We’ve mentioned The Quadrant development in Wyberton a time or two since the first plans were launched – and it came as no surprise that local people last week voted overwhelmingly against the idea.

Although the turnout was low – a meagre 18.76%, which was just 560 out of a voting population of 2,984 – of those who did vote, 483 rejected the plan and only 77 voted in favour.

That’s more than 85% against.

The voting avoided all the emotional nonsense about Boston United’s proposed new stadium, simply asking: "Do you want the development known as The Quadrant to be built?"

Ahead of the poll, we heard an impassioned cry which declared that without the new stadium there would be no Boston United.

This seems to be somewhat over-egging the pudding – and totally ignores the fact that the first phase of the scheme also includes 500 new homes, which we suspect is at the root of the opposition.

Figures on the website Openly Local say that Wyberton has around 1,625 dwellings.

So a development on the scale proposed would increase the size of the village by a third – and that’s only the first of the four stages.

Because of the scale, the council must refer the application to the Secretary of State if it wants to give it the go-ahead, but not if it wishes to refuse it.

However, the comments that we have seen so far indicate that many of the great and the good will smile on the project when it comes up for discussion at a special meeting on 5^th August, the management of which will be laid out following a meeting of the planning committee earlier this week chaired by veteran Councillor Mary Wright and presented to the full council on Monday night.

We agree that Boston needs new housing – but whether we need so much in one place is questionable.

And the future of the football club should not be used as a carrot behind the stick wielded by the developers of the project.

Interestingly, local campaigners say that more people voted in the village referendum, than the number who took part in a poll by the developer which covered the whole of Boston.

***

One small spanner in the works has emerged in the form of fears by the Wyberton Playing Field charity which says that Chestnut Homes have submitted plans which include re-arranging their football pitches.

The charity –  which was first registered more almost 50 years ago, lists its activities as junior football for seven to 16 year-old boys and girls,  senior football for men and women, a children’s play area, dominoes, pool, darts,  bingo and snooker – and  is run on a shoestring budget of  well under £10,000 a year.

Apparently the plans to re-arrange the pitches have been done without consulting the Executive Committee and would become a fait accompli if the plans are approved.

Any agreement would have to be taken by a special meeting which might also involve the Charity Commission.

Boston Borough Council’s planning department is said to feel that the developers are taking a bit of a liberty and have told them so.

Phew! That’ll make a difference.

***

 

Earlier this week, Boston’s Mayor, Councillor Alison Austin, raised the Armed Forces Day flag in the Memorial Gardens in Wide Bargate to heighten awareness of the achievements and contributions of the armed forces.

Whilst the location is entirely appropriate, it again reminds us of the loss of use of the flagpole on the Assembly Rooms nightclub – despite the promises of the owner.

How much better if we had been able to fly two flags to mark tomorrow’s event, one in Wide Bargate and the other for all to see in the Market Place area.

Instead, these days Boston Borough Council relies on a broom handle in a window box at Worst Street, where we can guarantee that no-one ever sees it.

***

All of which reminds us yet again of the council’s poorly planned public appeal to fund a borough memorial to mark the centenary of the First World War – which it is now more than halfway there.

The memorial will cost £4,200 and so far £2,470 is in the kitty.

This is very disappointing given the length of time that the appeal has been on the go and it seems to be advancing as slowly as did the front during the war that the bench or obelisk – we have not been told the final choice – will commemorate.

We have been critical of the way this stunt has been run for a number of reasons.

First and foremost, when the appeal showed signs of failing dismally, the entire sum was underwritten by the Boston Town Area Committee – whose role under the council's constitution is to represent and support town centre wards.

This committee has been a soft touch for years, and often gives money away to causes which are not specific to the town centre – contrary to its rules.

In fact almost all it appears to do now is to give away the precept paid in over and above the general council tax, and little if anything else to represent the interest of the people it is supposed to represent.

The committee meets four times a year.

This year’s tally of meetings is one on 5^th March, a second a month later on 30^th April, a virtually unscheduled  meeting last week with a single agenda item about planning for emergencies following the tidal surge and now nothing more until 10^th of December.

It is almost as if the committee is trying to prove that it need not really exist.

But back to the appeal.

The predominant contributors have been councillors and parish councils, which makes it more of a tax on ratepayers than a public appeal.

Elsewhere in Lincolnshire, South Kesteven District Council came up with an excellent plan, and was well rewarded by the lottery fund as a result.

Boston could have done better and spent more if it had taken a leaf from SKDC’s book.

But never mind, the borough – with its obsession with “badges” tells us that “All donations will be recorded on a public roll of honour.”

Presumably, it will join the long-forgotten “Roll of Achievement” on the council’s website, which got off to a poor start, then fizzled completely until it was baled out by a list of historical characters compiled by members of the University of the Third Age Local History Group who researched the stories behind the naming of some of the borough's roads and streets.  

The webpage was last updated on  27^th  November  … 2012.

Finally, a recent issue of the Boston Daily Bunkum added to the existing lackness of lustre of all this by seeming unable to decide which war it wanted to commemorate.

 

click on the picture to enlarge it

The First World War or the second …?

 

***

The decision by Independent Councillor Carol Taylor to cease blogging pro tem is a great disappoint as it means that Boston Borough Council now barely hears the voice of its members.

Only the Labour group remains active in this respect unless you count the council’s own propaganda – which we don’t.

Whilst Labour blogs daily during the week, the content often takes the form of a party rant from one of Labour’s top brass – for example, one entry last week was a 1,891 word speech by Ed Miliband which you really need to be a party loyalist to stomach.

However, at least Labour compensates for this with an almost weekly locally slanted party political broadcast in the letters pages of our local “newspapers”

Only two other blogs remain.

One is by out absentee English Democrat Councillor David Owens which has followed its author’s example and remained silent for years.

The other – a once prolific piece of work from the genial Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire – has also been dead in the water for more than three years.

So how do we keep track of the views, opinions and actions of the people who supposedly represent us?

The answer is that we don’t.

One or two publish ward newsletters, and a few others hold occasional local surgeries.

But most turn a famous old phrase on its head and simply run and take the money.

During the lifetime of the current council, there have been regular calls – again by the Labour group – for some sort of individual annual report in which councillors can tell the electorate what they have done to earn their keep.

This would be very helpful, in that voters could see just how much effort they are getting from the people who allegedly serve them.

This would leave many of our elected members looking remarkably lacklustre and inefficient, and so it is scarcely surprising that there is no enthusiasm for the idea.

With one or two exceptions, we never read of our councillors doing anything for their wards in the local press, and on the rare occasions that they gather for meetings none of them ever seems to have much to say, and most business seems to take place away from the public eye.

And whilst our local politicians witter on about importance of internet and better broadband for Lincolnshire they fail – in spades – to make use of the medium.

Pathetic.

***

Having said that, when they do speak, we sometimes wonder why they bothered.

Three recent episodes recently came to our attention –all involving Conservative councillors of a high degree of seniority in the Worst Street machine.

In the first a voter discussed a couple of issues during a chance meeting.  In response to the result of the recent European elections he was told “you never know what is going to happen next year.”

“I asked ‘why don't you know, as everyone else does?’ and I told him point blank, that he will be out of one of his jobs at which he was most aggressive in his reply.

“I also spoke to him regarding what's happening to the fishermen when the Boston barrier is set in place, and he replied that they would have to go with the flow of the tide.

“I also asked what went wrong on the 5^th December last year when the town was flooded. He didn't have the guts to say that contractors working in High Street and London Road had left a gap under the wall allowing water to flood the area.

“Then he continued to say that there would not have been any floods had the Port not allowed a number of ships to enter the river and proceed up to the docks pushing millions of tons of water into the town and causing all the flood damage.

“I just wonder if Boston Borough Council is claiming off the insurance of Boston Docks”

***

Another councillor to show off their feeble communication skills did so in response to a perfectly reasonable question by a ward resident concerned at bad parking manners in a local street.

Not unreasonably, the councillor was asked if the problem could be drawn to the attention of one of our increasingly useless PCSOs.

Back came the one line reply: “NOT MY PROBLEM COUNTY COUNCIL ROADS”

Aside from the fact that the writer presumably means the county’s Highways Department, and was sufficiently long in “service” to know this, the fact is that whilst County Hall is responsible for parking enforcement, visits by their wardens are few and far between, and tend to focus on the town centre, where much more ticket money is there for the taking.

A word with the local PCSO should have been all in a day’s work for a councillor who was really interested in the job.

We also note that the unpunctuated, barely fluent reply was written in capital letters – which in e-mails indicates that the writer is shouting, and is taken as an offensive way of replying by many internet users.

Could this have been intentional, we wonder?

***

Last – and by all means least – was the justification that we heard expressed recently during a discussion on whether to find some way to exempt market traders from the 20p charge they now pay to use the town’s Central Park toilets – which was waived whilst the premises were manned.

The quaint argument to justify the charge went along the following lines …

… in days of yore, low paid workers earned 30 shillings – that’s £1.50 – for a 46½ hour week, and were charged one old penny to use the toilet … which is equivalent to just over 85p today ...

… users of the toilets are therefore paying 65p less than they might be charged.  

Talk about getting bogged down!

***

Of course, better rhetoric is always forthcoming from politicians higher up the political food chain.

They don’t come much higher than MP Mark Simmonds – or so he appears to think, as he recently told us how grateful we should be that he is the first local MP to achieve ministerial status.

His job in the Foreign and Commonwealth office apparently included responsibility for overseeing security preparations for England fans visiting Brazil for the World Cup, which involved a visit and tour of the Sao Paulo stadium where England met Uruguay.

His party political column in one of our local “newspapers” recently waffled on about how he would be watching England play, and what a supporter and football fan he was, and how right it was for the government to do everything to ensure that England fans were safe in Brazil.

But then … just in case we might be upset at the thought  he might take the chance to mix business with pleasure, an asterisk at the end of the piece told us … “Mark will not be attending any games in person.”

A minister he may be – but don’t you think that final line reeks of insecurity and lack of confidence?

And to us, it seems almost silly to be in the country and not watch a match – did he just sit in his hotel room in front of the TV instead?

***

How infuriating that Lincolnshire County Council is starting yet another spate of road works whilst we are still shoulder deep in the chaos caused by the John Adams Way/Main Ridge debacle.

As always, a spokesman at County Hall says the “improvements” on Fydell Street, Tattershall Road, Grand Sluice Bridge, Irby Street, and Norfolk Street, – which overlap the present ones … will be carried out in different phases to minimise disruption as much as possible.

The exact quotation said:  “This is a very important piece of work that will improve several of the major roads in Boston.

“We have planned this work to coincide with another project being carried out in the same area by National Grid so we can minimise disruption to local people as much as possible.

“I would, however, like to take this opportunity to apologise to anyone inconvenienced by these road closures”

If that sounds familiar, then it should do.

Ahead of the Main Ridge works  – which descended on the area in a single operation, without any sign of the promised planned staging, and which have cost local businesses thousands of pounds in lost income –  we were told: “This is a very important piece of work that will improve several of the busiest roads in Boston. We have tried to structure the works to reduce disruption as much as possible, but I apologise if they cause you any inconvenience.”

We have often expressed the view that Worst Street’s Head Office regards Boston with contempt – and surely, this proves it.

***

Lincoln’s dismissive attitude is why we feel that the approach by Mayor Alison Austin to the leader of the county council for some action on our traffic problems after the recent road accident on the A16 Spalding Road – which saw the road closed for three hours and brought traffic to a complete standstill across the town – will fall on deaf ears.

This was not the first time that something like this has happened, and we all know how an often minor incident can logjam the Boston traffic system.

One problem is that no-one in Lincoln seems to understand just how bad things can get in Boston  – but then, having just had a  £30m project to build a relief road through the centre of the city signed off by the government – why should anyone care?

It’s such a lot of money, and yet the outcome will be to allow drivers to travel the few hundred yards between Lincoln University and Pelham bridge, just to avoid the railway level crossing.

Just think how much further a sum like that would go in Boston.

One other point.

After the A16 accident, Lincolnshire Police called for patience while a forensic examination was carried out at the scene.

Understanding and patience at such times is of course essential.

But is there really any need in these high-tech days for a forensic examination to require a three hour road closure –as long as it took 20 years and more ago when everything was done with tape measures, box Brownie cameras, string and wooden pegs.

***

Still with things to do with traffic – and also taking a leaf  from the book of other Lincolnshire local authorities, which we mentioned earlier – it was interesting to see the car park information below pictured on the Facebook page of Councillor Richard Davies, Lincolnshire’s portfolio holder for highways, transport and IT.

 

 

Whilst Boston Borough Council continually bemoans the falling income caused by its greedily high car parking charges, neighbouring South Holland appears to believe in keeping prices low – this four-hour charge is lower than many of Boston’s charges for an hour’s short-stay parking.

Note that the charges cover Monday to Saturday, which means free parking on Sunday – unlike Boston – and that blue badge holders pay nothing, and can use any bay. Not only that, but with a few exceptions, blue badge holders can park for any amount of time … unlike parsimonious Boston which allows a so-called free extra 30 minutes for the disabled to crawl back to their cars.

Boston Borough should take note, take action, and make life cheaper for us all.

But don’t hold your breath!

***

In our last blog we mentioned the pathetic planters that are dragged around the Market Place to marshal the traffic, and now we hear that a couple of them have broken because they are being constantly moved. And what they are going to be replaced with? You’ve guessed it.

Bollards!

***

In the way that Frank Sinatra was famous for an apparently endless number of “final” appearances, we have to say that we have lost count of the number of times we have had one last chance to get a free flood protection kit that doesn’t actually work quite as it should unless steeped in tap water before being used.

So we fervently hope that the promised “final chance” publicised last week was just that.

But bad luck if you’ve already signed up for Environment Agency flood alerts and made a flood plan, and weren’t in the area which flooded last year.

The penalty for your foresight is that you don’t qualify for a free kit.

But for obese Boston, the council offered a bonus – some help with meal planning during any flooding crisis!

  

A food resilience officer eh! Sounds yummy!

***

 Finally, we wrote earlier about the spendthrift Boston Town Area Committee, and it was with a sense of wry amusement that we noticed  a borough council report on the recent two-day Robin Hood medieval enactment staged by Boston Woods Trust, and featuring the Knights of Skirbeck.

According to Boston Borough Council, the woods were “transformed into Nottingham Forest for the day” – we thought at first that it must have taken quite some effort to turn trees into a football team, but then we realised that the council probably meant to say Sherwood Forest.

“The Knights thanked Boston Woods Trust for inviting them, and look forward to a skirmish with the evil Sheriff again next year,” the report oozed on.

“Invited” seems a strange way to describe being paid £350 to appear, which the Trust received as part of a £500 BTAC grant application.

And we wondered whether the Knights had had time since their own grant application was approved at the same meeting to buy any of the £880 worth of equipment funded by BTAC – including a single traditional longbow costing £250 and a replica Witham sword for £200.

Robin Hood might have been proud of BTAC – except that their policy appears to be to rob the poor taxpayers, then give it away to people who charge for their services.

 

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

 

 

As we walked around town the other day it barely seemed possible to move without stumbling across teams of merry council staff driving hither, thither and yon with lorries loaded with plants.

As we suspected, it’s Boston in Bloom time again – which means that for a short time the town looks bright and cheerful … in the way it should look for as much of the year as possible.

The obsession with the Royal Horticultural Society’s Britain in Bloom contest began two years ago, when – incredibly, we thought – the borough won silver in the large towns category of the East Midlands region.

So-called “research” by the RHS claims that entering their competition generates significant economic, social and environmental benefits – which include attracting more shoppers and tourists and inward investment, “reputational benefits” (we could use a shedload of those,) reduced anti-social behaviour and crime, and improved health and wellbeing.

But as far as the council is concerned there’s also the chance of a badge, to tell the world how marvellous you are.

After missing out last year by a single point, efforts will again focus on the usual suspects – Boston town centre (featuring new timber planters … you know, the dreary, colourless, oversized window boxes made from left-over decking which are normally used as traffic cones) the Geoff Moulder Leisure Complex grounds and Boston West Academy ecocentre – just to look good for a two-and-a-half hour tour by Britain in Bloom judges.

Last year included touching up the shabby town centre “furniture” – as the charmless benches are described – and to steam off some chewing gum with the expensive but seldom used gadget bought especially for the purpose ... which we hope might happen again this year.

We were told then that in “the future” it was hoped to broaden the scope of “Bloom activity” to cover other neglected areas such as the Bus Station/Railway Station/West Street and John Adams Way/Haven Bridge area, and main entry points to the town including more bulb planting on roadsides and improvements to tree planting along Horncastle Road, as well as enhancement of prominent roundabouts to improve their visual appearance, particularly to visitors (never mind the locals!) More of that jam tomorrow stuff, obviously Whilst in general, we wouldn’t take issue with the concept of Britain in Bloom, the problem is that Boston Borough Council seems only to be in it for the kudos. We shudder to think how much time and money is being poured into something just to impress the judges of a competition. Where once the council tried to make the place look attractive and presentable as part of its responsibility to taxpayers, the case now seems to be that the people who live here are treated with the usual indifference unless the powers that be in Worst Street think that there’s a medal in the offing. The voters deserve better than this. It’s also worth looking at our photos of what previous winners of their local Bloom awards have come up with and see how poorly Boston’s cluster of jumbo window boxes compare. As we’ve said, the “planters” are really glorified bollards first, and flower containers second. And look at the alternative Boston in Bloom pictures – weeds surrounding benches and posts and buildings allowed to become unsightly. – doubtless because the judges won’t be visiting that part of town. Not for the first time, our attempts look cheap and half-hearted. *** Our earlier mention of the Moulder Leisure Money Pit reminds us of the news that Boston Borough Council plans to hurl £40,000 at 142 more solar panels to go on the roof of the gym – that’s on top of the £140,000 that it bust a gut to spend a couple of years ago. According to the council, the stunt will produce a feed in tariff income of more than £3,000 a year and, with most of the power produced by the panels being used in the building, produce around £5,000 a year in income and fuel savings. Contradictorily the council’s published spending figures show little if any change in the centre’s electricity bill, and if someone could explain that, we would be deeply grateful. Over the 20-year lifespan of the system it is estimated it will generate almost £106,000 in income and savings and save around 16 tons of CO2 emissions a year – a figure that is highly dependent on power prices, the rate of inflation and other economic factors, and so may turn out to be not as great as predicted. How marvellous, though, that our cash strapped council managed to cobble together such a hefty sum to trumpet its green credentials. There must be an award in the offing, somewhere. This “lifespan” references are interesting as well, given the predictions for the centre. The council’s own 2011 annual valuation report, says the Creations gym roof is reckoned to be good until 2037 but that the pool roof will require replacement in 2024  Chances are that the whole thing will have been knocked down long before then, as we doubt that – even given the council’s hysterical rate of spending on the Moulder Money Mountain in recent years – it will decline inexorably over time, with mounting public dissatisfaction. *** It’s barely five minutes since we commented on the indifference shown by Boston council leader Pete Bedford towards readers of the monthly magazine Simply Boston. Anxious to fill their pages, they invite people like this to contribute, believing that we all hang on their every word as they are people of such importance. In the case of Chairman Pete, however, the words of “Peter’s Notes” are seldom new – in fact he regularly fobs Simply Boston off with some dried-out, wizened old rabbit that he’s served up before. The latest let them eat cake recipe is in the June issue of the magazine, which largely comprises a cut and paste job from a couple of pieces his scriptwriters produced for the Boston Standard back on 30th April – when he gave us the benefit of his wisdom on such things as footfall, internet shopping and the like – rather than knowing all there is to know about flood defences and barriers. *** Interestingly, he was on about the Boston Barrier only a few days ago when – after all these years – the scheme took an important step forward – at a government "gateway review." Apparently, projects as costly as the barrier scheme must leap these review hurdles in stages in order to continue to proceed, and this  first such review called by the Treasury saw it supported, with a recommendation that it proceed as quickly and smoothly as possible. Out course, there are still many possible obstacles to come, but we found Chairman Pete’s comments a little surprising, nonetheless. “It has been a concern, heightened by the flood of December 5th  that nothing should happen to delay the scheme. The last thing anyone wants are (sic) objections leading to a public inquiry. "It has already been placed on record that the barrier would have prevented all the flooding in Boston town on December 5th, so we don't want to see any unnecessary repeat of that." Something that he failed to mention, but which might have made a difference was the fact that the flood warning for last year's tidal surge came 24 hours later in Lincolnshire than the rest of the east coast – and that one of Boston Borough Council’s first pronouncement as the waters rose was to tell people not to bother them if they needed any sandbags. A number of people have expressed concerns about the proposed location of the barrier – among them experts in their field … unlike Councillor Bedford. If these concerns have merit, then they should be heard – not dismissed on the whim of an amateur who merely dislikes it when people start rocking the boat. Who knows, we might even end up with a better barrier scheme than the one currently creeping its way through the system. Mind you, at least Councillor Bedford is singing from the same hymn book that he first opened back in 2011. Then, when Councillor Carol Taylor left the Conservative group and went independent to flee the restrictive and anal Tory leadership, he told a local radio interviewer “It’s just the fact that you can’t have maverick voices.” *** Meanwhile, Councillor Bedford’s recent comments in the wake of the UKIP victories in the European election have provoked a stern comment from T Coope, of Freiston, who writes: “The promise of prosperity, improving economy, tackling unemployment etc., has more or less blown back in our faces in the way of post-election, finger pointing by council leader Peter Bedford on the issue of immigration. “This issue should have been taken seriously and tackled a long time ago. With relaxed border control by No 10 and recent benefit changes the outcome is inevitable. “Food banks, soup kitchens, communal unrest, more recently increasing homeless and the on-going rubbish and drink problems. “I recall as far back as the 50’s and early 60’s when it was mostly land workers and fishermen who had to register every day they never worked. In those days it was known as casual labour, and to my knowledge I don't recall any of these people being forced out on to the streets. “According to Elizabeth Hopkins (Chief Executive at Centrepoint Outreach) the idea that one day they have got a home and the next day they haven't is just adding another bag of knots to the town’s problems. “This issue should be taken up with agencies, gang masters, landlords or whoever. “Just take the average three bedroom house at approximately £600 per month … to one tenant that is a lot of money. It is if there are two, but if five or more occupants are in the house and pay only £50 per week each, they have got a roof over their head relatively cheaply plus £1,000 minimum rent going into that dwelling, hence the reason for multiple occupancy. “I think the only person that Boston people can look up to these days is Herbert Ingram and the Peregrine falcons.” *** Talking of flooding – although the signs might suggest the contrary, this picture was actually taken in Boston, shortly after a recent heavy bout of rainfall.    Yet again it shows how difficult contractors seem to find the task of laying surfaces in a way that will allow water to rapidly drain away when the weather is wet. The new footbridge joins other town soggy spots including the Pescod shopping centre, the newly resurfaced Cattle Market car park. The Botolph Street car park and parts of Strait Bargate. It never seems so bad as it does in Boston – so why is that? *** But floods may be the least of our worries once the Quadrant scheme is up and running, we are told. After our report last week, we received an e-mail from Sue Bell, who represents the

Wyberton Quadrant Action Group, which says: “On working our way through the huge amount of papers relating to this planning application, I would like to point out that there are several problems that show it up as a bad idea. 

“One huge problem is that they are only planning on putting a temporary sewerage system in on the stadium site. 

“Frampton has not got enough capacity  to cope with more than 400-plus homes now, and already Kirton, who use the same place, has planning passed for 120 new homes. Methinks this could be a costly situation for someone if not now, then in the future, especially if the community stadium is handed over to ‘us’ (ratepayers) to run?

“All the proposed (five) restaurants use a lot of water, the loos at the Stadium, watering the pitch etc.

“I’m not 100% sure, but I believe the 500 proposed houses will need eventually to be plumbed into Frampton too!

“This could cause a lot of local flooding with sewerage?

“What about general water pressure in the whole area – can  that cope?

“I do hope someone has their clever cap on before it's too late!”

Yet again, these are important and relevant points.

But when we are saddled with a council whose leader proclaims “the last thing anyone wants are objections leading to a public inquiry” there seems to be little by way of hope.

A couple of reminders, though …

The village referendum on the project will be held between 4pm and 9pm next Thursday 19^th in the parish hall, on London Road in Wyberton to vote. 

You must be registered as a resident of Wyberton and attend in person.

The question will be a straightforward one: “Do you want what is known as Quadrant One to be built?"

And the specially convened meeting of Boston Borough Council’s Planning Committee to consider the Quadrant application will be on Tuesday 5^th August at the Haven High School starting at 6-30pm.

***

 Last week’s reference to Boston Daily Drivel, incorporating Pie Munchers’ Monthly, raised a few eyebrows among readers.

Those who regularly look at Boston Borough Council’s apology for a newsletter may have been struck as we were by the way that it homes in on some things to the point of obsession.

It used to be MG cars – with endless reports of the local enthusiasts’ club – and more recently it has been pies.

On no fewer than five occasions in 12 months, the bulletin has featured stories about Pinchin’s farm shop at Algarkirk.

Quite why this has anything to do with the council is anyone’s guess – the nearest that we can find is that the joint proprietor Henny Pinchin is an Algarkirk parish councillor – but it is clear that someone in Worst Street has taken a fancy to the company.

Currently – if you’ll forgive the pun – the newsletter is belabouring us to sign up for the Lincolnshire Energy Switch Scheme by dangling the prospect of saving a couple of hundred quid on power bills beneath our noses.

The scheme is a collaboration of district and the county council which supposedly gets a cheaper deal by bulk buying power.

What, if anything, is in it for the councils isn’t clear, but critics of such schemes say that the savings are often not as good as is claimed unless it is some years since people switched providers.

***

If you live in the area that the police refer to as Boston town east, be afraid, be very afraid.

Leaflets pushed through the doors tell residents that their local neighbourhood policing team has identified the area as a “crime hotspot” and are advising homeowners to take extra precautions to protect their property.

However, given that 67 of the 177 crimes reported last month comprise anti-social behaviour and a further 21 are violence and sexual offences followed by the likes of drug offences, possession of weapons, shoplifting and public order, we somehow don’t think that the advice in the leaflet  to lock your doors and sheds is really a lot of use.

Whilst the police are very free with their advice on what we ought to be doing, there is nothing at all about their contributions to stem this tide of criminal iniquity.

We’ve talked before of the complete indifference shown by our local police after first-hand experience of a break-in, where the offence was logged as undetected ten days afterward without anyone even looking at what had happened.

Not that long ago, Boston Police were boasting that the division had one of the highest levels of detection in the whole force.

And just how high is this impressive figure … 90% …75% … 50% …?

Er, no.

The figure that our local nick was so proud of was a meagre 39.2% - and that’s supposed to be good.

They should be ashamed.

Not for the first time we have to say that if our police were more visible, they might have a better chance at preventing crime – if nothing else by acting as a deterrent.

But no.

The first new batch of “bobbies on the beat” – the neighbourhood teams –  rapidly vanished into cars, as did the second tranche, the PCSOs – who also flash past the people they are meant to be helping behind the wheel of specially marked vehicles.

The most recent big idea from Lincolnshire Police is to ask the punters to report their friends and relatives for drink-driving by texting their vehicle details to Lincolnshire Police. This information about habitual drink-drivers will then be used for intelligence gathering.

And also spare the police the effort of  … er … policing.

It’s not often that words fail us, but this is one such occasion.

 ***

And what use is “intelligence gathering” if nothing is done about it.?

Way back in February, a reader  signing herself Disgruntled member of the public wrote to report that “Five weeks ago I first complained to Boston police, my local councillor Mrs Wright, and traffic wardens about a van that parks in Thorold Street or Red Lion Street, all day every day, every week.

“I have seen the wardens walk past this van without even writing down the registration number.

“I have spoken to all the above on this matter and they all dismiss responsibility to do anything about this blatant disrespect for the law.”

Our reader has written again after reading a report in the Daily Mail  which says that a council in the south of England has admitted telling its traffic wardens ‘not to bother’ ticketing foreign cars because it is a waste of resources as it is impossible for them to enforce penalty charges against the owners of such cars.

Our reader laments: “It appears that the council have followed the actions of other councils and are authorising parking attendants to ignore foreign plated vehicles because it`s too much bother trying to collect the parking fine.”

The signature this time: “Still disgruntled.”

***

It seems almost as if the teams that mend our roads are trying to recapture the bad old days from all those years ago when Boston was a mass of them as efforts were made to ease the town’s traffic congestion.

When Lincolnshire County Council announced road works to improve John Adams Way, Main Ridge East, Vauxhall Road, Freiston Road, and Eastwood Road, a spokesman said the six-week £275,000 project, which runs until, 4^th July would be carried out in phases to try to minimise disruption as much as possible.

As far as that is concerned, we can declare the plan a failure at the halfway stage.

Road surfaces have been stripped away then left for days with nothing being done and little evidence that the work is being phased as promised..

Unnecessary traffic lights keep springing up to add to the delays, and the coning off of John Adams Way to stop traffic turning into Main Ridge begins as far away as Spilsby Road.

It is almost as if someone at Lincoln Head Office thinks that the motorists of Boston need a bit of hardship to add to all our other troubles.

None of this is helped by the resident morons who think that it is a grand joke to overturn the diversion signs so that anyone unfamiliar with the route is inconvenienced still further.

We are old enough to recall the time when – if roads needed resurfacing or repair – a huge gang of workers would descend on the area at the crack of dawn and crack on throughout the day or days required to finish the task.

Now, it seems that such works proceed at a snail’s pace and the current road works seem designed to maximise disruption and inconvenience rather than the reverse.

***

That’s it for this week.

There’s no blog next week – but we will be back on Friday 27^th June, and look forward to hearing from you between now and then.

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

 

 Last week’s item about the Quadrant development generated some interesting responses – including some attempts to answer our questions about what happens to the existing site of Boston United’s York Street ground.

It was also interesting to note that following last week’s blog an e-mail from the developers urging people to show their support for the last chance to secure a new home for BUFC by sending (presumably favourable) comments to Boston Borough Council before 11^th June.

“Q1 includes a new community stadium as a secure and sustainable new home for BUFC. We need your help now to encourage Boston Borough Council to approve the application,” says the message.

This is assuming that so many people care about their local football club – and are willing to say so – that they can influence the council’s planning committee … which seems a little ambitious to us.

However, time will tell.

But overall, many people seem to think that the decision to approve all this is a foregone conclusion, and we tend to agree.

Such glittering words and phrases have been used to paint a picture of the scheme that the inevitable impression is that only a fool would fail to grasp this once in a lifetime opportunity to bury Boston’s rural hinterland beneath acres of concrete.

In fact the overall language seem couched more in political than developmental terms – and regularly mentions a distributor road for those who still believe that Boston might, one day, perhaps acquire a bypass of sorts.

Phase one of the Quadrant plan – for 500 homes, a 60-bed hotel, food store and petrol filling station, restaurant, pub and hot food takeaway, leisure units and the football stadium is well documented, whilst Q2 will develop a further 200 acres and is “likely” to include a marina, an as yet unspecified amount of housing, open spaces; retail and leisure units, community facilities, and “employment land.”

Given that the scheme is called the Quadrant, we guess that Q3 and Q4 will follow in due course.

According to the developers, 4,520 new homes need to be built in Boston Borough by 2031, to meet local housing requirements – and it looks as though this scheme will provide a large chunk of them – although not, perhaps, as well staggered across the coming 17 years as might be wished.

Wyberton is currently home to 1,626 dwellings, housing 3,790 people – so it seems no exaggeration to say that this development, once completed will easily double the size of the parish, which certainly ought to worry some people.

Local campaigners calling themselves the Wyberton Quadrant Action Group have forced a referendum on the scheme which will take place on June 19^th, between 4pm and 9pm.

So, what’s the word on the street?

One major concern is about facilities.

Boston Borough Council has apparently asked for £750,000 towards school provision – but little has been said about dealing with the health of all these new residents locally, or the impact on Pilgrim Hospital.

It’s being said that retail facilities would be managed by outside contractors – and the number of empty shops around Boston which are similarly managed is testimony to the problems the area faces in attracting new investment.

There are also worries about the concept of a community stadium – which to many people implies a facility that once it is built is handed over to the locals to run, and which has reignited fears of a repeat of the PRSA council funding fiasco.

As far as  Q2  is concerned some readers are exercised by the possibility of the eventual absorption of Garfits Lane recreation area – which is to be the subject of a public meeting about “future management options” – and which the council seems keen to wash its hands of.

And what about the current football ground?

It’s being whispered that we might end up with a massive multi-storey housing development which would incorporate the sites presently occupied by the football club, the Gliderdrome, Matalan and the John Adams Way petrol station which will act as the gateway to the site – and that this has already been given a tacit blessing in the corridors of Worst Street – even though a decision is certainly not within the life of the present council.

It seems safe to say that we can expect no pleasant green space to survive in what is currently a much needed “lung” in this congested and polluted area.

In the same way that the Queen is said to think that the entire nation smells of fresh paint, it seems that the eau de Boston will be a none too subtle potpourri of cement dust and petrol fumes.

***

In the fall-out from the European elections we noted a report from the BBC which quoted Boston’s MP Mark Simmonds in bullish mood despite the massive local swing to UKIP.

According to Auntie’s Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Political Editor Tim Iredale, “the European elections saw UKIP poll more than 50% of the vote in Boston.

“However, the Conservative MP for Boston and Skegness, Mark Simmonds, said he was confident he would be re-elected at the general election.”

Bully for him.

We’ve already commented on his lacklustre response to Boston Borough Council leader Pete Bedford’s suggestion that he should spend more time in the town, and now he’s adding insult to injury by being smug and complacent to boot.

Recent video of Mr Simmonds shows a perma-tanned looking, much smoother sounding man than the one we recall from a few years ago, with a distinct veneer about him that now separates him from us mere locals.

His defence comprised a combination of party political broadcast, a rallying call to vote Tory in next May’s elections and the suggestion that we should all feel grateful and humbled because he is the first local MP to achieve ministerial status – coupled with the indignant comment that he lived locally, which seemed to hint that this automatically meant that he was around town a lot.

We wonder whether Mr Simmonds ever sits back and considers what an amazing gift he was given when he was offered the Boston seat – a place in parliament for life if he wants it, with all the benefits that this brings.

Already, he has notched up 13 years “service” in Boston, compared with an average of slightly less than nine years for his typical fellow member.

For that, we would have wished for a more humble response than the one that was given – and we wonder .... if living in the constituency was not regarded as bordering on the essential whether he would be seen within a million miles of the place.

We were reminded of an episode in the days when we dabbled with the wireless, and a newly selected Tory candidate elsewhere in Lincolnshire refused to take part in a broadcast debate – which in those days meant that the whole thing had to be ditched – on the grounds that “local people have always voted Conservative, and they always will.”

He said that he felt that there was no need to woo the electorate, although privately he might have  been scared to have dropped a clanger that could have cost him votes. Either way, his complacent dismissal of the electorate was disgraceful then – as is something similar now.

***

And there really is nothing to be smug about. The latest poll analysis of seven national surveys by Electoral Calculus published on 1^st  June showed  that overall the average support for the  Conservatives was unchanged at 32% , with Labour on 34% (-2), the Lib Dems on 8% (-1), and UKIP with  16% (+2).

The new national prediction is that Labour will have a majority of 28 seats, winning 339 seats – down six since 3^rd May.

***

It seems as though the increasingly secretive Boston Big Local group is starting to show its true colours. The group found itself in turmoil after some members expressed doubt about the direction in which it was going, which was followed by two meetings closed to the public whilst it tried to get its act back together.

At the most recent of these, we hear that a prime mover in the debate was kicked out of the group and told to leave the meeting.

Surely this is not the way that local citizens charged with spending a million pounds for the overall benefit of the town and its people should be behaving.

And who appointed them in the first place?

They should be open, public and accountable, and anyone who isn’t should be replaced.

Why is it that these days, whenever we hear the words Boston Big Local, we recall the desperate, inept and ultimately discredited and rejected Boston “Improvement” District?

***

Another bright idea from Boston Borough Council …

Businesses are being invited to buy advertising space on two big TV screens in the main reception areas in Worst Street.  They will blather away during normal opening hours and show waiting taxpayers a loop of information and news.

The council reckons that as many as 54,000 potential customers can be reached in this way every year – a group referred to as a captive audience while they are waiting to be served.

Our experience of such “services” is that they are annoying, unnecessary, and make the wait seem twice as long.

We would also have hoped that the council’s objective ought to be to deal with customers as quickly as possible, rather than try to entertain them whilst they stand in line.

Incidentally, we do wish that organisations such as Boston Borough Council would avoid the phrase members of the public which they use in this case to describe punters queuing for service.

The people who serve them are also members of the public, as are the senior officers and councillors. Even the police are “civilians” with specific legal powers – although they never acknowledge the fact.

Members of the public is a phrase which creates a them versus us situation, which the council should not try to encourage or perpetuate.

Customer service issues are always tricky, and fortunately we seldom if ever have to visit Worst Street –relying instead on e-mail to sort out any issues that arise.

But therein lies another rub.

Unless you are addressing an individual, the council’s general e-mail address is one of the info@.... variety.

On almost every occasion that we have used it, our message has fallen into a pitiless bottom and remained there until we have chased it up.

Most recently, an e-mail remained unanswered for a month until we wrote again. We then received a prompt reply and a promise of action. So why was the message ignored until then?

And thank heavens that we weren’t provided with entertainment to while away the time – we could have watched the Forsyte Saga fifty times over in the time it took Boston Borough Council to respond.

***

Our Big Brother council was back in action during the week with a piece in an issue of the Boston Daily Blather about the council’s new Trash the Ash campaign.

“Littering the streets continues to be a major concern for borough residents. It’s one of the things which always crops up when views are sought on what Boston Borough Council’s priorities for the future should be.

“But one area where there is particular concern is smoking litter. Many, especially smokers, still do not consider their carelessly-discarded cigarette ends to be litter, to the point where it has almost become socially acceptable to throw down a cigarette

butt in the street. WRONG! It is litter and anyone caught could face a £75 fine.”

Play it again, Sam.

This latest campaign reminds us of Boston’s blitz on graffiti some years ago, when the council left us knee deep in adjectives rather than litter vowing to purge the town of fly by night paint sprayers.

We’re waiting now with bated breath for the Borough v Boston Banksy battle. Some people appear to like the faux Banksys that are popping up around the place, although we have to say that we are not fans.

But now Boston town centre supremo Councillor Derek “Knocker” Richmond has announced an intention to act.

He told one of our local ‘newspapers:’ “We will probably have to remove them as they are sending out the wrong message …  the concern is we will have people come along who aren’t very good sticking up graffiti around the place.

 “We can’t keep getting more of this sort of thing as it degrades the town. Boston is a historic town and we need to keep it that way.”

Despite the interesting phraseology, we had to crack a smile at the idea of the man who can shoulder much of the opprobrium for the appalling “revitalised” marketplace suggesting that graffiti degrades the town in a way that the marketplace does not.

***

Boston’s joint deputy leader Councillor Singleton-McGuire has lost yet another string to his bow after ceding his Lincolnshire County Council seat to UKIP last year. He is no longer Chairman of Fishtoft Parish Council, which has a policy where anyone in the chair can only complete a four year maximum term, which he had done.

However, another member of Boston Borough Council – though not a fellow party member – is now chairman. Independent Group 2 (that’s the old BBI to you and us) Councillor Helen Staples was voted in at the Fishtoft annual meeting in May, with Councillor George Bishop as Vice Chair.

We hope that Councillor Singleton-McGuire is not a superstitious man given the belief that things good and bad tend to occur in threes.

Two departures from office in two consecutive years, both in May … with the borough council elections still to come in May 2015.

We’d be looking over our shoulders, and that’s for sure!

***

Whilst Boston Borough Council more commonly manages to clutch defeat from the jaws of victory, for once it is trying to blow its own trumpet.

In a rare unsigned party political broadcast in the Boston Standard, council leader Pete Bedford tells us that four case studies of “best practice” will be on display at the district councils’ stand at the Local Government Association conference in Bournemouth next month.

The four things being trumpeted are the Geoff Moulder Leisure Pool “initiatives,” the confusingly named “Operation Fly Swat” which uses “free” (i.e. captive, and possibly involuntary) labour from the North Sea open prison,  the garden waste collection service – which is efficient, but scarcely an initiative – and the “daily low-cost and environmentally friendly electronic residents’ newsletter.

The first in this quartet has mainly been achieved by a cosy deal with a couple of swimming groups and throwing money far in excess of the agreed amount at the project.

The second must surely depend on a handy, low-security prison for success. Not only are they few and far between, but the recent spate of prisoners going on the run from such facilities may well see a restriction on allowing inmates out for a spot of litter picking.

And finally, the Boston Daily Drivel, incorporating Pie Munchers’ Monthly. The phrase “low-cost” is interesting – in particular because there are no real figures to compare it with. It seems likely to us that that if one divides the cost of the staff time needed to produce it by the number of readers, and then it would not be so cheap after all.

And on the subject of cost – one figure that it proving elusive is that of attending the LGA conference. Traditionally, Worst Street has sent a couple of councillors along to this dog hanging for the great and the good – but as an exhibition is involved this year, some officers might be required to attend as well for below stairs duties.

Tickets for LGA members are just a fiver under £500 – and that doesn’t include the cost of travel or accommodation.

The cost of membership – which is not obligatory –  is hard to find. But the most recent figures for Boston Borough Council are: 2007/08 £16,250, 2008/09 £ 13,485, 2009/10 £ 10,000, 2010/11 £ 8180 and 2011/12 £ 6,825. The typical cost today is around £10,000.

Would anyone care to assure us that this is really money well spent?

***

 Following last week’s Fawcett Report on the extent of sexism faced by women in local government, our eyes were drawn to another piece of research which has yielded the fascinating information that fruit flies “think” before they act and take longer to make more difficult decisions.

The news cheered us immeasurably – since it means that there may be hope for members of Boston Borough Council’s cabinet, after all.

***

Finally, there are two sides to every coin, and we are grateful to a reader for this contribution following the European elections.

“I was enjoying my usual couple of pints in the local, and feeling a little smug, thinking how astute it was of me to have thought, and indeed voted, in the remarkable UKIP victory when  an older, and normally very pleasant acquaintance, sidled up to me, a strange glower on his face ... or maybe a look of thunder.

 “‘Can you believe that bloody result?’ he growled, ‘I am just so bloody angry, all of those stupid people! Who in their right mind would vote for that bloody UKIP lot, what the hell are these people on? How can that many people be so damn, bloody stupid? We cannot be without these immigrants, when you see how hard they work! Our bloody lot just would not do it, they are to bloody idle.’

“I said: ‘Why on earth you are so surprised, just look at the massive influx of visitors that have arrived over the recent years. Look at the pressures that this has put on our systems. Don`t you think local people are entitled to get more and more concerned?

“’Just look for a minute at the numbers who are coming, and ask yourself, how long do you think this can continue, how long can we go on being tolerant before our social and domestic systems begin to break down.`

“’Why are people so surprised that this politically driven movement will create a negative reaction, it was bound to happen?’

“`No! I am not surprised’ he snapped, `and I`ll tell you this though, them UKIPpers what caused this stupid election need their a***s kicking! They have no idea how much of a bad effect this will have on the farming industry...`

“I then asked him why he considered his labour needs more important than the needs of others who live and work in the area.

“Were we actually talking about  ‘on the books employees,’ or hired agency labour, which might or might not be on short term contracts, maybe even flexible working arrangements, all of which are perfectly legal?

“No response.

“And would he mind telling me if those that worked with, or for him, had employment contracts, and if not, did he have to pay anything towards holiday or sickness?

“’All I am saying is, that all that this will do’ he said ‘is put the price of veg up! Now how`s that gonna help anybody, and anyway, we might then lose the markets, that have been opened up by us bein` Members of the EU.’

“’You might be right’ I said. ‘And if all those people, who have landed here in the last few years, go back home, who is gonna pick your crops? `

“I asked my friend if that was the real reason for his angst....and again asked if he actually employed these workers, or were they kind of part time agency workers?

“No comment...

“How sure was he that the ‘agency’ was in fact properly addressing reasonable welfare arrangements, in accordance with British (no sorry) European Laws?

“He fell somewhat silent...

“Of course, I said, I still think that the Common Market was a fabulous idea ... I wonder why it changed. My friend agreed.

“Well sort of! But at least he was less angry now.”

Name Supplied.

 

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

 

 

DON’T FORGET ENDER