It’s always rewarding when something that you campaign about ends up with a result.

Over the years, we have mentioned time and again the cost of the office of The Mayor of Boston – and at last, it seems that the message has got through.

Whilst it’s almost eighteen months since the council’s “transformation” programme identified target savings of £90,000 by 2020 from the civic and mayoral budget, it is only now that a report has surfaced to debate “Mayoral Protocol for Attendance at Events Provision of Transport and Use of Mayoral Allowances.”

Regulars will remember that some while ago we published details of a former first citizen’s engagements over a 12-month period – some 200 in all.

Of these, around 60 involved scratching the backs of fellow mayors … often involving quite a bit of time and travel in the process, and including such exotic items as a trip to Lincoln for the mayor’s “Whisky Tour?”

Nor were the jollies confined to the county – the year saw civic visits as far afield as Kings Lynn, Peterborough, Wisbech, Fenland District Council in March, Cambs, plus Melton Mowbray, Downham Market and Newark.

Our report concluded: “Frankly, we think that many engagements could be done away with – especially those that do nothing more than allow the mayor to swagger around with his peer group.

“In Boston, we think that this could save around £20,000 a year – whilst collectively, across the legions of other councils who are staging events for their own self-aggrandisement, the savings could run into hundreds of thousands.”

Now it seems that the message has got through.

***

The protocol proposes that the Mayor will be given transport and a chauffeur for all engagements within the borough area “to recognise the standing of the position of first citizen and the importance people place on having the Mayor attend their events.”

But outside the borough a limit of six non-charity events a year held by civic heads for which officer support and transport will be provided.

Support will not be provided for non-civic events unless there is a “significant” benefit or importance attached to attendance.

***

It’s a good enough starter for ten – and it is to be hoped that other districts will follow Boston’s example … which as we have said could save hundreds of thousands of  pounds.

It’s now proposed that the Civic Review be referred to an Inquiry Day open to all members at some future date.

Amazingly, the report says an officer will bring figures and “indicative” costs to the session – as past costs were not recorded.

Some members have already expressed views – and you won’t be surprised to learn that in a brief summary of their comments, the word dignity appears no fewer than four times … along with a soupçon of  honour and privilege.

***

Other comments included the claim that councillors spent a significant amount of their own money in the role and it involved a considerable commitment of time and effort with few benefits, so it needed to be “an attractive proposition.”

Another suggestion was that the Boston Town Area Committee – BTAC-ky (motto: “We’re going to spend, spend, spend”)  and parish councils could be asked to fund the role and businesses could also be asked to assist.

We’ll restrain ourselves from any comment on that one.

It has to be remembered that whilst the role of Mayor is one that is worth having for councillors, it no longer has the cachet with the people that it once did.

It is also worth noting that whilst the role in the past has been associated with length of service, loyalty and commitment to the voters and their wards, recent political disruptions such as the election of the Bypass Independents and UKIP mean that many councillors have only a few years’ service which must diminish the role somewhat.

***

Speaking as we were of BTAC-ky just now, we’re sorry if you get bored occasionally with our invectives against the newly-styled Boston Town Council – the former penny ante ‘area committee’ whose eyes have become bigger than its mouth.

But that’s not going to stop us pointing out the reckless approach to its so-called responsibilities that will heap financial penalties on thousands of people living in some of the most deprived and poorest areas of the town.

***

For some time before its recent elevation – in the days when it was simply the Boston Town Area Committee – the machinery was in motion to reinvent it to take over spending which was normally the responsibility of Worst Street Central.

WSC was – and still is – the political straitjacket known as the council cabinet comprising just six people who take decisions regardless of the wishes of the thirty members of the council and the 60,000 people they supposedly represent.

Since the goalposts began to be moved, the Tackies have taken on the cost of providing public toilets, and the running of Central Park – to cite two major examples.

***

 

At their meeting last month, the Tackies continued their on-going pursuit of the contents of taxpayers’ wallets.

We’ve mentioned before that the way the meetings are structured these days means that if members of the public want to know what’s going on, they can no longer find out from reading the agenda ahead of the meeting.

In an interesting reverse ferret of Worst Street’s promises regarding transparency, BTAC-ky’s business at meetings is almost always done via verbal reports on the night – so unless you attend in person, you have wait a month to read the minutes … which are of course Worst Street’s sanitised account of events, and not the reality.

***

Once in a blue moon, our local ‘newspapers’ drop by to see what’s going on – and without boasting, we like to think that their attendance may have something to do with our criticism of their usual and indifferent absence.

*** 

The  Tackies’ October meeting heard an update from Boston Stump’s Team Rector Alyson (call me Aly) Buxton on the Passion for People Scheme, which is currently short of a paltry £365,000 of match funding to secure a £1 million-plus lottery grant to mount the £2.1 million project.

The scheme includes repairs to the building, the pews and the under floor heating – and plans for porch doors inside church  so that the outside doors might be opened fully without creating draughts, as well as creating a visitor centre and educational interaction and activity scheme to tell the story of the town and the church.

Tackies were beside themselves at the news.

Even though they would not be empowered to throw their taxpayers' money away in even larger quantities than in the past until later in the meeting – they simply could not wait.

***

One local “newspaper report told us: “A number of councillors agreed the committee should support the endeavour.

“Councillor Brian Rush praised the work the church does saying: ‘What a wonderful iconic building we have and I think we undervalue it and I would really like to see it being top of the pops of our contributions.

“‘I think it pays back to Boston well in advance of what Boston pays to you.

“‘I think we do owe a debt of gratitude for both the tourist contribution of the church and everything else that goes along with it.’

“However, he did urge councillors not to get too carried away with BTAC funding. “Councillors suggested that the church apply to the committee's ‘Large Grants’ scheme, which they were due to confirm later that night.

“Councillor Paul Gleeson said the council ‘should be looking to make a donation for this year and next year’ and asked for a report.”

Later, one-time mayor and BTAC spending enthusiast Councillor Stephen Woodliffe was quoted as saying: “Without the Stump we would have a serious issue attracting people to the area, so we have a vested interest in protecting the Stump.”

***

Whoa there!

The phrase vested interest is an interesting one.

The Oxford dictionary defines it as “a personal reason for involvement in an undertaking or situation, especially an expectation of financial or other gain.”

Meanwhile, the Cambridge dictionary interprets the phrase to mean “people or organizations that have a financial or personal interest in a business, company, or existing system.”

And Collins dictionary says: “If you have a vested interest in something, you have a very strong reason for acting in a particular way, for example to protect your money, power, or reputation.”

Whichever way you cut it, the BTAC-ky motives are questionable – and seem nothing more than a cynical attempt to buy visitors to Boston.

***

Is this something that we should be doing?

Granted, tourists spend money in the town – but many of our commercial outlets are national companies, whom we are sure will be delighted to increase profits at the expense of council taxpayers in the town.

Yes, in the town, because the cost of boosting the Stump will be met from taxes on householders in just eight of the borough’s fifteen wards.

Whilst the meeting heard that the church parish has committed to £329,000 to help the shortfall, the contribution pales into insignificance when compared to the increase in Church of England assets in the past year of 17.1% on a portfolio worth £7.9 billion – that’s a profit of £1,350 million pounds.

***

On that basis, it would seem that the CofE is perfectly capable of making up the difference – rather than the BTAC-ky residents whose incomes in many cases border on the breadline.

Whilst figures were not mentioned, the context of the suggestion for a payment was within the new large grant scheme – which lets the committee to give away up to £10,000 without any challenge …and in the case of one councillor it was proposed to make a pay-out for not just one year … but two.

It would be hard to imagine that the BTAC-ky spendthrifts were considering anything less than the maximum – which could be as much as £20,000 … equivalent to the entire tax haul from a street of 20 houses in their patch.
And let's not forget that Boston taxpayers already pay the church £25,000 a year  under an ancient law that goes towards the maintenance of the chancel.

***

By now, we expect to have been branded as the Antichrist blogger of Boston – but just hang on a minute.

Once upon a time, BTAC-ky had a clear-cut constitution which would have made such payments impossible.

But by careful rearrangement of the goalposts, Worst Street Central has slithered many of its bills on to the gullible Tackies – allowing it to keep its hands clean when higher taxes would be needed, and instead dumping the cost on the poorer, deprived areas.

And the Tackies, feeling flattered and self-important, have fallen for it.

***

Important as St Botolph’s Church is to Boston it is first and foremost a place of worship and secondly a tourist attraction – or so we would have thought.

Committees such at BTAC-ky should be non-denominational – what might members of other churches feel about such unrepresentative support?

Despite the tinkering with its role – one section of the BTAC-ky guidelines remains at its core.

“BTAC supports initiatives that have a direct benefit and positive impact on Boston’s town centre neighbourhoods and communities.”

Its members would do well to keep this in mind.

***

Care is particularly important as it looks as though another shedload of money will be heading Stumpwards after the announcement of a £1.39 million grant from the Government's Controlling Migration Fund, to promote “community cohesion.”

Boston Borough Council Leader, Councillor Michael Cooper, emerged from hibernation to declare: “We’ve been awarded this money in recognition of the impact that migration has had locally.

“Our partnership will focus on doing things that our residents have told us are important to them.

“We will use the funding to bring people together in various ways including through sport, events and making the most of our physical assets like St Botolph's Church.

“We will extend the availability of advice services, enforcement capacity, community leadership and volunteering opportunities and importantly, we will support the development of English language skills to support people communicate effectively with public services to help save time and money and increase efficiency and effectiveness."

Another strong and silent councillor – Martin Griggs, Portfolio Holder for Communities – added, "This is excellent news for Boston. The funding will allow the council to continue and expand our award winning work to tackle rogue landlords and improve housing locally.

“It will also enable us to work with the Stump on their 'A Passion for People' project', to help improve English language skills across the migrant community, as well as improving integration between the various communities who call Boston home."

With two cabinet members and BTAC-ky on board, Christmas has certainly come early for Boston Stump this year!

***

Whilst it’s early days – the award was only announced last Thursday – we sincerely hope that Worst Street will avoid the toxic practices of earlier years, which have seen money poured down the nearest drain whenever possible

Around seven years ago Worst Street was awarded a £52,000 government grant to improve the look of the town by tackling the problem of empty shops.

After a series of staggering blunders, most of the money went down the drain, and was shrugged off  by an officer reporting that because the extra money came from a grant, there had been no extra cost to the council, and that lessons had been learned … as if that made everything all right.

***

The sum involved then was a drop in the ocean compared to last week’s hand-out.

But let’s not forget the borough has also received £1million to fund the Boston Big Local project – which is draining away in unmemorable dribs and drabs, and will be gone in a few years with nothing to show for it.

Then there is the arts’ project they call Transported – which has waded through millions in recent years to little effect – and which looks as though it will be underpinned financially by we taxpayers over the coming four years.

***

As we said, this latest windfall is in its early days – but we will bet that it will involve a generous staffing structure running into tens of thousands before any other decision is taken.

Echoes of BTAC-ky – whose first act on getting more power was to establish two new staff appointments.

Watch this space as they say.

But if nothing else, any contribution from Worst Street Central to the Stump should make BTAC-ky’s mania for giveaway redundant.

***

Finally – and appropriately in a sense – our Man in the Know who writes under the pseudonym The Sorcerer marks a hat trick of contributions on a sporting theme …

R

umours abound that The Football Stadium might be a dead duck – although who would have guessed that could happen?

No doubt sincere apologies for the undeserved and abusive comments that were made might soon be winging their way to the people who were labelled stadium protestors!

But when asked about this new development, they suggested that their main concern was always the unsuitability of the location – never the project, or the on-going ambitions of the club!

How have those once ‘signed up and nailed down’ businesses failed to appear?

Will people not be tempted to ask if any of it was ever about football – and not all about bricks, windows, and roofing tiles?

But if Boston United are really serious about a new home they might resurrect their interest in the area around the Dabsi ... sorry … the PRSA.

How many of us remember that once upon a time the magnificent but abandoned idea of a Sports Village was being widely circulated?

But we cynically suspect that there may yet be very awkward questions to be answered in that neck of the woods as well.

If we could dismiss all that, and ‘transfer’ the stadium – lock , stock, pattern and design – to within a bus stop walk of the PRSA/Rugby Club, would it not confirm what many have been advocating for years as the best place to build a football stadium … large, medium or even small!

The up side – Boston United would have a new home.

The Rugby Club would have a new neighbour.

The nearby Boston Enterprise Centre business park might become more active – helping the town to progress in a better direction.

All we need is a few people to swallow their pride and give it a shot.

Ah …

A

nd one last tip ... let’s keep Boston Borough Council out of the discussions!

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com   

E-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Our former blog is archived at: http://bostoneyelincolnshire.blogspot.com  

We are on Twitter – visit @eye_boston