The recent entry above on WorstWeb – the borough’s “news” source on the internet – instantly conjured the phrase fait accompli into mind.

From being a piece of pie in the sky for years, it was suddenly announced that the lunatics on Boston Town Area Committee – BTAC-ky to its friends – are now taking over the asylum.

The item told us: “Boston's town council – the Boston Town Area Committee – is to have new powers to do more. Boston Borough Council's Cabinet has agreed BTAC should have powers to spend on projects up to £10,000.

“The committee did not previously have executive powers to spend on projects for the town area its elected members cover.

“Projects requiring a spend of more than £10,000 will be first approved by the council's Cabinet.

“The new ruling will speed up the decision-making process.”

***

Would that it were that easy.

Four years ago, the creation of a town council to replace BTAC-ky was looked into by the then Acting Chief Executive on behalf of the committee  – which has only three members still serving today.

At the time, a set of government rules was in place that were under review and have since been simplified.

BUT … the report said that “BTAC had special area expense powers and a precept; a town council would be similar, but would run its own services in its own way and employ its own contractors.

“It would have its own clerk and the head of the town council would have a civic role. “It would make its own policy decisions; the Borough Council’s power and influence would be diluted …

“… The disadvantages were that a Community Governance Review would involve a significant amount of work and there would be a cost.

“Also, it would be difficult to explain the issues involved to the public to enable people to make an informed decision …

“A referendum or an e-referendum could be held, but it would be hard to interest the public.”

The bottom line was that the Chief Executive felt that the formation of a town council would make matters more complicated for the borough council and said that BTAC would have to voice very positive views for it to agree to go ahead.

“On the introduction of a town council, BTAC would cease to exist.

“The town council would start from scratch and could choose its powers; it would not automatically assume the same responsibilities.”

***

At the end of 2013 another report said that a review would take two full-time officers a year to complete – and with consultation would cost around £70,000 … which Worst Street would pay.

After that, things went quiet.

Regular readers will note from some of the italicised sections above the ever-present and insulting Worst Street assumption that the electors – the people who pay the wages and allowances of officers and members – are too stupid to understand anything more complicated than paying their council tax for Worst Street to spend willy-nilly.

***

An official system remains in place for the process to establish a Town Council – and as mentioned four years ago is now much simpler.

But there is still a formula to be followed, and to do so is still not cheap.

To establish a local council, a Community Governance Review must be triggered – which can be done by either Worst Street or by the community through the submission of a petition.

The minimum number of signatures required varies according to the population size – and in the case of the BTAC-ky area, which has more than 2,500 local government voters, the petition must be signed by at least 7.5% of the electors.

Once the petition reaches the required number of signatures, it can be submitted to the principal authority, which will validate the signatures and – provided that the minimum threshold is met – will conduct a Community Governance Review within 12 months.

During this time, the principal authority will launch a consultation, asking residents to state whether they are in favour or against the establishment of a local council. At the end of the consultation period, the council will review residents’ responses before reaching a decision.

If the principal authority decides in favour of a town council, it will also set a date for the first election.

***

Note the words the first election …

BTAC-ky does not simply shrug off its anorak and don a glittering set of civic robes and a gold chain.

If it is truly to be a town council for Boston, it must complete the required formalities and put its wannabe councillors on trial by ballot box.

If nothing else, an election might rid us of those who claim their attendance allowance but seldom bother to turn up –  see The Sorcerer later on this page.

What we are looking at now is an ambitious but pathetic connivance between BTAC-ky and Worst Street Central to shift a financial responsibility that was once dispensed centrally and instead penalise some of the town’s most deprived and poorest areas.

The object of this is to keep cabinet hands clean when it comes to council tax setting time – and because the bills have been dumped elsewhere, to claim that government savings targets are being met.

Perhaps BTAC-ky could change its name fairly soon in common with its newfound status.

Might we suggest SHIF-ty?

We’ll have another BTAC-ky rant next week.

***

 The saga of the Boston Barrier has been going on for so long now that many of us have almost forgotten about it.

Not so our MP Matt Warman, who recently raised its progress following a public inquiry earlier this year with junior environment minister Therese Coffey.

But her response – whilst broadly positive – lacked much the pizazz that we might have hoped for.

“….I have received the report; the findings are now being considered by lawyers. This legal due diligence must be completed before I can make any final decision on granting the order.

“In the meantime, I can assure him (Warman) that the Environment Agency is making all necessary preparations to start construction as soon as possible, subject to securing funding from the Treasury, which I am confident of.”

When the month-long inquiry began in April, the Environment Agency was quoted as saying that work could start in December and take about two years to complete.

Back in 2015, the anticipated start date for construction of the barrier and associated works was late 2017, with final completion expected by December 2019.

Still earlier, a business case projection predicted design work starting in August 2013 with construction being completed in November 2018.

At the very most, biblical scholars reckon that it took Noah 120 years to build the Ark.

Perhaps we should invite him to become a consultant on the Boston Barrier!

***

Boston town centre’s inclusion on Historic England’s Heritage at Risk register once again in 2017 means that our conservation area has now spent seven years on the list.

Disappointingly after so long, the area’s condition is still said to be “very bad” but with medium vulnerability and an “improving” trend.

Having used the town centre throughout this period, we must say that we struggle to note much by way of improvement – despite inducements such as grant schemes to individual shopkeepers and the promises of other major hand-outs to Worst Street.

So – might we anticipate a breakthrough in the foreseeable future?

Worst Street boasts a Leisure, Events and Culture department with almost 70 staff – so we would very much hope for some positive signs soon.

***

Meanwhile, Worst Street seems likely to be putting its heritage eggs in the arty-farty basket they call Transported.
After six years of hand-outs from the Arts Council, a dog-hanging was staged at Boston Stump under the wispy heading:  Cultivating Our Future In Common.

Put simply, Transported is getting no more easy money and still has four years of its decade long vision still to go.

According to the propaganda, “this year will see the arts funded programme continue (although capacity is reduced) but the project directors will place more emphasis on encouraging, supporting and empowering local stakeholders across the public, business and community sectors to increasingly take the lead, growing local infrastructure, securing new investment and building a sustainable future for arts engagement in Boston and South Holland.”

“Empowering local stakeholders” is one of those pathetic clichés of which the bottom line is that council taxpayers and businesses foot the bill for things that most people don’t really give a toss about.

Disappointingly, Worst Street Chief Executive Phil Drury sided with the luvvies in one of his first public utterances since his shoo-into the job – even though we find it difficult to believe that people really speak this way …

"We want to build on current successes of taking art and culture to people wherever possible and are hopeful that continued and improved engagement can only be good in supporting and collaborating wider economic development, tourism and heritage links and opportunities."

Imagine yourself saying that!

Might “art and culture” stretch to embrace clean and tidy  footpaths and pavements which are free of chewing gum, we wonder – or even more hopefully, involve artistic brushwork  on the dilapidated and run down shops in our “at risk” conservation area.

Somehow, we doubt it – even though that is what we really need, and what our leader should be pushing for.

***

Our contributor The Sorcerer is back again this week to echo comments of our own about councillor attendance – which has become even more relevant since Worst Street councillors began considering awarding themselves a pay rise.

Its title is: Missing in Action.

I

t has got really tough recently for some of the people in our borough just to afford to pay the bills, feed the kids, and still strive to be decent human beings,

Even so, most of us do our best to act as best we can – and wouldn’t it would be nice to be able to say that about all of our elected members – councillors to you and me.

There are two councillors in particular who one imagines should have done the decent thing by now and resigned.

Even though it’s really expensive to hold a by-election, our leaders should stop being party protectionists and sack these two ... although I’m not sure what we do with an unaligned Independent!

Before anyone writes in with suitable sympathetic adjectives, just stop for a moment and consider this.

Where is the difference between someone walking, into say Oldrids, or Wilko, picking up a selection of goods, leaving without paying  ... what would that be called ...?

It seems to me that the same is not – for some unknown reason – thought to apply in the case of ‘public money.'

Am I wrong in thinking that public money is what councillors’ allowances are paid from – although I prefer to call them earnings. 

If one or two councillors decide to move away – too far properly to respond to a ward resident’s 'call for assistance' – but return only to meet the 'barest' legal minimum level of attendance in the council chamber … what a remarkable co-incidence it would be if by doing so their attendance ‘inadvertently’ protected their monthly allowances.

Would – could – such a thing happen here in Boston?

I see evidence to suggest it could be happening in Boston as it is rumoured to have done often in the past.

Would a Freedom of Information request uncover the level of councillor attendance – and if it did, should it not be made public?

It is known that there are councillors who give their all for the people they represent.

Sadly many others do not – and some do absolutely nothing!

They’re the ones who seem to consider the people of Boston are ‘divs’ – to use a local term.

They think that no-one knows who the stay-aways are, or how little they do.

Still they unashamedly, pick up their public ‘duty’ money month after month!

The vast majority of Bostonians should by now know just who these selfish people are, and how little they do.

So before the next election, I wonder if any potential new councillors will tell people who these bluffers are.

We who know also know that they are a disparate group of individuals who should never be allowed to stand again – and the same should apply to those who have supported them.

It has been suggested to me more than once that instead of being expected to attend a minimum number of meetings members should – like ordinary folk – get paid for the work they do.

It’s difficult to prove, but everyone suspects or knows the 'friends', who regularly offer apologies – and who would know whether any have actually been sent.

I can’t for a moment imagine who, if any, of our councillors would stoop so low.

We cannot have councillors who care only about their allowances; who have no idea how many families are in their ward – or whose kids might go to school hungry.

So why is action not the duty of people such as our Chief Executive, who is ultimately responsible for delivering public services?

He seems without power when it comes to protecting funding streams or even investigating perceived or real abuse of statutory income.

I think that we all need to become tell-tales, and report those who do not care very much about their role.

P

ublic Service means just that – to serve the public, not ourselves.

***

Lincolnshire Police have acquired another fine set of toys in the form of a £200,000 fleet of ten all-wheel drive Ford Kuga vehicles “to help officers tackle crime in even the toughest conditions.”

The force says that “the vehicles will help officers take on treacherous terrains in the countryside such as fields and farmers tracks, and difficult winter weather conditions such as icy or flooded roads.”

Chief Constable Bill Skelly is quoted as saying: “With these vehicles our officers will be able to go where they previously couldn’t in a police car – such as into a crop field to find where a stolen vehicle has been hidden or to pursue a hare courser trying to make an escape using an off-road track.

“Doing so would cause significant damage to a police car so in the past our officers have had to accept lifts from farmers or traipse through fields on foot to reach a crime scene.”

We make no comment other than to present this footage from a Ford Kuga off-road test – in conditions that can scarcely be called “challenging.”

Why is it that we feel that it is highly likely that officers will still need to beg lifts from farmers or traipse through fields on foot in the future?

***

Finally, many thanks to the reader who sent the following after we took a birthday break last week …

If you are off for a birthday treat we all will miss your weekly bleat.

Your acrid truths may burn and sting; your jousts and jolts make councillors swing,

And if and when their projects fail, some blues will cringe, and some will wail.

We might snigger, not too loud, because the Eye exists, to make Boston proud.

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