104 days to the elections
As the four-year term of the current Boston Borough Council
coughs and wheezes its final tottering steps to the political graveyard, the
quote of the Olympiad must surely be the one by Council Leader Pete Bedford
concerning the Princess Royal Sports Arena.
This whitest elephant of them all has cost the council many
millions of pounds that otherwise might have been spent on transforming the
face of the town beyond all recognition and lifting if out of the slough into
which it has sunk in the past few years.
And we all felt considerable relief when he made his
leadership position clear shortly after the Tories took control of the council
in May 2011.
Just a few days after their surprise win – they were more surprised
than the voters – Councillor Bedford issued his “vision.”
It included a pledge that arrangements for the Princess
Royal Sports Arena will be “settled once and for all.”
And later, in an edition of the Boston Daily Drivel, he maintained: “Arrangements are now at an advanced
stage to put the Boston Sports Initiative into the position of managing the
Princess Royal Sports Arena. This will enable it to become a successful venue
for sport and public entertainment …”
The total of the reckless spending on this disastrous
project is lost in the anals of time (this is not a misprint) – but the last
attempt at a tally was a year before the elections when the “grand” total of
the cost to Boston taxpayers was put at £8,275,298.
Since then, of course there has been a lot more – much of
which appears to have been spent but not specified.
As we reported at the beginning of the year, the
most recent financial report from the PRSA charity Boston Sports Initiative
showed an income of £616,166 – including £141,001 grant funding –
against expenditure of £825,386, along with the news that “an exceptional
amount of £2,059,820 was generated by the write off by Boston Borough Council
of outstanding loan balances which had been previously retained in the
financial statements, as Boston Borough Council did not formally implement the
resolutions until May 2013.”
***
So, whilst any right thinking individual might come to the
conclusion that “settled once and for all” meant exactly that, it would appear
that the borough’s white elephant is merely being washed down with a load of
old flannel.
Because now, the council has announced a plan for an “umbilical
cord to be cut” so as stop funding the PRSA year after year.
This has, of course,
already happened, if we are to believe previous announcements.
In March 2011 – just before the election – a £2 million scheme which would have seen the
private firm Leisure Connections take over the running of the Geoff Moulder and
the PRSA was scrapped.
The council decided to maintain day-to-day control of the
Geoff Moulder but leave the Boston Sports Initiative in charge of the PRSA –
with taxpayer funded grants of £176,000
in subsidies 2011/12 and £88,000 in 2012/13 “before seeing the hand outs end
in 2013/14.”
In fact, it was as long ago as 2012 that Councillor Bedford
again revealed that the next priority for the council would be the Princess
Royal Sports Arena.
“We will put proper leases in place with all the partners so
that the place can trade correctly.”
If you look skyward at this point, you may well notice some
pie flying around – because not content with wasting millions of our pounds on
the PRSA since it opened in 2003, our leaders appear to relish the wasteful
process so much that they plan to carry on for a few more years yet.
At the end of the month the council’s Environment and
Performance Committee will be asked to agree to plunder its reserves for
£560,000 to fund energy efficiency measures at both the PRSA and Geoff Moulder
Leisure Complex which it claims will bring in £1.5 million and therefore more
than cover the PRSA works and cost of installation – with the proceeds going
back into the reserves.
The PRSA works?
Over the period of a ten-year lease, £840,000 will be needed
for “repairs and commercial investment.”
Yet in the last set of asset valuation figures we could lay
our hands on, Boston Borough Council reported that the value of the PRSA was
between £11,242,000 and £11,371,772 depending on whose assessment you took and
described the building as a freehold let in good condition.
Apparently disregarding all of the above, Councillor Bedford
is jubilant at the thought of leaving a huge legacy of spending to whoever
takes over at Worst Street in May. He is quoted as saying: “This points the way
to a successful future for the PRSA at minimal cost to the council
taxpayer. It will ensure the centre’s future. It has an important role to play
in tackling health inequalities for the residents of the borough. It is a
well-used facility.”
***
The PRSA seems to have bad luck as far as its structural durability
is concerned.
As long ago as 2007 there were reports that part of the roof
had been leaking for about a year – apparently with nothing being done until
storms made matters worse, when the arena’s insurance company footed the bill.
Another interesting sidebar is in the timeline of the
“management” of the facility.
The PRSA website says: “Princess Royal Sports Arena is
operated by the Boston Sports Initiative and managed by 1Life.”
Four years ago, when Leisure Connection was in line to
take over the running of the centre the plan was hailed by the borough as “all
systems go for a bright new future for leisure services in Boston.”
This was despite the company’s reputation in managing other
civic facilities where it was severely criticised. The nearest locally, was in
South Kesteven, where users of the Meres Leisure Centre reported “filthy,
smelly and vile” conditions.
However, with one bound, Jack was free, and since then, Leisure Connection has metamorphosed
into Harpers Fitness in 2008, and
from last year became known as - yes,
you’ve guessed it 1Life.
What’s the quotation?
A rose by any other name would smell as much.
***
Whilst we are quoting Councillor Bedford, it is worth
recalling that in the same “vision” (he appears to have had almost as many as Saint Bernadette)
he had shortly after the 2011 election he told the adoring electorate: “We want
to be seen as forward thinking, supporting businesses and development and
putting a spring back into the step of people in Boston.”
There appears to be no mention as to how this would have been achieved either between now and the elections – or even over the forthcoming
decade.
Or perhaps the ambition to put a spring in our step is why
we now have two sports centres leeching our tax contributions.
***
Meanwhile, the leadership’s monomania with closing
Boston incrementally continues unabated.
The latest admission that the management of the town is
beyond their grasp comes with the news that Hatter Lane is next on the list of
streets for closure because of the usual urination/defecation problems.
This one size fits all approach has already been tried on
Archers Lane, off Wormgate, which was poetically rechristened Poo Corner to aid the borough’s prurient
attempts at publicity.
Now – like a naughty child with a new toy – the powers that b’aint are flexing their newly
acquired SPO muscles to gate both the West Street and High Street ends of Hatter Lane having failed to discourage
unwanted behaviour by cleaning the lane
on a daily basis in the hope that this would set a shining example and
discourage midnight dumping by drunks.
The news comes at an interesting time.
Last week we had some critical words about the town’s CCTV
system, which were countered in the Boston Daily
Prattle on Tuesday with the defensive claim that it is Boston’s “force for
good.”
Given all the huffing and puffing about naming and shaming
and the wonderful work of the unsleeping eye that watches over us all like a
guardian angel clutching a summons, why has a temporary CCTV camera not been
set up in Hatter Lane?
Instead, the arbitrary decision has been taken to make it a
no-go area – and to add insult to injury the council that can’t cope plans to
charge the residential and business
properties in the area for the cost of installing and maintaining the gates if the plan goes ahead.
***
Obviously a solution has to be found to problems of the kind
being faced in Hatter Lane.
But the leadership solution is yet again destructive.
Before it started denying public access to public routes, we
saw vast swathes of trees and shrubs hacked out to prevent them being used for nefarious
purposes – including in the town’s Central Park.
And, of course, on the assumption that every public bench in
the town was being used by drinkers, rather than people wishing to feed the
ducks or enjoy a quiet moment of contemplation, a decision was taken to remove
dozens of pieces of public amenity furniture.
***
Given this knee jerk reaction, we wonder what the response might be in Boston to a story such as this one – which appeared in the Wigan
Evening Post last week.
We envisage a mass uprooting of all pillar boxes and
pronouncements by councillors to the effect that this sort of thing has to be
stamped out – if you’ll forgive the pun.
***
Mention of the drinking SPO reminds us that Boston Police
were quick to claim some sort of success with the news that five
people have had alcohol taken off (sic) them as part of Boston’s new
‘street-drinking ban.’
All this means at this stage is that the cops were compelled to come up with some sort of result to show that they were enforcing the ban –
although we have no doubt that this will prove to have been a flash in the pan.
And did we detect a hint of disappointment when a force
spokesman said that there had been no arrests because everyone asked to give up
their hooch had done so?
All this hoo-ha about street drinking reminds us of just how
small was the demand for a ban in the first place.
As with the council’s slash and burn policy in our parks and
other open spaces, and the removal of amenity seating without any consultation
in many instances because people “demanded action,” a “short” survey ran from 7th March
last year until to 22nd April.
Residents were encouraged to fill the survey out online;
however paper copies were available from Worst Street or could be posted on
request.
From a population of around 65,000 people in the borough … 491
responses were received – that’s around 0.75% – of whom 459 wanted a ban on street
drinking.
There was also a straw poll taken during a meeting of the
Rotary Club of Boston St Botolph’s. Of the 14 members present, the response to
the question “should people be allowed to drink alcohol in a public place? the
unsurprising outcome was “yes” – 1 vote “no”
– 13 votes.
We are sure that this was the clincher – although it made no
difference to the percentage figure.
The decision based on such a pathetic response led to an expenditure
of £10,000 of ratepayers’ taxes – but
that’s a mere can of lager down the drain when compared with the cornucopia of
cash being wasted on the PRSA and Moulder Leisure Pool.
***
Then again, it seems double standards are de rigueur in Boston.
A mysterious “street poet’s” chalked contributions to the
pavement in Strait Bargate have greatly exercised the minds of some of our
councillors and our Principal Community Safety Officer.
He told councillors: “We are fully aware of the ‘Street Poet’
as he calls himself, we have CCTV images of him in the act and the cleansing
team on a daily basis go and clean off his chalk writing.
“We have also asked (two PCs) to go a warning (sic) that gentleman that if
he continues to keep writing on the pavements, he may receive either a fixed
penalty ticket and/or clean up charge from the cleansing team, we are still
researching what offence he is committing as the argument will be he is not
criminally defacing or damaging the footpath as he is writing in chalk only,
but are aware that police in another part of the country have given fixed
penalty tickets to individuals drawing on paths with chalk, so we have enquired
(or the police are) under what offence.”
Sadly for the Worst Street Fun Police, the culprit
moved on before falling victim to the shock and awe tactics of the powers that
be.
We saw his work on the street – and although it was too
faded to read properly, it seemed to be fairly harmless.
The council’s attitude seems strangely contradictory –
especially in light of a £1,000 grant made by the B-Tacky committee in 2012 to
the South Lincolnshire Community and Voluntary Service to celebrate National
Volunteering Week … by encouraging
people to chalk all over the pavement.
***
Earlier we credited the council “leader” with the quote of
the Olympiad – and the quote of the week must surely come from Councillor
Yvonne Gunter during a discussion on how the council could improve its grass
cutting services.
One idea was to save a staggering £17,000 by removing
provision for floral schemes for Boston
in Bloom.
This is a ridiculous sum of money for the results that we
see around the place for the few weeks when Boston is tarted up so that the
council can try to win another badge.
But Councillor Gunter rejected the idea out of hand.
Is it our imagination, or does Councillor Gunter need to get
out more?
***
Having said that, Alison Fairman, chairman of the Boston in
Bloom committee has gone even further with this Tweet …
Beatify? “To announce formally in the Roman Catholic Church
that someone who is dead has lived a holy life, usually as the first stage in
making that person a saint.” Arise Saint Boston in Bloom!
***
The debate over the “localness” of parliamentary candidates for Boston and Skegness may not be as important as people would have us think.
An exclusive poll for Red
Box – a daily political round up produced by The Times – asked people: "How do you think you will actually
cast your vote?"
Seventy-one per cent said it would be "for the party or
candidate that I most want to win" whilst 17% said "for a party or
candidate that is not my first choice, but who can stop a party I don't like
from winning"
Participants were also asked: "Which of the following
is most important to you when deciding who to vote for in a general
election?"
Top of the list was "values and priorities" – 44
per cent.
"Specific policies" – 21 per cent.
"Best PM" – 9 per cent.
"Local candidates" – 7 per
cent.
"Local issues" – 6 per cent.
"Don't know" – 13 per cent.
***
Having said that, we have just acquired another local candidate
in the race to become the next MP for Boston and Skegness.
The Green Party's Victoria Percival lives in Boston and runs her own small
business, and is quoted as saying that she is confident she can give the
electorate a fresh choice from the rest of the field and can win in what is set
to be an unpredictable vote.
“I am there to give people a choice. If they don’t want to
vote for the usual parties - or UKIP - I am there to give people something
different.
“I do believe that social media and the media are giving us
a voice. People realise we are not just ‘yoghurt weavers’ – we have got
policies and they are pretty good policies.”
Yoghurt weavers, eh?
***
Meanwhile, our departing MP Mark Simmonds has made an
interesting foray into a former stamping ground.
After a three year stint as a health minister, which ended
in 2010, he subsequently took on a job as “strategic adviser” to Circle Health,
the first private firm to take control of an NHS hospital, for £50,000
a year to work just 10 hours a month.
That ceased when he became an Under Secretary at the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office in September 2012, and recently, Circle Health announced
that it wanted to pull out of its deal to run Hinchingbrooke Hospital because
its franchise is "no longer viable under current terms."
Mr Simmonds, however, seems still to favour healthcare as a
means of keeping his name in political lights.
Last week he published a lengthy piece in Conservative Home praising improved survival rates for cancer.
Given his distance from health matters these days, and his
imminent departure from the House of Commons we wonder if this is an attempt to
raise a signal flag saying “open for
business.”
***
Finally, job descriptions these days are often designed to
dignify the post holder with a sense of importance that lifts them from the run
of the mill dogsbody.
Hence such titles as Media Distribution Officer (paperboy); Education Centre Nourishment Consultant (school dinner lady); Petroleum
Transfer Engineer (petrol pump attendant); Customer Experience Enhancement
Consultant (shop assistant); Gastronomical Hygiene Technician (dishwasher) and Mortar
Logistics Engineer (bricklayer.)
Not to be left out, Boston has recently acquired an equally
prestigious title.
As we shopped in a local supermarket, a call went out over
the tannoy: “All Queuebusters to the
checkouts …”
Who else are ya gonna call …?
***
We are sorry that Boston Eye is shorter than usual this week. This is due to extended
guest appearances at the Pilgrim Hospital, which have cut into our writing
time. Depending on the outcome, we hope to be back next week – but if not, then
certainly the week following.
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
No comments:
Post a Comment