There are still a few days left to submit comments to the Local Government Boundary Commission, which is proposing changes to the shape of the electoral wards in the borough - and also reducing the number of councillors from 32 to 30.
The commission’s review aims to deliver improved electoral equality for local voters – to give you better “value” for your vote.
Whilst the commission has agreed with Boston Borough Council about the loss of two wards, the organisations differ when it comes to names.
The council proposed the following: Trinity, College, Haven, Station, North West, Staniland, Western, St. Thomas’ and Witham.
As we said at the time, this would mean the loss of two names with historic associations with Boston – Skirbeck and Pilgrim.
We pointed out that Skirbeck as a village settlement is older than Boston, and was so resilient that it had its own parish council until it was absorbed into Boston amid great protests in 1931.
Skirbeck is mentioned in the Domesday Book of 1086. Boston is not.
St Nicholas Church in Skirbeck dates from the 12th century, and is the oldest church in Boston – older even than Boston Stump. St Nicholas – appropriately for a coastal town and port –   is the patron saint of sailors.
Given its history, we thought that to abandon the name was unconscionable.
As far as the name Pilgrim is concerned - despite the fact that the Pilgrim Fathers were not detained in the town’s Guildhall – the word is used everywhere in the town … Pilgrim Hospital, Pilgrim College, The Pilgrims (Boston United) and by numerous businesses.
If the Boundary Commission report has its way, at least one of those names will be preserved - as it is proposing ward names of Trinity, Witham, North West, Western, Staniland, Station,  Haven and Skirbeck, Eastern and St Thomas’.
The saving of the Skirbeck name will be widely welcomed – and also reflects common sense.
The Commission report says that the boundary proposed by the council split the community of Skirbeck in two, whereas its arrangement keeps communities together and retains internal access routes.
All the various submissions can be viewed on the Boundary Commission website at www.lgbce.org.uk and your feedback is welcome.
One point that has been made previously is that re-arranging the boundaries and reducing the number of councillors does nothing to address the quality of representation.
We are sure that there are a number of councillors – especially among the ruling Tory group – who hold the title in name only. These are the ones who will welcome the inclusion of current ward maps amongst the discussion papers on the proposed boundary changes.
Why?
Because at least they can check to see where their wards are in the event of being asked in a pub quiz!
Recent contentious debates in the council chamber have underlined just how dim a few councillors are, as we have heard their spouting of stupid arguments which are then recycled over and over again by others not even bright enough to come up with their own arguments.
You only need to read some of their offerings or hear them speak to realise that some of these people should not be in office – though we’ll be paying them to do nothing except what their masters tell them for the next three years.
Perhaps when you comment to the Boundary Commission, you might like to make the point that two fewer councillors is unlikely to raise the collective IQ by any significant amount.

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