S

o, tomorrow is the big day for the four wannabes who’d like to represent Boston and Skegness for the Conservatives at the general election next May.

The quartet emerged from a longlist of ten hopefuls, who in turn may have come from an even longer list, as we find it hard to imagine that so few people would be looking for a lifetime opportunity in parliament – which is what Boston has been for almost a century for those Tories who have stayed the course.

The way that the system works is that applicants go through a gruelling procedure which if they are successful earns them a place on an approved list of parliamentary candidates – after which they can apply to constituencies that are looking for one.

This time, the choice will be a public affair – or what the local Tories are calling “a US-style ‘Primary’” – an open election at which anyone living in the constituency and old enough to vote can attend to hear the candidates and vote for the one they most like.

The dog-hanging is at the former Peter Paine Sports Centre in Boston tomorrow afternoon – but don’t just pitch up, as you need a ticket … and it’s too late to get one now.

Last time around, things worked slightly differently, with the local branch making the choice.

While Boston and Skegness Tories are trumpeting the open primary decision, our instincts and observations of the way they operate tell us that it was more likely foisted on them, and they would rather have done the whole thing in the cosy comfort of the Conservative Club in Main Ridge.

So, who are the candidates in this four horse race?

Paul Bristow is 35, was born in North Yorkshire, and fought Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland for the Tories in 2010.  He is a former Hammersmith and Fulham councillor and one of the finalists in the South East Cambridgeshire open primary, last November. Mr Bristow joined the Conservative Party as a teenager and was the Conservative Future National Chairman from 2003-2005. He has also worked for a frontbench Conservative MP. He works in public affairs and market research.

Karen Buckley is a Lancastrian born and bred, a solicitor specialising in family law, and at the last general election, was the Conservative candidate for Hyndburn in East Lancashire.  She has been a councillor in Fylde, Lancashire since 2007, and is a campaigner for marriage. She divides her time between working as casework manager for Paul Maynard, the Blackpool North and Cleveleys MP, and teaching as an associate law lecturer of at the University of Central Lancashire. She is married with two children aged 19 and 21 and is an accomplished pianist and a member of her local church music team.

Tim Clark is the principal of Skinners’ Academy in Hackney, north east London and previously

headmaster of Spalding High School.  He has written about education policy, and in 2005 he stood against David Blunkett in Sheffield Brightside, where the Conservative vote share fell by 1.2 per cent.   He was also longlisted for the open primary in Suffolk Central and Ipswich North before the last election. Mr Clark is the son of a clergyman, and played the organ at his father’s church from being small. He was an assistant organist at St Mary and St Nicolas Church in Spalding.

Matt Warman is 33 and Head of Technology for the Daily Telegraph. He is the only first time candidate on the list – although he is head of a Conservative association in Hertfordshire, were he lives. His wife’s family live locally … his father in law is  a teacher at Boston Grammar School and his mother in law works at RSPB  nature reserve at Freiston Shore.

  

*** 

W

hat if anything does this list of hopefuls tell us?

Whilst we do not know how many approved candidates expressed an interest in the seat – or how many interested individuals failed to make it on to that list, we would have hoped that there might have been at least one “local” candidate.

True, there is one who formerly worked down the road from Boston and another with family in the constituency – but the absence of at least one … however tokenistic person that Bostonians and Skegnessians  could feel might fight their corner … might have persuaded us that the Conservative Central Office was at least putting the interests of Boston ahead of its own.

The names on this list are – for want of a better term – the blue-eyed boys and girls whose fidelity and commitment to the party will be rewarded sooner rather than later with a seat in the House of Commons... the yes people the party needs in the increasingly fraught political environment.

Three have already fought parliamentary elections, and two of those have also been runners-up in selections for other constituencies, whilst the fourth is a member of his local party who works for the best-known Tory newspaper in the land.

Our departing MP Mark Simmonds had similar political antecedents when he was selected – membership of Wandsworth Borough Council and a candidate  in the 1997 general election who stood against Geoff Hoon in Ashfield.

The bottom line is that – especially where candidates have stood previously – their prime objective is to become an MP, with the choice of constituency being secondary.

In some cases here, the hope will be that Boston is a third-time-lucky constituency for their ambitions.

That’s not to say that whoever is elected won’t deliver – but we would question how much their heart will be in the idea of representing Boston and Skegness in particular.

For Mark Simmonds it proved a stepping stone to a ministerial post and an entrée to some valuable consultancy work.

And we think he showed his true colour when recently criticised for not doing enough for Boston with the response that we ought to be proud that he was the first local MP to hold ministerial office.

No, Boston is not most people’s idea of a place to come and live – and as we said in our blog a few weeks ago: “The problem with such a lengthy period of ownership and such regularly high Tory majorities, is that the seat is important to Conservative Central Office – for the sole reason that it can parachute in a favoured candidate in the certainty that they will win.

“This sort of political patronage has become increasingly common with the Tories in recent years, so don’t hold your breath and hope that an MP who is really perfect for Boston will get the job.”

Having said that, there is still a possibility that the Tories’ hopes could founder, as peoples’ voting intentions are changing all the time.

UKIP is highly confident of getting a good result in Boston – if not taking the seat outright.

If, as the political Cassandras predict, a vote for UKIP is a vote for Labour – then candidate Paul Kenny could be in for a pleasant surprise after the decline in the party’s fortunes locally in recent years … though not, we suspect a seat at Westminster.

On balance, our opinion is that the Tories have played into the hands of UKIP by failing to realise how desperate local people are to have an MP who will put Boston first, first and first.

Time will tell.

  

***

W

e can’t leave this week’s political section without a look at the light-hearted UKIP Calypso, which is causing some silly controversy and which includes a name-check for Boston in the final chorus, part of which runs:

♫The other parties will count

The cost

In Eastleigh, Thanet,

Thurrock, Boston

Labour and Tories shaking in

Their boots

When UKIP kick them up the grassroots … ♫

The record, which laments “illegal immigrants in every town,” is performed by the former Radio 1 DJ Mike Read, and has prompted charges of racism because he sings it in a faux Jamaican accent.

Mr Read responded: “It’s a satire and a bit of fun. It’s not terribly serious. It wouldn’t have sounded very good sung in a Surrey accent.”

That was at the start of the week, after which it all got “terribly serious,” and within days, Mr Read was apologising to all and sundry and asking for the recording to be withdrawn.

If anyone wishes to complain to us about the inclusion of the above item – they can go and stick their head up a dead bear’s bum ... and we will not be changing our mind and apologising for that remark later, either.

***

T

he Boston Big Local project seems to be lurching into action after almost two years of internal strife since it was established following the granting of £1 million pounds to spend in the six most deprived wards in Boston – Staniland South, Pilgrim Ward, Skirbeck Ward, Boston Central, a small portion of Fenside and Witham Ward – to make life better for local people.

As regular readers will know, schemes like this worry us – and in this instance we feel that our fears are justified.

The Big Local group appears to be largely self-appointed, and we also note the presence of some members with an existing agenda.

The group held its first public “consultation” in the town last week in the specially created eyesore known as the Age Concern Community Rooms, which does so much to detract from the ambience of the Wide and Strait Bargate areas.

One thing that everyone has been at great pains to stress is that spending decisions in no way involve the great and the good of the town – organisations such as Boston Borough Council and the South Lincolnshire Community Voluntary Service.

In fact, so loudly and so often was the point made, that it was possible to disbelieve the assertions from the outset.

And so it proved – as both the SLCVS and the council’s spendthrift B-TACky committee had their feet under the table at the start.

Quite where the members of the group appeared from is a bit of a mystery – and remains so, and we cannot recall much by way of public invitation to express an interest in membership.

***

N

otwithstanding all this, there was a public consultation last week and on the Big Local website there is an eye wateringly long list which covers spending of many more millions than the mere one that is available.

Presumably, the idea is that we, the public – a pejorative term, if ever there was one – examine all the suggestions and select our personal favourites

The choices are under four themes – Health and Wellbeing, A More Attractive Environment, Greater Community Spirit and Encouraging Enterprise.

Under each heading there are lists of ideas that Boston Big Local “might support and fund” and those that the group “might inform others about but not fund.”

Theme one, heading one, contains 37 ideas with a further 11 considered worth a mention but not spending money on.

The breakdown for theme two is 21 and 24, theme three 32 and 4, and theme four 10 and 1.

That adds up neatly to 100 big ideas, but some of them have clearly been included without any thought at all.

And an astonishing number are things that are already the responsibility of Lincolnshire County Council or its odd job man, Boston Borough Council, are on the list.

Who else has the job of making roundabouts attractive, or putting more planters in the town?

Another suggestion is to encourage the renovation of many of our listed town centre properties – possibly through grants to owners … something for which a huge fund already exists, and which hardly anyone has bothered to access.

Other ideas include tidying open areas to provide mini parks – near the police station, near the railway crossing, near ASDA and on commercial sites that are no longer used;  providing welcoming signs and/or artworks on roundabouts depicting Boston’s heritage; employ a gardener and team to maintain high levels of environmental maintenance; clearing litter hotspots, tipping hotspots, etc.

All of these jobs already have an authority responsible for them – not only that but they are already funded through our council tax ... or if not, they should be.

The lists go on and on and on – and whilst worthy, lack imagination, comprising what are clearly a collection of individual bees in individual bonnets. Why else would somewhere like Burgess Pit again be included as somewhere worthy of the addition of park equipment including outdoor gym equipment) with a training track around the perimeter and gates at both ends?

It isn’t difficult to predict the final episode of this sorry soap opera.

The great and the good or their hangers-on will end up having a significant input into how the money is spent (if they haven’t already done so) and where there was once a chance to come up with something major, imaginative and impressive that would really enhance the town, the money will disappear in dribs and drabs on pet projects which at the end of the day will scarcely be noticed.

Meanwhile, the next step will be a report to the next meeting of the steering group on 30^th  October.

We can’t wait.

***

O

ur report last week criticised the dismal state of Boston’s shopping “offer” but sadly, it seems to be about par for the course.

A report from the data company Experian says that our high streets have been transformed in the last ten years, and the change – illustrated by the rise of tattoo parlours and convenience stores along with betting shops and mobile phone retailers – are changes that are seen as “increasingly social.”

The news coincides with a warning from English Heritage chief executive Simon Thurley that historic towns and cities will soon be put under "huge pressure" to build "exponentially" to fulfil a perceived housing need.

He said that after next May’s election whichever party takes power will “put its foot on the accelerator” with increasingly “draconian measures” to ensure market towns are expanded to double or treble in size.

“This expansion is happening without due thought and attention being given to things like traffic, schools, the health service, hospitals, all those other things,” he said, citing  near neighbour King's Lynn as an example of somewhere that “huge identikit slabs of housing” are tacked on.

“I think in the next five or ten years, we risk losing something that has been protected for many centuries.”

We have no doubt that he is right – and that Boston is leading the way down that slippery slope already.

The first phase of the Quadrant developments includes plans for 500 new houses, Boston Mayflower plans a similar number, and we recently mentioned two separate applications which could see 420 houses built on estates facing each other on either side of Toot Lane, whilst parish councillors in Sibsey were opposing plans in East Lindsey District Council’s 15-year development plan which could see at least 235 new homes built in the village.

We wonder whether anyone in the corridors of power ever steps back for a moment, and – not in isolation – conjures up a mind’s eye picture of the area as a whole if all this building goes ahead.

We suspect not – otherwise alarm bells would be ringing in their heads.

***

I

f you can call it that, the good news is that more help is on the way in the event of flooding in Boston. The bad news is that it will be located in Horncastle and run by the Lincolnshire Community Foundation which is based in Sleaford.

The foundation will provide clean-up materials for victims of flooding and help to make properties flood proof.

Whilst it sounds very useful, let’s not forget that of the scores of people affected by flooding in Boston at the end of last year, scarcely any have bothered to apply for government funding to make their homes and businesses more secure – and that Boston Borough Council’s “we don’t provide sandbags for taxpayers” policy will leave future flood victims high and dry … or rather just the opposite!

***

W

e got something of a shock when we looked at the office hourglass the other day. Not only does the shape resemble the figure eight – but it is also almost eight years since we started blogging.

Despite that, it surprises us was that there are still some people out there who do not understand what Boston Eye is all about.

Despite what some may think, Boston Eye is not a newspaper … which is about the only thing that it has in common with the Boston Standard and Boston Target. We do not attend events to report on them, but instead try to offer an analysis that you won’t find anywhere else.
The clue is in the name – Boston Eye –  we keep a lookout for the taxpayers of the borough, and try to hold a mirror up to the great and the good of the town, in the hope that from time to time they might see the error of their ways and learn something as a result.

Unfortunately, this approach exemplifies the adage that you can take a horse to water, but cannot make it drink.

Over the years we have highlighted a number of wrongful things that we would have expected an opposition of any colour to have pursued with the power-mongers of the day.

But this has simply not happened.

What our stint at the grindstone has told is that relationships within the corridors of Worst Street are far too cosy, so that when push comes to shove – no-one bothers to shove.

  

***

O

ur disappointment in our local councillors is underlined by a report from the Local Government Association, which is teaming-up with partners to draw-up some guidance for elected members to make more use of social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter.

According to the LGA: “Social media's importance is rapidly increasing as 54 per cent of adults now use it.

“There are 21,000 democratically-elected members across Britain and there is a thirst for knowledge on how councillors can best use it to better serve people who live and work in their area."

At the last count, one Independent councillor and one political group produced a blog – and three appear to make occasional use of Twitter."

Any further examples of the remoteness and disregard with which our elected representatives hold us will be read with interest.

***

H

aving said that, one example which springs to mind is the regular contribution to the local magazine Simply Boston by the respected and beloved leader Pete Bedford.

Every month, he is invited to contribute his “notes” – and with monotonous regularity, what appears is usually an outdated piece that first surfaced in one of our local “newspapers” either as a comment column or a letter.

The latest offering finds the leader ruminating that “At the time of writing I am expecting the decision any day of the Secretary of State concerning the Quadrant application at Wyberton.”

That decision was announced on 17^th September.

“Peter’s Notes” appeared in Simply Boston – for October.

Perhaps for the next issue he might like to mention the Great Fire of Boston in 1281 which destroyed much of the town, and defend the council’s decision not to provide members of ye publick with leather water buckets.

  

***

O

f course, it is entirely possible that Councillor Bedford was keeping his eloquence in reserve for Boston’s role on a most unlikely stage.

As a result of the intervention of Councillor Stephen Woodliffe  – the cabinet member for Building Control, Environmental Health, Community Safety, Emergency Planning, Health and Safety, Licensing and Land Charges – Boston has apparently played a key part locally in the crisis concerning … wait for it … Ebola.

This unusual development came after Councillor Woodliffe attended a port users’ conference at the House of Commons.

The visit by Councillor Woodliffe  – who more than once has been mistaken for a Time Lord, because when his name is mentioned people ask, Councillor Who? – was “followed up” … presumably from leafy Surrey … by former Chief Executive Richard Harbord, who raised it with the Lincolnshire Resilience Forum, which then produced a briefing document about Ebola which was sent out to Lincolnshire county councillors and MPs.

From this, the two main things we have learned are that a) every local resilience forum is to “benefit” from staging an exercise to test preparedness for a case of Ebola developing, and which we can anticipate in “the near future” here in Lincolnshire, and b) that there are no current cases of Ebola in the UK, and that “the overall risk remains very low.”

Councillor Bedford circulated the news to all elected members at Worst Street, with the comment: “I hope you all agree that once again Boston has led the way on this issue.”

We are left lost for words.

***

T

here are still many of us who remember Mark James, who was Chief Executive of Boston Borough Council between 1995 and 2002 – when he moved to the same post with Carmarthenshire County Council.

Mr James is most fondly cherished for his enthusiastic promotion of the Princess Royal Sports Arena, and was famously quoted as saying that it would not cost the ratepayer a penny – an estimate that was adrift by around £8 million.

He so liked the idea that he took it with him to Wales, where it repeated the “success” story and a rugby stadium costing £25 million to build saw £18 million provided in differing forms by Carmarthenshire Council. 

Amidst all of this, Mr James ran afoul of a local blogger – to such a degree that a libel action ensued.

Unfortunately, the county council indemnified Mr James in a counter-claim and also allowed him to avoid tax due after a change in the law relating to pension contributions for high earners by awarding “pay supplements” which were credited directly to Mr James on top of his salary.

The Assistant Auditor General for Wales has ruled that the council acted unlawfully by authorising the tax avoidance schemes and by indemnifying the libel counter-claim.

Now it has emerged that Mr James has apparently decided that enough is enough and is one of 400 council staff who have applied for severance terms.

Mr James is paid £168,000 a year –  and a petition has been started which demands that he should not receive a massive payoff when he leaves … particularly as reports say that he may have already accepted another job, perhaps with the University of Bath.

Anger is particularly rife after the Chief Executive of nearby Pembrokeshire received a severance deal worth £330,000 to quit his job following a row over cash payments in lieu of pension contributions.

If you’d like to get up to date with the goings on, you can click here and here 

***

W

hilst we are often critical of Boston Borough Council’s lip service to democracy, we were nonetheless taken aback by a recent meeting of South Holland District Council as it appeared on Twitter.

We mentioned earlier the keenness of councils and their members to communicate via social media – but in this case, we have to ask … what on earth was the point?

***

F

or the sixth time in little more than a year, Boston Borough Council’s Daily Bleat is devoting a large amount of space to promote a local farm shop and beg us to vote for it in something called the Farm Shop and Deli Awards Retailer of the Year. 

We think that this is going a bit too far for a so-called civic publication funded by the taxpayer – which often includes stories of a local newspaper variety which are completely irrelevant to the work of the borough council.

Not only that, in this case the report appears to be a barely changed lift from the competition organisers'  including a reference to “our expert panel of judges …”  which makes it sound as though that panel is provided by the council, when this is clearly not the case.

It has to be asked whether the Boston Daily Bulletin is really worth the time that is spent on it.

It is obvious from the bulletin’s content that nothing much ever happens at Boston Borough Council – although oddly, the abrupt departure of the former Chief Executive more than a month ago has somehow failed to make either the bulletin or the borough’s website.

However, if  the farm shop in question wins an award, we are sure that it will be free hot pies for all in the corridors of Worst Street.

***

F

inally, we are delighted to report a case of “now you see it … now you don’t.”

Last week we described the months-long saga of our battle with Lincolnshire County Council’s Highwaymen to address the potential danger caused by a temporary manhole cover.

After frequent e-mails – all of which were ignored by County Hall – we highlighted the feature on Boston Eye.

The day before last week’s issue appeared, the scene was as pictured on the left.

But by Saturday morning the risk had vanished – as the picture on the right shows. What a pity that it took so long and involved such rudeness and disinterest from those highways imps in Lincoln before a simple job was carried out.

We are still awaiting the promised e-mail response from the named officer to whom our complaints were forwarded – but won’t be holding our breath,

There will be no blog next week – our oncologist has other plans for us – and we cannot guarantee a return on 7^th November either.  Apologies for that, and we will keep you posted via the blog, and our page on Twitter … @eye_boston

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