Our Friday miscellany

of the week's

news and events

Wednesday’s publication of  Lincolnshire’s unemployment figures showed an increase in longer-term joblessness, and - compared with this time last year -  more than 1,000 people  claiming benefits. In Boston,  unemployment was  eight fewer than  last month – but year on year 10%  higher - with 137 more people seeking work. This placed Boston fourth on the list of the county’s 13 economic areas, and came against the backdrop of the news that 34 out of 55 staff at Pinguin Foods on the Marsh Lane Industrial Estate could be sacked – although the company hopes it might be less. The news underlines two things. Firstly - that what some of our leaders see as core employment in the area  ...  i.e. field and packhouse work ... is undergoing a steady decline; and secondly that more effort must be put into creating new, non-agricultural employment in Boston.
It’s now roughly 100 days since Boston’s Labour councillors launched a campaign on their website for local people to identify local “grot spots” - which would be drawn to the attention of Worst Street in the hope that something would be done about them. We said at the time that we were sure there would be no shortage of nominations. But as is so often the case - whether anything has been done about any of them is another matter entirely. Perhaps a progress report would help …
Interestingly, in the same week that we reported the launch of Labour’s campaign, we also noted the closure of the Maud Foster Tearooms, blamed on the totally pointless Spilsby Road roadworks that have done nothing at all to improve the way traffic flows through town. Even though we have mentioned the fate of the tearooms before, it has been ignored by people who should know better. This month’s issue of Lincolnshire Focus magazine carries the advert below.

click to enlarge the picture

Given that the advert is produced by Boston BID, it comes as no surprise that it is wrong in some respect. But Boston Borough Council is another culprit - telling readers of its website “Maud’s tearoom is a traditional tea shop serving morning coffees, lunches and afternoon teas,” whilst posting a link to the mill’s own site which quite clearly states “Maud's Tea Room has now closed.” More seriously, we think that the BID advert is also misleading. The photo of the Market Place - which of course is now a  building site  - makes no mention of the work currently being undertaken, nor that the site of the market has moved pro tem. Presumably, this was because the BID thought that such information might put people off visiting the town. But a carefully written piece, explaining what is going on,  and pointing out that the town ought soon to have one of the finest market places in the country, is surely far preferable to having people visit and feel cheated.
In yesterday’s blog, we reproduced figures from the Lincolnshire Observatory showing who does what in the world of work in the county – giving the lie to the idea that Boston is a place where most residents work in the fields. The same statistics showed Overall Household Recycling and Composting Rate (as a percentage of household waste) for local authority districts for 2010-11.

click to enlarge the picture

Perhaps the recent rush to recycle in Boston may have come too late, but the figures show the borough at the bottom of the compost heap with a meagre 29% - almost half that of the top recyclers West Lindsey, with 56% .

It seems that progress is taking place since the planned Boston march about immigration levels was postponed - with claims that police activity with regard to anti-social behaviour is increasing. We also hear that there should be some news of Boston Borough Council’s task and finish group by the end of the month. There is also to be a review of the current Designated Public Places Order, which might feature a total drinks ban for some areas – subject to changes in the law.

The Boston Protest March Facebook page, meanwhile, changes almost daily, but seems to be fragmenting, with many complaints from people about removal of their comments and the like. As recently as yesterday, chunks of older messages disappeared – prompting suggestions that the site had been hacked. The page has also prompted the following e-mail from an anonymous reader concerned that the public interest is being marginalised in the debate. He writes: “Following your blog on the stifling of free speech by Councillor Bedford, I was minded to pose another question. Since the announcement of a march in Boston on the subject of immigration, organised almost entirely on a popular social networking site, the "leadership" of this group seem to have been invited to meet with local councillors, the Home Office, the MP and others.  On what basis has the council decided that these are the only people that require consultation on the problems within Boston? Are the silent (or those not on Facebook) majority to be ignored in favour of those who call for action via the internet? In fact, how many members of this "group" are just viewing the posts and have no intention of marching? A lot of the comments come from people who don't even live in or have any connection to Boston. What worried me was the "public meeting" that seemed to be by invite only. Is there going to be no general consultation of the borough's citizens if the problems we face are that great? In the last few days there seems to be a great deal of infighting on their page and the "banning" of people who don't agree with the moderators of the group. I'm not sure this is the example of a democratic group challenging the council.”
We wonder what bright spark decided that last Sunday would be a good day to erect new road signage and undertake white lining on many of Boston’s main roads. Traffic through the town was gridlocked during the day, with not only John Adams Way, but many of its tributary roads, choked with traffic. In case the traffic managers at – presumably County Hall – had not noticed, Sunday was Remembrance Day. When we arrived to park shortly after 10am, much of The Green was already taken up by contractors’ vehicles, and as 11am approached,  parking problems for late arrivals were acute. This, on a day that is guaranteed to be one of the busiest in the calendar for town centre parking.
Apropos that, whilst we can understand that signs proclaiming a 60p charge for half an hour’s parking on The Green on Sunday is intended as a demonstration of generosity, we felt that it would have been more appropriate to remove them last weekend. The reasons? Firstly, half an hour isn’t long enough for attendees at the War Memorial service, and secondly the signs broadcast the impression that people were being warned to “pay up or else” rather than being made aware of reduced charges. A lesson for next year, perhaps?
Is it really true that this week is Boston Enterprise Week? We read of a couple of events on Wednesday under that heading on Boston Borough Council’s website comprising a Dragon’s Den event staged by Young Enterprise and a Junior Chamber International event on optimising your online business profile. Aside from that there is a  speed networking event  being staged next week. Try as we might, we can find no reference to the event on Boston Business Improvement District’s website, and the whole thing seems a little half hearted, to say the least. In the current economic climate we would have expected an “Enterprise Week” to be … well, enterprising – if nothing else!
On Wednesday, we mentioned the Boston Town Area Committee, and its budget surplus of £13,281. Despite having so much unspent cash, splashing out on some fencing to make life more liveable for residents of Punchbowl Lane was declared to be neither an “optimum, cost effective or proportionate solution.”   At the same meeting, the committee discussed an application by the South Lincolnshire Community Voluntary Service for financial help towards next year’s Boston Community Showcase. Apparently, in the real world the event would cost around £70,000 to stage – but by some miracle, the Showcase Partnership keeps it down to about £14,000. A letter asks if BTAC would be willing to “consider sponsoring” the event – which we hope does not mean footing the entire bill. It’s reported that SLCVS already gets around £100,000 a year from Boston Borough Council, plus the laughable community “hub” at a peppercorn rent, as well as a big chunk of the Placecheck monies. According to the Charity Commission, SLCVS had an income in 2010 of £794,433 - of which it carried forward a hefty chunk to the following year. It seem to us that the SLVCS considers Boston Borough Council a soft touch – and that the council should be asking more questions about where the money is going before it acts as the organisation’s sugar daddy.
Finally, no matter how arcane the language, we can usually make sense of most things that appear in the Boston Standard. But for once, we were baffled by the piece below which appeared in this week’s Memory Lane feature ...

If anyone can explain from the information published how finding two bob ended up with a puffin in a cardboard box, we would be delighted to hear.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com   Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.
Our former blog is archived at: http://bostoneyelincolnshire.blogspot.com