Each year at this time, we try to produce our own Christmas card that summarises the past 12 months in Boston. This year, we pondered the question what if? … what if the events of 2,014 years ago happened in Boston today? Sadly, the outcome is more festering than festive – but we hope that it will raise a smile regardless – please click on the image above to see the full sized version.

***

The fact that the card is as it is, is largely due to the efforts of Boston Borough Council during the year.

As we studied its internet news offerings a pretty depressing picture began to take shape.

We found 21 references to flooding, six about the need to ban street drinking, and four about the feeble “name and shame” campaign – which ironically neither names nor shames the people who appear in the photographs.

Clearly, the issue of flooding was one that could not be ignored but – like some toothless old dog worrying at a bone, the borough milked the event for far longer than was necessary.

Although we have said it before, it bears repeating that Boston Borough Council’s website is the front-of-house for the borough for people from around the world. It embraces a huge gamut,  from those planning a relatively local visit to  tourists from further afield – even overseas – as well as people auditioning the area as a place to work and live, there is really nowhere else much for people to turn to.

And what do they find when they take the trouble to explore further?

Warnings about the litter strewn state of the town, drinking in the streets, coupled with the use of public areas as outside lavatories.

Other public areas are gated off, and leisure seating removed – all in the name of improving public order around the place.

We know how we would feel if we visited the site with a visit to Boston planned for whatever reason.

We’d look for somewhere more pleasant and civilised instead – such as Afghanistan, Gaza, Iraq, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or North Korea!

Whilst a spade must be called a spade, and bad news not brushed beneath the carpet, the borough council unfailingly wrings the last drop of misery from anything that reflects badly on Boston – and for the life of us, we can’t understand why.

***

Having said that, one recent attempt to generate some encouraging news proved slightly baffling as far as we are concerned.

A recent announcement that Phil Drury has been appointed as the council's acting chief executive after Richard Harbord, left the council at the end of November included a statement by the great and glorious leader, Pete Bedford, that the acting  position “would be maintained for no longer than 12 months”  pending a permanent appointment.

The report outlining this to the full council said that “Savings of approximately £10,000 per month will accrue during the period the post is vacant and filled on an ‘acting up’ basis. This will be reported through the quarterly performance reporting process.”

This implies the potential for saving up to £120,000 if the post is not filled for the entire 12-month period.

But our understanding of the way that local government finance works is that budgets are drawn up on an annual basis starting in April of each year.

In other words, the high salary enjoyed by Mr Harbord ceases to be a part of the budget at the end of March next year.

As he has left the authority, there is no need for his salary to appear in the next budget and therefore no “savings” to be made, either.

At least we can be relieved that Mr Harbord’s contract was apparently constructed in the way that it was, which means there will be no costs surrounding his departure.

In a BBC radio interview almost three years ago in which he defended Mr Harbord’s salary of more than £120,000 for just fifteen days’ work a month, leader Bedford said: “Our Chief Executive is only a part-time position. He is perfectly at liberty to work for other clients on the days he does not work for us. The council’s contract with the company means that the council has no liability for holiday pay, sick pay, national insurance or pension contributions. There is also no question of employment rights and the cost arising from that.”

That’s all right then.

Whatever happens next, the council will be considerably better off financially.

The report to the council said that its Chief Officer Employment Panel considered options for the future which would consider a permanent shared or part time Chief Executive for Boston. 

However, all of this raises more questions than it answers.

Mr Harbord ran the shop for five years before his departure – on a high salary, yet only part time.

He was brought in as a trouble shooter, and was much needed after the hapless reign of the Boston Bypass Independents.

As far as we can see, the trouble bit the dust at a fairly early stage, but the largesse continued through contract extension after contract extension.

Had he not left early, Mr Harbord’s contract would have seen him in post until 31^st July 2015 “to provide stability and oversee any changes that may occur at the next election in May 2015.”

Given the latest developments, this seemed especially pointless, as Mr Drury has worked at Boston Borough Council since Noah was a lad, and was perfectly capable of taking over the role in an acting capacity at the point this “final” extension was agreed.

Now, by the sound of things, he is destined to be a bridesmaid rather than a bride, as we can see no way that Boston Borough Council – which is one of the smallest district authorities in the country – can possibly justify a separate full time £100,000 a year job ... especially whilst someone else will have been doing that job plus the duties of the Strategic Director for just £125 a week more than the council has been paying.

It seems to us that the council – rather than saving a fortune as is now being claimed – has been frittering one away for years and years.

***

Meanwhile, as fast as we write, the bad news overtakes the good, or so it seems.

The council’s bulletin has even managed to take away some of the joy and anticipation of Christmas beneath the headline: “Community Safety’s 12 golden rules for the 12 days of Christmas.”

It begins “Christmas is a time for giving and receiving. Sadly there are some who only want to receive ... mainly your property when you are not at home or your guard is down.”

Sick bags at the ready …

“Because they love you all, (yeuchh) Boston Borough Council’s community safety team (Peter, Adam and Donna) have put together 12 golden rules for the 12 days of Christmas to keep you safe and sound.

There follows a spoof version on the 12 days of Christmas with the first verse setting the dreary scene.

“On the first day of Christmas my true love said to me...

“Always remember to lock your car and don’t leave windows open.

“Use a steering lock. Don’t leave keys in the ignition and the car unattended.”

The following 11 days offer seasonal advice on things such as “stranger danger, bike and shed thefts and the wisdom of not leaving your drink unattended in case someone spikes it.

We’re glad that Boston community safety staff love us all – though we have to say we find that hard to believe.

But we really could do with less mollycoddling from Worst Street – whose image of a “true love” more closely resembles one of a music hall mother-in-law.

The advice is nothing more than basic crime prevention – which is the job of the police, not the borough council in any case … and we are sure that the people in blue will be saying precisely the same thing in the near future.

Any day now we expect Boston Borough Council to put the fear of god into us with suggestions as to how electrical faults in the tree lights and unattended candles will burn our houses down over Christmas – even though that’s the job of the fire brigade.

Just for once, couldn’t they simply wish us a merry Christmas – and sound as though they mean it?

***

Meanwhile, Boston Citizens’ Advice Bureau has been piling on the agony by announcing that the exploitation of migrant workers is increasing after the number of people seeking help had doubled in the last year to 12 cases a week.

A spokesman for Lincolnshire police added the icing on the Christmas cake by telling the BBC "There is a level of exploitation, through slavery and servitude, through sexual exploitation, labour exploitation, that because it is hidden behind doors, or it is in factories, people just don't see it but we will see more and more of this going on unless we do something about it.”

*** 

And it seems that even if you do earn a decent wage, a greedy landlord is on standby to part you from as much of it as possible.

Recent figures claimed that Boston is one of the most unaffordable places to live in the East Midlands … taking third place in a list of 20 locations where rent is not affordable compared to annual earnings.

The figures, compiled by the National Housing Federation, match an average monthly rent of £560 in Boston against annual income for a person in the town of £20,748 which means Boston is more ‘unaffordable’ to rent a property in than Melton, Wellingborough and Mansfield.

***

If all of the above paints a bleak and gloomy portrait, that’s because it’s bleak and gloomy out there.

But so much could be done to make improvements which would have the knock-on effect of bettering Boston’s image. The problem is that the political will seems to be lacking – and despite the fact that we now have a combined opposition that is well placed to push for the delivery of some of the many improvements it has been calling for, all its members do is sit on their hands and say nothing.

Meanwhile the best that anyone seems to come up with is to bask in the reflected glory of others who are getting on with the real business of trying to develop interest in their home towns.

One such example is the decision to sign up to a re-incarnated Hanseatic League which has apparently done good things for tourism and business in Kings Lynn – which is therefore taken to mean that it could do the same in Boston.

Next, of course, Boston will be throwing its lot in with the celebrations to mark the 400^th anniversary of the departure of the Pilgrim Fathers for the new world in 1620 – even though the Pilgrim Fathers’ link to Boston is far more tenuous than many Bostonians like to imagine.

***

Irony is cruel sometimes – and an excellent demonstration can be seen in the latest contribution to the local free magazine Simply Boston from our great and glorious leader.

For as long as we can recall, Mr Bedford has managed to fob the magazine off by sending “Peter’s Notes” that are not only hopelessly out of date, but which have often been published somewhere else previously.

For his first apparent stab at originality, it is therefore unfortunate that he chose CCTV  to praise as an outstanding achievement by Boston Borough Council.

Yet again, the piece mentions the “name and shame” campaign – which, as far as we are aware – neither names nor shames anyone.

But it does roll trillingly off the tongue and makes a good headline, doesn’t it?

Boston’s CCTV system was recently upgraded at a cost of £230,000 and the cameras are now described as “state of the art” – whatever that means.

“They record everything they see,” the leader huffed in Simply Boston.

“They see in the dark. They zoom in, they track.”

What a pity then, that they don’t apparently cover important areas where some of the town’s night clubs are located.

Way, way back in August, there was what the police have called a “sexually motivated” attack in Liquorpond Street.

A photo of a man that they wanted to trace was circulated from a camera at the H20 nightclub.

The police said that: “After leaving the club, the man is captured on town CCTV walking along the street,  and we are now releasing that moving footage in the hope that it may jog someone’s memory …”

However, the video is not of any great help – and if you don’t believe us – take a look at a couple of stills from it.

It might be thought that a nightclub would be a slam dunk as a location for one of Boston’s “state of the art” cameras – but apparently not.

As a result, whilst Boston Borough Council can issue a detailed en print between the time it takes for someone to spit and for the gobbet to hit the ground, it has taken the police almost four months to cobble together scraps of near useless footage to try to detect a much more serious event – which may well go unsolved as a result

***

To compound the irony, it is only two and a half years ago that the self-same leader who now preaches the value of CCTV was threatening that security cameras could be turned off in a debate over who should pay for them.

A local “newspaper” reported: “Boston Borough Council leader Peter Bedford told councillors … that it was looking to cut its spending on CCTV provision.

“He called for businesses in the town to foot some of the bill and singled out housing association Boston Mayflower as a particularly ‘big user’ of the cameras to cover its properties in Fenside.

“Councillor Bedford revealed the social housing provider had ‘never paid a fee’ and warned: ‘If Mayflower are not going to pay the cameras will have to be removed.’"

“After the meeting a council spokesman said: "As part of our on-going efficiency programme the council is considering the future of its CCTV coverage of the Fenside Estate.

"Fenside has the highest level of CCTV coverage of any residential area in the borough which, as a consequence of our on-going review, has prompted us to question the value for money these cameras return.”

Hmmm.

Value for money?

Was it being said that crime is only worth monitoring and possibly preventing if there was a big enough pay back for Boston Borough Council?

It would seem so.

The same story also reported: “Questions have been raised about the council's plans to save £70,000 a year by sharing CCTV control room services with City of Lincoln Council and South Kesteven District Council.

“A council spokesman stressed the control room proposal was ‘unconnected’ to the issue over the Fenside cameras and said talks were continuing with the ‘potential partner organisations.’”

Isn’t it interesting that Fenside … where 123 crimes were reported in October, and which is considered one of the most deprived wards in the country was not that long ago deemed not to be worth the expense of CCTV cameras – unless someone else was paying, of course?

***

The phone rang whilst we were writing this, and a nervous young man identified himself as a canvasser for the Boston and Skegness branch of UKIP – although the number was not a local one.

Perhaps we’ve been lucky in the last and not received this type of call, but if not, it demonstrates an escalation in the war for our votes.

And no-one seems to have been in the wars more than UKIP in recent days, with yet another candidate – Kerry Smith – resigning for saying things that he shouldn’t in this day and age.

Although the seat involved was way dahn sarf – in South Basildon and East Thurrock –  the name of Neil Hamilton surfaced yet again.

Hamilton had been shortlisted for the seat and expected to win when he stepped aside in favour of Smith, who was deselected in October without explanation and a new contest was ordered, which was due to include Hamilton and Natasha Bolter, a former Labour supporter.

Pay attention – we may ask questions afterwards.

The contest descended into chaos as UKIP queried Hamilton’s expenses and Bolter became involved in a controversy about whether the party’s general secretary, Roger Bird, had made inappropriate sexual advances towards her.

The upshot was that Hamilton withdrew at the 11^th hour, and Smith was re-selected – only to resign within a day or so.

Every time stories like these appear, the Boston and Skegness constituency name is trawled through the mire and it is ironic that Hamilton pulled out of our local race after saying of Boston: “I came, I saw, I liked what I saw and that is what has made my mind up."

He added that he had decided to stand in the constituency because it won the highest number of regional votes for UKIP in the European elections in May.

“I obviously want to be in at the kill," he declared.

Then he went, stood elsewhere, nearly got selected and then withdrew yet again.

In an effort to clarify matters the Financial Times reported on Monday: “War has broken out at the top of the UK Independence party, with officials accusing one of its most significant funders of trying to pressure them into accepting the parliamentary candidacy of Neil Hamilton, the former Conservative MP.

"Two senior UKIP officials have told the Financial Times that Stuart Wheeler, the party’s second-largest donor, has threatened not to give any more money before the next election if Mr Hamilton does not get a seat.

“The row blew up on Wednesday night after a letter was leaked from UKIP high command to Mr Hamilton asking him to explain apparent anomalies in his expense claims.

“Mr Hamilton, who saw the letter as he arrived at a hustings event in Basildon South, one of UKIP's top targets for 2015, withdrew his candidacy, but criticised the leak as a “dirty tricks” campaign. He did not comment on the veracity of the allegations.

“Mr Hamilton, who was once accused of accepting money to ask parliamentary questions when he was a Tory MP — something he denies — is being supported by Mr Wheeler. One member of the party leadership said: “I don’t care how powerful his patron is, we are not caving [in] to this.”

“Andrew Reid, who took over from Mr Wheeler as the party’s treasurer six months ago, told the FT: “Nobody gets to buy a seat for someone else in UKIP.”

“Others in the party are furious at what they see as unfair treatment of Mr Hamilton, who previously stood aside from the seat of Boston and Skegness under what they claim was heavy pressure from Nigel Farage, the party leader.

“A spokesman for Mr Farage did not comment.

“One senior party member close to the dispute said: “This is all to do with Nigel's ego. He thinks he may not win in Thanet South [the seat for which he has been selected], so he is determined to bring Neil down. He cannot bear the thought Neil might be an MP but not Nigel.”

We thought that general elections were a grown up affair.

How wrong can you get?

***

Co-incidentally we saw two of our candidates in action last weekend.

Conservative Matt Warman was manning a flagpole in the middle of Strait Bargate, and perhaps musing on whether to rechristen himself Matt Coldman after a few hours of such campaigning.

At least he’ll appreciate why people are moaning when the complaints about being brushed aside by passing Brylaine buses using the town’s most notorious rat run are being made.

***

The other candidate was UKIP’s  Boy Wonder Robin Hunter-Clark, who had a far more comfortable time of things in a session with a couple of other candidates on Sunday’s Dermot Murnaghan political marathon on Sky news.

We watched the encounter and found nothing noteworthy – although we would counsel the candidate against gurning as often as he did, as it is most disconcerting.

However, one thing he declared with great emphasis was “when you vote UKIP, you get UKIP.”

Whilst it’s a splendid sound bite, it rings a little hollow here in Lincolnshire, where voting UKIP got you UKIP for as long as it took everyone to fall out, call themselves something else entirely for a brief spell and in many cases then defect to the Lincolnshire Independents – which are now reported to be considering a coalition with UKIP to seize the official opposition on Lincolnshire Council from Labour.

Such a pity that all they seem to spend their time doing is posturing and playing power games instead of trying to make Lincolnshire a better place for the people who live here.

***

But we did get a smile out of politics for a change when Nigel Farage appeared on BBC’s Question Time, and responded to a question on whether politics had become too petty and adversarial in nature.

One thing that he did highlight was the changing nature of the modern candidate … click on the video clip below to hear what he said …

A career professional political class?

Never had a job in their lives?

Straight into the back office aged 23, and then become career politicians

They lack a breadth of experience …

… No proper ideology in politics.

Who on earth could Mr Farage have had in mind?

Perhaps we could ask 22 year-old Robin Hunter-Clark, who has never had what you might call a "real"  job, and whose “ideology” in politics has already seen him defect from the Tories to UKIP having started in the “back office” of a Skegness town council seat.

***

We note that the location of polling stations in Boston borough has been rearranged ahead of next May’s local elections which will see a change in the structure of the council and its members.

The number of councillors will fall from 32 to 30, and some new ward names will appear to reflect the changes to the planned areas.

Newcomers will include Trinity, Station and St Thomas.

Boston Borough Council says that all registered electors will be notified of the changes in advance of May 7th next year – but without saying how soon.

We think that sooner, rather than later, would be preferable, as it would be helpful to see a simple map to show electors who will be voting in new wards where they are and whether the numerical representation will be changing.

***

It seems as if the New Year will start with yet another vacant shop front in Boston. A notice in the window of the Age Concern premises in the community rooms tells us that they are moving to the former Garfit’s Bank in the High Street, which has a chequered history.

The listed building, which was the first bank in Boston, lay in a ruinous state for years – not helped by the meddling of Boston Borough Council which at the end of the day cost the taxpayer tens of thousands of pounds.

 It is now used for community purposes – one of a growing number in the town, whose purpose is little more than one step up from being a mobile phone or charity shop.

Whilst Age Concern worked hard to keep its present Wide Bargate premises – the former Sketchley’s Cleaners – in the same dilapidated state in which they found them, the building was at least well placed as a central community focus.
Quite what the thinking is behind moving way down the High Street, where access and parking is difficult, is anyone’s guess.

Certainly, we cannot see that it will benefit the people the organisation is meant to be serving – although it will doubtless be far more pleasant for those who work there.

***

Finally, we believe that Boston Borough Council omitted two golden rules from the earlier list of suggestions apparently designed to keep you sleepless with worry throughout the festive period.

The doomsayers omitted the following vital warnings.

“On the 13^th Day of Christmas, my true love said to me – be sure to fit a cowl on your chimney pot. Should Santa Claus get stuck in the flue there is a serious risk of the occupants of the house suffering from the effects of carbon monoxide poisoning.

“On the 14^th day of Christmas, my true love said to me – make sure that you take the proper precautions to prevent reindeer from landing on the roof, where they could cause considerable damage and unwanted insurance claims at this already expensive time of year.

“For the avoidance of doubt, spending money, and being helpful to taxpayers, Boston Borough Council does not offer any assistance in preventing a reindeer incident.

“There are proprietary products available such as Hoof-Off™ and ClopStop™ so don’t waste your breath asking us for help, as the responsibility for safeguarding homes and businesses lies with the owner.

“Having said that, some supplies are being held at the council offices specifically to secure the solar panels at the Moulder Leisure Centre, and protect them from harm.”

***

That’s it for this week – and for this year.

We really mean it when we say that we wish you a merry Christmas and happy New Year, and we thank all our readers for their loyalty to Boston Eye during the year.

Our next blog will appear – external factors permitting – on Friday 9th January 2015

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

I

t’s been the week that Boston Borough Council introduced prohibition – and we can’t wait to see quite what effect it will have.

We cannot for a moment imagine that the council would have done other than vote to ban street drinking – in the form of a PSPO … a Public Space Protection Order. Scarcely had the gavel fallen to confirm the order than Boston Borough Council’s website was chortling: “Drinking alcohol in the street in Boston town centre will be illegal from January 12^th.

“Boston Borough Council agreed to be among the first in the country to introduce new legislation declaring the town centre a drink-free area.

“Anyone found drinking alcohol in the designated area will be subject to arrest if, when requested by a police officer, they do not stop drinking or surrender the drink.”

Therefore, if we read it correctly, drinking alcohol in the town centre will not be “illegal.”

In the unlikely event of a police officer (and it can only be a police officer) losing his way to the nick and winding up in the town centre and then having the misfortune to bump into someone drinking, an offence will be committed “if, when requested … they do not stop drinking or surrender the drink.”

So …

If someone is drinking in the town centre – or that Hell’s Kitchen included in the prohibition zone known as the Grand Sluice Bridge – a police officer has a) to see the consumption of alcohol and b) to have the request to stop refused before c) an offence is committed.

Previous schemes have failed because they have not been enforced – and in those days, a greater selection of officials had authority to do the job.

Councillors were told that despite fears over future funding, Lincolnshire’s Chief Constable Neil Rhodes had given an undertaking that the area could be policed – although it is possible that the pledge was a long-lost echo that bounced from the marble pillars of the council chamber after been trapped there for some years.

It will now cost council taxpayers around £10,000 to publicise a scheme that was dead in the water before it was even floated.

Despite that, council leader, Pete Bedford, said: “This one of the best good news stories we have had for a while” – a mauling of superlatives that suggests he really needs to get out more.

***

In tandem with all this we noted Boston Borough Council’s somewhat inconsistent embrace of tipple in connection with last year’s floods.

On Wednesday 26^th November, the Boston Standard ran a promotion – rather loosely tied to the flood anniversary – about the launch of a bottled beer named Resilience Ale … which readers could buy cheap with a cut-out coupon from the paper.

Two days later the story appeared almost word for word in the borough council’s bulletin, with the claim that Boston Borough Council had “teamed up” with East Lindsey, Lincolnshire County Council, the Environment Agency and the Standard to produce the beer.

So irresistible was the chance of a cheap drink, that the council bulletin mentioned it several times more over the following days – apparently without any sense of irony..

  

***

I

nterestingly, as the issue of the PSPOs reached the full council at the beginning of the week, the leadership came under fire from a councillor who lamented an en bloc vote by the Conservative group “to not allow proper debate of the topic.”  

So let’s see if we have this right …

… It’s ok for our “transparency” obsessed council apparently to collaborate with a brewery to produce supplies of cut-price “celebratory” booze …

… But it is not ok to allow the council as a whole to debate the introduction of new regulations to control street drinking.

Could someone please tell us how this self-serving approach makes any kind of sense?

***

S

omeone else who might benefit from an outing with our leader is our aforementioned Chief Constable Neil Rhodes, who has stepped up his recent warnings about the effects of cuts by writing to the Home Secretary Theresa May to claim that the force will effectively go out of business within three years under the current funding arrangements, and will be the “first in the country to fall”.

The Daily Telegraph, which gave prominence to the leaked letter, said:

“Mr Rhodes warned that under that structure, bobbies on the beat would be a thing of the past in Lincolnshire, while those officers left would take much longer to respond to 999 calls.

He said minor offences such as criminal damage and theft would have to be largely ignored … and that the current budget proposals mean a further 236 front line officers will have to go."

Hold hard, as they say.

 Never mind what may happen in 2018 – bobbies on the beat have been a thing of the past in our part of the world for years, and we have first-hand proof that cases of criminal damage and theft are ignored,

And as for cuts – why is the front line at risk?

It’s equivalent to sacking the foot soldiers in order to keep the generals in work, and makes no sense at all

History reminds us that Sir Robert Peel, who was widely regarded as the father of modern policing, was heavily influenced by the social and legal philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, a British social reformer who called for a strong and centralised, but politically neutral, police force for the maintenance of social order, for the protection of people from crime and to act as a visible deterrent to urban crime and disorder.

You can’t do that from the back office.

***

A

n intriguing little message from Lincolnshire police appeared on Twitter earlier in the month, and caused us a little concern.

It was posted – presumably by way of explanation- after the force named a person charged with crimes in Boston. 

“We name those charged with burglary 'before guilty' as well as those charged with drink driving. Way UK justice works.”

Say again.

We name those charged “before guilty” smacks of overconfidence and more than a little by way of prejudgement – and we hope that they didn’t mean it the way it sounded.

  

***

W

e have acquired yet another candidate who wants to be Boston’s next MP.

He’s Chris Pain, a Lincolnshire County Councillor, who will be fighting Boston and Skegness as “An Independence from Europe Party” candidate. 

He said: “The current electorate have got the choice of three ‘Conservative’ candidates – the Conservative lead candidate (Matt Warman) works at the Telegraph in London and lives there. 

“The Lincolnshire Independent (Lyn Luxton) failed to be selected at the Conservative hustings.

“The UKIP candidate (Robin Hunter-Clarke,) who is a 22 year-old ex-Conservative member, has never held a job and comes straight for (sic) college.”

Taken at face value, this is an interesting analysis – but also somewhat disingenuous. Crucially, it overlooks the fact that there is a Labour Party candidate in the ample form of Councillor Paul Kenny – who is fighting the Boston and Skegness seat for the third consecutive election.

There is also another Independent candidate – Paul Wooding – who had hoped to be the UKIP choice until a last minute piece of sleight-of-hand saw Robin the Boy Wonder win the day.

Mr Pain’s background is no less interesting than some of the other candidates that he has highlighted because of their change of allegiance.

He had led UKIP in Lincolnshire until 2013 and was the official leader of the opposition on the county council after the party came second last May.

He was then ousted from the party and his departure, along with that of several “breakaway” councillors – including two representing Boston, who are now Lincolnshire Independent councillors – gifted the official opposition to Labour.

He summarises his bumpy ride on his website here which includes the c-word … conspiracy.

If you are wondering about “An Independence from Europe Party,” then worry no more.

It was launched by Mike Nattrass in 2013 after UKIP de-selected him as a candidate – so it would appear that political disgruntlement will be a driving force at next year’s general election

Confused?

If you aren’t already, then you certainly will be by the time that 7^th May next year dawns.

*** 

W

hoever wins, we reckon that it can be said with some confidence that not much will change.

Despite the promises at national, county and local level, it came as no surprise to see Lincolnshire omitted from the government’s heavily publicised £15 billion scheme to invest in more than 100 new road schemes which will see more than 1,300 new lane miles of motorways and trunk roads, and in the words of  Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin tackle congestion and fix some of the “most notorious and longstanding problem areas” on the network.

“When 90% of journeys are taking place on our roads this work is vital to help people get on and get around.”

You might have thought that this would have almost certainly included our part of the world – after all, Boston has been recognised for years as having an antiquated road network which is totally unsuitable for purpose.

But no.

When the map was published to show where the Whitehall largesse was arriving, Lincolnshire might well have been the Kalahari Desert.

And if that wasn’t bad enough McLoughlin rubbed salt further into our wounds by branding his announcement “the biggest, boldest and most far-reaching roads programme for decades.

“It will dramatically improve our road network and unlock Britain’s economic potential.”

The latter phrase served as an ironic reminder that Boston’s plight is exacerbated by the fact that inadequate road communications are frequently cited as a key reason why industry is unwilling to set up shop here.

If it’s the biggest for decades, we suppose that gives some sort of clue of how long we must wait before we get a decent road network.

But let’s not be pessimistic …

Perhaps the railways will come to Boston in the not too distant future!

***

M

eanwhile, many of our election candidates are making use of social media– especially Twitter – to keep voters in touch with what they are up  … sometimes delivering what seems to be an almost minute by minute account.

Probably the most prolific is Lyn Luxton, followed by Paul Wooding, whose more recent offerings have comprised a rant against the party he formerly sought to represent in Westminster.

Shortly after our last issue was published, he posed six open questions for Robin Hunter-Clarke concerning the candidate selection process.

He has asked Hunter-Clarke to explain how he emerged as the "winner" when he did not enter the original contest in the first place; why, as a member of the selection committee did he not choose any local candidates for a shortlist; his reasoning for selecting former Tory Neil Hamilton for the shortlist and his relationship with him; why, when the NEC elevated him to the shortlist, he did not refuse on the grounds of it being unfair to the other candidates; when he became aware of the NEC's decision to add his name into the equation and why did he not, at that point, inform the other candidates; and, as he was aware of the contents of all the other candidates’ CVs and additional candidate information with motives for contesting the seat, why did he not declare this information to the NEC and ask to be ruled out.

Although the answers might prove interesting, we don’t somehow expect that they will be forthcoming.

***

O

ne might think that with so many candidates already lined up on the starting grid that we are in for an interesting time ahead – but history shows that this is unlikely to be the case.

Whilst we applaud the chutzpah of the two independents to declare so far (or three, realistically, if you include Mr Pain) there are currently just three “independent” MPs out of the 650 “serving” at Westminster.

The pressure on an independent to persuade the electorate is so much greater than it is on any of the party apparatchiks who are contesting the seat.

An advantage of standing for a party is that there is a hard core of voters who will put their ‘X’ in your box regardless.

It is not necessary to demonstrate charisma or any other charms – as we have seen over the years.

For any of our “independent” candidates to persuade voters of their potential abilities and thus be elected is an uphill struggle comparable to climbing Mount Everest in bare feet, a T-shirt and shorts, and without oxygen whilst carrying an anvil in their knapsack!

We fear that there will be a few deposits of £500 forfeited before the day is out.

***

A

nother independent further down the food chain who deserves some sympathy is Boston Borough Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire.  No sooner had he been suspended from his cabinet and portfolio responsibilities “pending” the outcome of legal proceedings relating to his business activities, than he was replaced by Councillor Aaron Spencer.

When he appeared in court – on video for the entire world to see, thanks to the Boston Standard – the case was adjourned to Lincoln Magistrates’ Court, where a two-day trial is scheduled to open on April 28^th.

The local elections are scheduled to take place on Thursday 7^{th –} just nine days later.

***

M

eanwhile, sitting MP Mark Simmonds has decided that reports of his death have been greatly exaggerated, to quote Mark Twain.

He has bobbed up in newspaper reports claiming that the benefit cap is helping to cut unemployment across Lincolnshire.

And it’s no small beer.

"Because of this cap, fifty-two households in Boston and Skegness **(see footnote) are no longer able to claim more in benefits than the average family earns by going out to work.

"This means more families in Boston and Skegness with the self-respect and security that comes with a good job and a regular pay packet.

"The worst thing we could do now is abandon the plan that is working, delivering a brighter, more secure future for families in Boston and Skegness."

If Mr Simmonds could explain how more families have gained self-respect and security because a mere 52 have had their benefits docked, we would like to hear.

***

A

s we get older, we sometimes wonder whether our memory is as acute as it once was – so it is always welcome to receive some reassurance.

Recently, we raised an Eyebrow at Boston Borough Council’s claim that the English Heritage and Boston Borough Council Partnership Scheme in Conservation Areas had been “so successful” that English Heritage had extended it into 2015.

Our recollection was that the scheme, which was launched in December 2011, was always intended to run for five years – and that far from being a roaring success, only a handful of the grant money available had been handed out.

Much of this has been confirmed by the council’s Overview and Scrutiny annual report which says that there is still about £100,000 in the kitty, with a “definite possibility” of further funding being made available.

And the report added: “The scheme was to be re-launched to encourage further applications.”

Now that’s more like it!

***

W

e take a cock-eyed approach to the way we do some things here in Boston.

Last weekend saw the national Small Business Saturday event, which in some districts of Lincolnshire – notably South Kesteven – was enthusiastically embraced.

But in Boston we had become so obsessed with last year’s floods, that we appear not to have bothered with the event much at all – which was a sadly missed opportunity … especially given that plenty of free support and promotional material was available to participants.

More bizarrely in Wormgate a so-called “bite back” event (why?) was staged to mark the flood anniversary the previous day, which could have made an excellent springboard for the national event.

The flood anniversary has become something of an obsession with Boston Borough Council, which seems unable to draw a line under it, and reminds us about it on an almost daily basis.

But we think that it was a step too far to publish the above item on Twitter – which might have caused some to fear that history was repeating itself!

***

T

alking of events, we have had the great Christmas light celebrations since our last blog.

It’s still shameful that the management of Pescod Square, and more disappointingly Oldrids not only distanced themselves from the council’s own offering, but seemed almost to have planned a “spoiler” to steal the borough’s thunder.

We know that there was a slight hitch with the lights on the borough’s effort, but what we wondered more was what has happened to the incredibly expensive lights that made an appearance a couple of years ago, and which we understood were hired on a five year contract costing £30,000 a year.

Certainly the look of the town does not reflect a spend of that magnitude, so what is going on?

Also there were murmurings about the shortage of lights on the borough’s tree in the Market Place, and bearing in mind that the council had been given £1,000 for the project by local company Magnadata we do feel that Worst Street could have come up with better value for money – unless, perish the thought, they resorted to renting yet again.

However, depending on who’s taking the pictures, every photo tells a different story.

The above photo on the left accompanied coverage by the Boston Standard, whilst its neighbour appeared in the council’s bulletin.

***

A

couple of side bars to the Christmas activities included an annoyed message from a visitor during one of the much trumpeted free parking session in the council’s car parks.

“Shame it was written on small cards nowhere near the button on the machines” said the writer adding ruefully “I paid!”

And our favourite photo has to be the one of the Mayor, Councillor Alison Austin and her consort, husband Richard, apparently being greeted by three members of the borough council’s cabinet – who are all easily recognisable!

**Footnote: Boston has 27,291 households, and Skegness has 8,445. The 52 no longer receiving big benefit payments represent 0.14% of the total.

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

They’re rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic – aka the bad ship SS Worst Street – in the aftermath of the removal of the former deputy leader Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire from his cabinet and committee duties … as the leadership gets busy reinventing – and contradicting – itself.

In one breath, our “leadership” claimed that Councillor Singleton-McGuire’s departure was “pending completion of proceedings relating to his personal business interests” … and that “in the interim the leader and deputy leader, Councillor Michael Brookes, will jointly discharge the portfolio responsibilities.”

There is no ambiguity about such a statement, yet within days came the announcement that Councillor Aaron Spencer had taken over the finance portfolio with the leader’s confidence that “he will carry on the excellent work that Councillor Singleton-McGuire has done.”

What Councillor Singleton-McGuire – who was due to appear before Boston magistrates yesterday in an action being brought by the borough council and Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue – might have to say about this, is anyone’s guess.

Councillor Spencer – at 23 one of the youngest councillors in the country – was elected to  represent Five Villages ward at Boston Borough Council in May 2011 at the age of 19.

But he is not letting the importance of the role  – which as well as finance including revenues and benefits,  takes in procurement, IT, corporate governance, customer services, freedom of information, and complaints – dim his confidence.

“I look forward to the challenge of taking the lead in the financial affairs of the borough council.

“I recognise the importance of the role – it is something which impacts in some way on practically every person living in the borough.

“It’s a big job, but I have worked in the commercial world (we are told that he is currently a “car sales executive”) and I will have the support of the council’s excellent financial team, and I take up the reigns (sic) from a good starting point.”

Councillor Spencer’s elevation to the Worst Street peerage follows a torpid time since his election. In his first year, he attended just over half of the meetings where he was a member – 11 out of 21.

He was reported as saying that having a job in the daytime stopped him attending many meetings.

“When I was running for office they said it would be great to get young blood and fresh ideas. In reality I have found it to be quite different.

“The meetings are at awkward times. I work from 9am to 6pm and when I explained this to the council they don’t seem to listen.

“I love helping people in my ward and do a lot for the community. Sitting in a meeting where everything has already been decided really isn’t what being a councillor seemed about.

“My opinion is that if the council was run logically like a business for the best of the town rather than for an agenda it would be a lot better.”

The most recent attendance figures also show that Councillor Spencer – whose early offer to run as the country’s youngest elected mayor was turned down – is still having problems.

Whilst he has managed 100% attendance at full council meetings, he has only turned up to three out of five meetings of the Environment and Performance Committee – the only other committee on which he sits … although now, he will join the cabinet as well.

We understand that as well as Councillor Spencer, another member of the Tory squad stepped forward to volunteer to take on the finance portfolio – although that report may just be a glorious myth.

***

As far as attendances are concerned, an observer might wonder whether councillors are getting demob happy.

The latest figures for the current political year show some notable absentees.

Only four of the thirteen members of the Planning Committee managed to attend all lessons – with Labour group leader Paul Gleeson managing just three out of eight meetings … a meagre 38%

However, Councillor Gleeson told Boston  Eye: “My poor attendance at planning committee this year was due to my breaking my leg in May.  Whilst being laid up kept me from attending all meeting for a while, it has had a bigger impact on my attendance at planning meetings, as I was not physically able to do some of the inspections that were a prerequisite of being at the meeting and I had to miss one as it clashed with a hospital appointment.

“I think you will find that my attendance at meetings prior to my accident was quite good and whilst I am still not as mobile as I would like I am once again regularly attending meetings.” Fair enough – but it might be worth Boston Borough Council’s while explaining such absences, rather than merely publishing what looks like a bad attendance record.

Councillor David Witts – leader of Independent Group 2 – was next with a 63% attendance, or five meetings out of eight, the same as independent Ossy Snell.

Audit and Governance committee meetings managed without the presence of Independent Stuart Ashton, a recent aspirant to be our next Conservative MP. He shared the record with Conservative councillors Judith Skinner and Gloria Smith.
All told, four of the nine members failed to attend a meeting in June or September.

The committee has responsibility for member standards issues and is formally recognised as that charged with governance and with independence from scrutiny committees, and reports directly to council. 

Sounds important, doesn’t it – although it can’t be if so many don’t bother to attend.

Another committee which is important as far as the people whom  it represents are concerned is the Boston Town Area Committee – B-Tacky – whose 16 members are responsible for the “non-parished” wards, and have money to spend for their benefit.

Three of the members have failed to attend meetings so far this business year according to the borough council.

Two are Conservative – Yvonne Gunter and Dr Gurdip Samra – whilst the third, English Democrat David Owens, continues to thumb his nose at the electorate and avoids as many meetings as he can.

Hopefully, he will not have the brass to seek re-election next year.

Of the eleven members of the Corporate and Community Committee, only five have managed full attendance – with the worst being former Mayor Colin Brotherton’s 33% attendance record.

Full council meetings are better attended – with the exception of Councillor Owens once again – although the meetings are nothing more than an exercise in rubber stamping which crushes debate and democracy both.

Finally, the Environment and Performance Committee – where just two of the eleven members managed full attendance.

Overall the attendance figures are pretty dismal – but we bet that come next year’s elections, all those seeking another four years of money for nothing will be polishing their high flying words and phrases to tell us how devoted they are to serving their communities and why we should return them yet again.

***

On now to the bigger politics – and at last the battle lines for the general election, which will be held on the same 7^th May date next year as the local election, are being drawn.

An early casualty was UKIP contender Paul Wooding, who withdrew his candidacy at the last minute ahead of the appointment of Robin Hunter-Clarke – the local UKIP chairman as well as a Lincolnshire county  and Skegness town councillor.

Mr Wooding told Boston Eye: “After a few days of soul searching, I have concluded that UKIP and myself are diametrically opposed in respect of ethics, honesty, principle and integrity. The utter contempt that UKIP appear to show the electorate regarding the secretive pre-ordained selection process will undoubtedly manifest itself in the results of May 2015.

“With regard to the hustings on 13^th November (postponed from 11^th September giving Clacton by election as a reason which I believe was in fact a ruse,) Hunter-Clarke had not applied in the first instance to stand and was part of a selection committee in August to choose a shortlist.

“He saw all of the candidates’ CVs and also requested by email, accompanying letters detailing candidates’ agendas for the hustings.”

Mr Wooding said that the selection committee chose him, Neil Hamilton, and three others for the play-off, and claims that all the candidates were chosen and perceived as weak to allow Neil Hamilton to win.

“ The night before the hustings, I was sent an email informing me that the NEC had removed one candidate and replaced that person with Hunter-Clarke around a month ago (Hamilton).

“I was also informed that one candidate had now pulled out of the hustings.

“Hunter-Clarke was advised to send an email to all the candidates to share the CV's, and I received the full details at 0630hrs on the 13^th November.

“I decided at that point that I was not prepared to lend credibility to a pre-ordained, corrupt pantomime orchestrated by the all-powerful NEC.

“I do not feel as though I have lost an honest contest, as for one to lose, one must attend the contest in the first place.

“The real losers are the ordinary people of Boston and Skegness ... nothing will change with their everyday lives and it will be business as usual for the ‘cosy UKIP elite.’

“The narrow-minded political agenda of having the youngest candidate to stand in the 2015 general election will backfire in my opinion.

“UKIP have appeared to put strategy over public affinity, secrecy over openness and agenda over ethics.

“Nothing was learned from the Boston and Skegness Conservative open primary whereby the general publics’ feeling was that they did not want, and did not choose a career politician, a councillor, a media magnet or someone with no life skills ... they chose an ordinary worker, Matt Warman.

“UKIP instead shoehorned a 21 year-old ex-Conservative with no life skills to speak of, who defected in December 2012 at the UKIP party Conference just eight weeks before an election.

“A Farage sycophant, (who is equally at ease with a certain Mr Neil Hamilton since their introduction in Chester,) won his Lincolnshire County Council by just 50 votes and was told at a full council meeting to “grow up and be less childish” by the chairman who is the holder of an OBE.” (**see Footnote)

“Farage says in his televised speeches that Cameron, Miliband and Clegg have never had a proper job, leaving university and going straight into politics.

“Well, that mirrors Hunter-Clarke’s résumé, and I believe UKIP has done itself a massive disservice in pre-positioning him to be selected.

“He appears not to live in the same world as the majority of the voters there, and I firmly believe that UKIP could well have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Boston and Skegness in May 2015.

“In the New Year, I shall ask the electorate of Boston and Skegness six simple questions.

“The answers to them will have a massive impact upon their future.”

***

Whilst we cannot speculate on what these questions might be, it is interesting to note that Mr Wooding now styles himself as: “Paul Wooding Ind PC” – which suggests that he plans to go it alone.

***

Interestingly we have had a sight of some of the e-mails going the rounds during all of this, and they certainly raise a few questions.

As far back as September, Robin Hunter-Clark was e-mailing interested parties to express members’ concern “that the selection process will be turned into a public debate between candidates” if local newspapers were allowed to discuss the selection process “which cannot be permitted in the branch’s eyes. A view I share!

“I am going to ask all candidates from this point onwards not to discuss the selection process with the press and especially not to talk about other candidates who may have applied. I hope you will agree to this?”

Then on 12^th November – the day before the selection of a candidate – another email to candidates from Graham Westmore, the, Boston and Skegness UKIP branch secretary, told that “an anomalous situation (definition: deviating from what is standard, normal, or expected)  has arisen which we are doing our best to rectify.”

It went on: “At the time of our original short-listing meeting at the end of August the CVs of all the candidates had been received and were considered by the meeting.  The shortlist was duly drawn up and was submitted to the NEC. 

“Unusually, they made adjustments to the list and one name was withdrawn and was replaced by another. 

“The name that was the replacement is that of Robin Hunter-Clarke who was, and currently remains, the chairman of this branch. 

“This process took a long time and we were only presented with the revised shortlist about a month ago.

“It was recognised that an irregularity had been created in that Mr Hunter-Clarke had had sight of your CVs at the time of the original selection meeting in August as he was one of the four of us who were on the selection committee. 

“At that time there was no suggestion that he would be a candidate. 

“Clearly, this was an undesirable situation and the only remedy seemed to be for all of you to have sight of each other’s’ CVs in order to create a level playing field.  “Consequently, once we had been informed of the identity of the Chairman of the Hustings (Mr David Soutter - UKIP Head of Candidates) I wrote to him setting out the situation and suggesting the above remedy. 

“That was 2½ weeks ago and I have just today received Mr Soutter’s agreement as to this proposed course of action. 

“Accordingly, I have asked Mr Hunter-Clarke to send to each one of you as soon as possible the CVs of himself and of the other two candidates.  (There are now four candidates, one of the original five having withdrawn.)

“I greatly regret that this situation has arisen and I hope that you will appreciate that it has done so solely as a result of the intervention of the NEC. 

“I should add that there is no connection between these events and the concurrent directive (also derived from the NEC) that the identities of the candidates on the shortlist should not be revealed.”

***

Criticism notwithstanding, the bookies seem confident that UKIP can win Boston and Skegness.

The party is ranked as 4/7 favourite to take the seat from the Conservatives, who are second favourites at 11/8.

A Ladbrokes' spokesman said: "UKIP have been targeting this seat for some time and because the current MP Mark Simmonds is stepping down at the general election, we expect them to win that seat."

If the bookies are to be believed, Boston and Skegness will see a straight fight between Matt Warman and Robin Hunter-Clarke.

Meanwhile, the most recent polling shows Labour five points ahead in this week’s Ashcroft National Poll, conducted last weekend.

Labour’s share is up two points since last week at 32%, with the Conservatives down two at 27%, the Liberal Democrats down two at 7%, UKIP up two at 18%, the Greens unchanged on 7%.

***

Having said that, when we watched Mr Hunter-Clarke’s victory speech on local television, we came away completely underwhelmed.

Our reaction was Gee – which includes Gasconism, Glib, and Grating among possible definitions.

Having spent some time during our career coaching people who crave the public’s confidence and support, we think that a few quid spent on image building and presentation would be money well spent.

And no – we are not offering our services!

***

We still have until Sunday to comment on Boston Borough Council’s latest cunning plan – which is to stop people drinking in public by declaring a Public Space Protection Order prohibiting the consumption of alcohol in an oddly shaped area of the town – which at one point includes the width of a single bridge!

Under the new rules, any person failing to stop drinking when requested will be committing an offence and can be arrested and fined – £100 for a first offence and up to £500 for a second offence committed within six months of the first.

As the PSPO is certain to be approved by the council, we can say with equal confidence that it will not work.

The reason for that is the same reason that all earlier ideas have failed – such a scheme can only succeed if the area is policed and the order is enforced.

This has not happened in the past, and we can see no reason to imagine that anything different will change things in the future.

But it will cost £10,000 for all the pre-publicity and signage – compared with just under £7,000 for the same exercise with the failed Designated Public Place Order which preceded it.

***

It’s taken a few years, but one of Boston Eye’s suggestions has at last been given a test run.

Boston Borough Council informed us last week that a “new currency” was being put into circulation for yesterday’s Boston Big Local street food and craft fare (sic.)

The so-called “test trading” event to encourage “more micro-business growth” saw each of the first 100 people attending being given three “Botolph Pounds”  a local currency aimed at “keeping money local.”

Wind the clock back to February 2009 and an item in Boston Eye. 

“If Boston wants to encourage people to use what local shops there are to boost the local economy, why not take a leaf out of the book of Lewes, in East Sussex

“There, they have issued a local currency in the form of the Lewes Pound which is bought and circulated locally.

“As the Lewis Pound website promoting the idea (www.thelewespound.org) says: "Money spent locally circulates within, and benefits the local economy. Money spent in national chains doesn't. The Lewes Pound encourages demand for local goods and services. In turn this builds resilience to the rising costs of energy, transport and food."

You saw it first on Boston Eye.

***

They say that bad news travels fast, and that certainly seems to be the case where Boston’s public toilets are concerned.

Not content with nauseating local readers of the borough’s bulletin and the local papers that slavishly follow its lead, the borough has bogged itself down yet again – this time with a story headlined “Praise for council toilet cleaners.”

The plaudits come from a lady called Gillian Kemp, the leader of something called the Truckers Toilets UK Campaign, which is part of the British Toilet Association.

In a message to Councillor Derek “Knocker” Richmond, Ms Kemp speaks of her dismay at the state the Lincoln Lane lavvies were left in recently, which she describes as “unbelievable” and creating a “dreadfully unpleasant” task for the cleaners.

This in turn has prompted Councillor Richmond to ask us to suspend our disbelief by claiming that “toilet cleaners are an invisible force for good.”

Whilst we acknowledge the sterling work done by our cleaners in difficult circumstances it is sad but inevitable that the borough again took the opportunity to remind us of the disgusting specifics that led to the publication of the original item.

The British Toilet Association is based in Bangor, County Down – and how they stumbled across the story is anyone’s guess.

How many more times, we wonder, will Boston Borough Council seek to promote the news those visitors to its toilets might be in for a nasty shock?

One important date that slipped beneath the borough’s radar this year was that World Toilet Day – which was inaugurated in 2001 – was celebrated on 19^th November this year … which gives the powers that be almost a full year to plan for a fresh assault on our sensitivities.

***

We think it is quite right that criticism has been made of the decision to allow local produce firm Staples permission for 52 more caravans on its site to add to the 63 already there to accommodate as many as 650 “students” in the peak season.

The issue first reared its head in 2009 when Staples took on eastern European "students" under SAWS – the government Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme.

Then as now, it claimed that local workers were hard to find and that those provided by local agencies were less reliable.

SAWS allowed UK farmers and growers to recruit low-skilled overseas workers solely from Bulgaria or Romania at the agricultural minimum wage for up to six months.

Since then, the scheme has been closed because labour market curbs for workers from those countries were lifted at the end of 2013.

Home Office Minister Mark Harper said then: "At a time of unemployment in the UK and the European Union there should be sufficient workers from within those labour markets to meet the needs of the horticultural industry."

But, adieu SAWS, bonjour HOPS – the Harvesting Opportunities Permit Scheme which has taken over.

Staples says it suffers an ‘inability to recruit from the indigenous population’, but adds Lincolnshire ‘still thrives because foreign students visit the area to work’.

Given what we often hear local people say, this takes some swallowing – and we wonder just how hard Staples searched for local workers before deciding that  a transient, temporarily captive workforce is a lot easier to manage – not to mention a whole lot cheaper! 

***

Not wishing to sound a bit of a killjoy, but either our emergency services are strapped for resources, or they are not.

Local papers reported the appearance of “mysterious eggs” at a number of the Phoenix “family” of schools in the borough – including the Park Academy, where a “Mystery Object Investigation Team” was brought in to examine the egg, which had to be fetched down by a crew from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue while Lincolnshire Police guarded the team.

It was all part of a scheme to get children to create stories and videos about the experience which will be shortlisted in a competition – and no doubt the youngsters involved enjoyed it all immensely.

But next time our emergency services tell us how short of funds they are, we will take it with a pinch of salt!

***

Our apologies, but due to circumstances beyond our control there will be no blog next week.

All things being equal, Boston Eye will be back on Friday December 12^th. 

  

**Footnote:  The episode occurred after Councillor Hunter-Clarke asked why council leader Martin Hill’s dog was allowed into County Offices and whether it posed a risk to allergy sufferers.

Councillor Hill told Hunter-Clarke: "You have been elected on to a large £1 billion organisation that's delivering services to a large population in Lincolnshire.

"If you have an issue the place is not here and perhaps you should grow up and be less childish."

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