rejected by her former Foreign Secretary, two former Brexit Secretaries, and now by Parliament on three separate occasions.

So great is the disconnect between the promises made and the delay and distrust now delivered, we call upon the Prime Minister to now resign. We call for this with much regret but for the good of the Party we love, the Brexit the people voted for, and securing a stable government for our country.

It is necessary to enable a successor to be chosen who can restore trust and goodwill within our Party, and to regain the faith and confidence of our voters and supporters; a successor who would be best placed to deliver the Brexit that the people of Boston were promised. These are the views of moderate and loyal Conservatives. We are thoroughly appalled at a Prime Minister who promised to deliver Brexit, who repeated “No deal is better than a bad deal” ad nauseum (sic) now selling out to Jeremy Corbyn. Some of us were prepared to compromise to get Brexit over the line through Chequers and the Withdrawal Agreement, but this is now a betrayal too far.

These views also reflect the opinions of so many voters canvassed over the course of the local elections and are representative of the local people who have supported the Conservatives, who want to vote for us, but feel utterly betrayed by the present leadership.

This is likely to have a real impact on blameless local Conservative candidates across the country. Despite our positive local messages, good record in office, and effective future plans, the damage done to our Party by the failure of our Leadership to get on with Brexit will harm the delivery of good local services, and the jobs and investment local people rely on. Only by a change at the very top might we reset the trust and good will which has been squandered and deliver the Brexit that was promised.

We trust you will convey these views to relevant colleagues and to the Prime Minister.

The main signatories are Councillors Tom Ashton, Paul Skinner, Nigel Welton, and Mike Cooper – respectively Association Deputy Chairman; cabinet member and branch Chairman; cabinet member and branch deputy chairman and Leader of the Council.

***

The letter is also “subscribed to” by the 22 remaining candidates in next week's elections.

Subscribed by the following local candidates for Boston Borough Council: Frank Pickett, Sue Bell, Katie Chalmers, Judith Skinner, Jonathan Noble, Yvonne Stevens, Martin Griggs, Alistair Arundell, Sarah Fitzgerald, Matt Barnes, Gerry Roffey, Alastair Hamilton, Anna Szwedzinska, Martin Howard, Deborah Evans, Shaun Blackman, David Brown, Paula Cooper, Aaron Spencer, Chelcei Sharman, George Cornah and Anton Dani.

***

It is scarcely a case of reading between the lines to interpret the final two paragraphs …

The voters who feel “utterly betrayed” are telling candidates who bang on their doors that they are so fed up with the antics of MPs in the Brexit debate – which some have cynically used to skew matters into a leadership contest with themselves in poll position – that they will not be voting Tory.

***

The signatories doubtless include themselves among the “blameless” local candidates – and the bottom line is that they are scared stiff of losing office … and with very good reason.

***

We suspect that by signing up to the Daisy Must Go movement after so many other associations have paved the way indicates a certain disline at having to stand up and be counted – but overall we suspect that with less than ten days before the local elections the move may be too late to save many Tory councillors from losing their seats ... both here in Boston as well as the country as a whole.

***

Local MP Matt Warman told Boston Eye that he was not a signatory to the letter – but did not respond when asked if he endorsed the contents.

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