Monday 29 April 2019

How are you coping with the impending elections?
Excited?
Somehow, we doubt it – but don’t forget that unless you take the trouble to vote, it’s no good moaning about the quality of the councillors who represent you.
As we have said for some while now, don’t think that the result is a foregone conclusion – a point that has been underlined by events of the last few days when every local Tory candidate signed a letter to the national party chairman calling for Prime Minister Theresa May to quit.
Whilst ostensibly citing the travails over Brexit, a look between the lines shows that the local Tories are running scared at the possibility of a trouncing at this Thursday's polls.

***

Concrete proof if any were needed has appeared in recent days in the shape of  the for sale boards hammered into the front gardens of party supporters to urge people to vote for their favoured candidate.
We have noted a number of them which – whilst as blue as the Tory sky – conspicuously omit any reference to the candidate's political persuasion.
Not only is this remarkably cowardly, but it is obviously a ploy that treats potential voters as stupid – assuming that they are too thick to realise that  they are voting Tory if they put their X in the box beside this candidates name.
Not exactly the best way to win votes and influence ppeople!

***

In their bleat  to Head Office, our local Tory candidates claim that “local people who have supported the Conservatives, who want to vote for us, ... feel utterly betrayed by the present leadership.
“This is likely to have a real impact on blameless local Conservative candidates across the country.
“Despite our positive local messages, good record in office, and effective future plans, the damage done to our Party by the failure of our Leadership to get on with Brexit will harm the delivery of good local services, and the jobs and investment local people rely on. Only by a change at the very top might we reset the trust and goodwill which has been squandered and deliver the Brexit that was promised. 

***

Aside from being left too late, the appeal – which was also sent to the 1922 Committee – failed to bring about any change in the rules to allow an early challenge to Theresa May's leadership, but the committee has asked for more clarity about how long she will remain in office.

***

After the details of the letter were made public, MP Matt Warman told Boston Eye that he had not been a signatory  – but did not respond when asked if he endorsed the contents.
But an answer of sorts came a few hours later, when the MP tweeted ...


We're told that this has upset the local party faithful as a whip is a doer for the government ... headed by the very Prime Minister that the locals want to see resign.
Indeed, the role is defined thus: “A whip is an official of a political party whose task is to ensure party discipline. This usually means ensuring that members of the party vote according to the party platform, rather than according to their own individual ideology or the will of their constituents. Whips are the party's ‘enforcers.’”

***
So what are the odds for Thursday's local elections ...?
Historically, Boston Borough Council had no party in overall control during the 34 years between 1973, when local government was reorganised and 2007 when the Bypass Independents took the reins and rode the horse straight through the hedge and into Becher’s Brook.
The Tories took control for the 2011-2015 term – much to their surprise, we recall – and since then the council has been listed as again under no overall control although various defections and political shenanigans have recently given the Tories back control.
According to Worst Street’s so-called “website” the council's current political composition is: Conservative - 16, UKIP - 6, Independent - 4, Bostonian Independents - 3, Unaligned – 1.
Given the state of the parties over the past 46 years we’d say it could be anybody’s race.

***

The imminence of the elections has prompted more words of wisdom from our contributor Scanner – whose closing words are food for thought for us all …

Goodbye Marks and Spencer – hello Lidl.
The loss of the former and the introduction of the latter to the town centre just highlights the problems in that area that have been festering for many years – shop closures and the cost and availability of parking.
Rising rents by absentee landlords and perpetually increasing business rates are usually blamed for the closure of shops.
What most councillors seem to forget is that if the customers aren’t there the shops cannot make the profit needed to pay their way, and that sacked staff lose income to spend in the shops.
I have mentioned the loss of IT3 and IT4 bus services previously.
I now hear that other IT services had their routes changed. In effect this means that even more pensioners are deprived of their shopping trip. As ones I have spoken to loved to get out and were regular shoppers at M&S, down goes the central footfall once more. 
Have there been protests at these service cuts from West Street or from our local county councillors? I doubt it. Yet on Look North it was reported that a Boston to Skegness bus service is to be saved from closure after protests from Friskney produced intervention and support from ‘the council.’ I didn’t catch which one – East Lindsey or the County Council. Surprising, as there is already a regular service by another company between Boston and Skegness.
The arrival of another supermarket in the centre of Boston is, perhaps, good news. but, at the loss of valuable parking spaces?
I understand from a former councillor that both the site for a multi-storey car park and Park and Ride were investigated many years ago. At that time, the figures showed that the multi-storey was not viable.
The Park and Ride vanished when the officer involved left.
What a pity that the council, when the supermarket announced its plans to build in Tawney Street, didn’t suggest that there could be co-operation to build a multi-storey car park on that site.
Would a Park and Ride solve some of the problems as well?
Finally: Charges for parking.
I sympathise with the problem West Street has juggling with diminishing finances, but, it’s a downward spiral. Closed shops = less business rates = less customer footfall = less income = closed shops. And less income from parking.
Boston has a bad reputation for huge traffic congestion, lack of parking where people need to be and high parking charges.  
Lincolnshire County Council seems impervious to Boston’s existence. “There is a need for bypasses to the north, south and west of us” (Does Spalding really need the new bypass being planned?) we are told.  LCC ‘experts’ see no traffic actually flowing through Boston. There still seems no will locally by councillors to challenge this blinkered vision.
Historical purists would love to see traffic barred completely from the Market Place – possibly filled with tables and chairs and people drinking coffee I suppose? – and kept clear for the many events we were promised – if there is money to fund them of course. 
The Market Place has been the busy hub of the town since it came into existence. I doubt that there was never a day when people crossing it had to watch out for riders, stage coaches and horses and carts as they crossed to do their shopping.  Many councils are introducing free one-hour parking to attract people back to town centres.
My friend, controversially perhaps, would like to see the present empty part of the Market Place – the part surrounded by bollards – used for one-hour free parking with a machine that issues tickets with the car number on it to prevent misuse.
The present charges there could be adapted to allow for the first hour to be free as well.
And, even more controversially, ask M&S to keep their food store open – even expand it – and create, with support from the council, a daily indoor market to complement the Wednesday and Saturday open air ones.  Then move the Bargate stalls and auction inside. This would clear The Green for more parking on market days.
Finally, do you think parking charges for evenings and Sundays really help the so called “night time” and “weekend” economies to flourish?
I am writing this with hours to go before the next Borough elections. Let’s hope the new councillors have the strength and vision to make Boston a force to be reckoned with, once more.
Big is not always the answer.

Earlier we applied quotation marks to the word website as it refers to Worst Street as we no longer regard the council’s offering as being in that category.
Since it changed address many users have reported considerable trouble in finding information – and we are certain that hundreds of pages have been deleted.
Now it is a case of not only knowing what you are looking for, but often having to know the precise (and often arcane) wording needed to find it.
Increasingly, we believe that Worst Street’s aim is to make communication with the taxpayers difficult, if not impossible.

***

Similar sentiments have been voiced by the Witham Central and Carlton Road Neighbourhood Action Group whose fears cover a major concern in Boston – that of houses in multiple occupation … HMOs.
The group says: “We share your concerns about the lack of transparency of the new Boston Borough Website. Attached is an outline of our concerns regarding its failing to provide information regarding HMO issues. The issue has been raised at our local Placecheck meeting.
The outline says:

The HMO Public Register is not available on it, although this is a legal obligation.
The council has focused on recent additional HMO regulations despite their legal obligations under the 2018 Housing Act.
There is an emphasis on tenants reporting poor accommodation under “Strengthening Consumer redress in the Housing Market and Property Sector.” They are asked to fill out a Housing Disrepair Complaint Form #3571175 and provided information on MYBOSTONUK.COM about “disrepair, Information For Tenants.” This information is not complete and does not cover HMO issues. There are some links provided and a phone number.
This practice discriminates against immigrants who have limited English and are unaware of their legal rights.
It also protects tenants who wish to sublet the property they are renting.
Landlords are given information online what constitutes a HMO and given the contact number of the Private housing Sector team.
They are given some information about management regulations but it is incomplete and does not cover such issues as room size. It is also not made clear their responsibility towards their tenants’ actions. For example, if the tenants act illegally, act in an antisocial way.
There is no information on rogue landlord registers. They are provided with links to register.
There is no information online about any fines in the area for illegal HMOs or rogue landlords or agents.
The council, unlike many other councils, does not have a policy about dealing with high concentrations of HMOs.
The Housing Ombudsman Service is now taking a more important role in regulating HMOs … a “Redress Reform Working Group.” The information available is at present limited, but is available online under the council website.”

And we thought it was difficult simply trying to get basic, everyday information!


***


Whilst Boston Borough Council now draws the line on recording meetings because it’s become too much trouble, it has no fears about embracing more complex technology elsewhere.
A recruitment video was put online recently to try to tempt applicants to apply for three well-paid and senior jobs.
But take a look and tell us – would you be interested in responding to this piece of amateur movie making?


***

Having said that, we think that the Cecil B DeMille wannabes on the Worst Street studio lot are improving slightly – a previous epic aimed at encouraging people who want to become councillors was a desperate piece of work as you can see if you click here   … but this is only slightly better.
The sound is harsh; there are a couple of jump cuts within the minute-long presentation, and the acoustics are terrible.

***

Watching it, an outsider might be hard-pressed to believe the claim that “whilst we’re small in Boston, we’re a council that punches way above our weight.”
Frankly it looks and sounds as though Worst Street is on the ropes as the referee stands by to declare a knockout.
Finding good staff these days must be difficult … though the time is long gone when council staff were poorly rewarded and senior roles demanded long hours and hard work.

***

The three jobs being advertised include a Growth Manager – another of those endearing job titles that we mentioned in a recent edition.
Notably for such a wonderful place to work and live, the post is being advertised for the second time in less than year … the previous closing date was 2nd July 2018, and the latest closes tomorrow.
The two other jobs are IT Manager and Principal Planning Officer – and together they pay £120,000 a year.

***

Worst Street needs to get its act together if it wants to attract top-quality staff. To be honest the area has little to offer apart from cheap housing and one of the main reasons that so many people stay is because they can’t afford to move elsewhere.
Boston is one of the smallest councils in the country and has a mindset and imagination to match, and all the sloganizing in the world – ‘whilst we’re small in Boston we’re a council that punches way above our weight’ – is clearly bollocks as the state the place is in proves.

***

If Worst Street plans to use broadcast media to up its image and make itself seem attractive, then it needs to do it professionally, and not stick any Tom, Dick or Harriet in front of a microphone or camera
It is self deluding to believe and do otherwise.
The results speak for themselves.

***

And whilst we’re on about this sort of thing, a positive attitude is always a help – which is why we were disappointed at this tweet which accompanied a chart which claims that Lincolnshire is the fourth poorest area in Northern Europe ...

  
Such a ‘nothing to do with me guv’ throwaway from the £40,000+ a year Economic Development Manager at Boston Borough Council really got up our nose.
Surely a major part of his role is to try to see that such a slur is removed from our part of the world at least – not laugh it off, which is how it seems.

***

Meanwhile, Worst Street has published the results of its latest business survey – an exercise that creates a lot of waste paper and a mountain of statistical information which like much of the stuff emanating from Boston’s answer to Fawlty Towers is of dubious value.

***

Out of the 2,000-plus businesses in and around the borough only 82 completed the survey – which the council proudly declared was 64% more than in 2017/18. What a waste of time that survey was, then.
The headlines were that the top three issues identified as obstacles to business growth were: business rates (44%); in joint 2nd place at 36% licensing and regulation (something at which Worst Street excels) and raw material prices; and thirdly, the availability of a suitable workforce (35%.)
More than half of the respondents employed fewer than ten people, and only 6% more than 100.
44% of respondents reported that they had performed either a lot weaker or slightly weaker than in the previous year – and discouragingly expected something similar for the year ahead.
Of course, since this pointless exercise was carried out, we have said farewell to Marks and Spencer, the GAME store and a Clinton’s outlet.

***

Doubtless Worst Street will seize the opportunity to turn the figures into pages of reports whilst at the same time taking no action to try to improve matters – although perhaps an inspirational tweet from a senior officer along the lines of “maybe here in Boston we need to do a little better” might well do the trick.

***

Because we had questions about wheelie bin collections over the Easter holiday, we dropped an e-mail to Worst Street.
Admittedly, our inquiry was short and sweet, as it was sent to the so-called website, with Bin Collections as the subject line and a text which asked: “Any clues about Easter yet?” –  in case the new-look, all-singing, all-dancing world-wide-wonder had hidden the information somewhere no one would think of looking.
After all, that’s what it does with pretty well everything else.
The reply we received mirrored, we thought, the changing attitudes of Worst Street towards its customers.
No salutation – and the most abrupt and cursory of replies, to wit: “The bin men work bank holidays except for over Christmas so your bin collection day remains unchanged.
“You received a bin calendar in your council tax bill which would have shown this.”
Elsewhere this is referred as telling people to stick their head up a bear’s bum.
In Worst Street it is laughingly referred to as customer service.

***

Earlier we mentioned the mistaken belief among the powers that be that Boston is the best place on earth.
It may not be that bad – but whilst Worst Street’s efforts appear alongside website headlines such as ‘Man gets boy to film him throwing mud and stones at unconscious man’ and ‘Commuters watch on in disgust as two men urinate near bus station’ then the council certainly faces an uphill struggle.

***

These headlines come to us courtesy of a website called Lincolnshire Live – the webface of the Boston Target.
And whilst we would defend their professional duty to bring such things to the public’s attention, we draw then line at making a meal out of bad news alone – such as in the piece below …


It’s now more than two years since Boston’s Chief Executive and the group leaders of the day wrote to local editors to ask for a respite from the bad news.
That was a silly thing to do – as part of the council's responsibility is for the health, wealth and betterment of the borough … and if they sit idly by as it goes down the tubes it’s no good asking for a gag on the facts.
But when the media seems to be targeting Boston with a slightly vicious streak, then enough is enough – and it’s time for Worst Street to get its crayons out again.


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

Tuesday 23 April 2019

Local Tories in
'PM must go'
call to save their
own skins
OK, we said that we weren't blogging again until next week – but when an outbreak of Boskeg Soskins occurs, exceptions have to be made.
Boskeg Soskins?
It stands for Boston and Skegness Conservatives Save our Skins – a campaign launched last night after local Tories joined at least 70 other party associations up and down the country to demand that Prime Minister Theresa May resigns.

***

In a letter to the Chairman of the Conservative Party Brandon Lewis, and the Chairman of the 1922 Committee Graham Brady, our local leaders and council candidates say:

We write to formally express our complete loss of confidence in the Prime Minister; her ability to deliver the Brexit the people of Boston voted for and which she has so often pledged to deliver; and her ability to lead HM Government to deliver on the broader domestic policy agenda our Party is committed to.
While we have the greatest personal sympathy for the Prime Minister and recognise the strain and efforts she has undergone, we believe the end of the road has been reached and the time has come for her to take full responsibility for the litany of failures over the last two years which now imperils Brexit itself. It has long been the custom in this country that politicians who have their policies rejected by the people or by colleagues resign. The Prime Minister’s programme for government was rejected by the people in the disastrous 2017 General Election; her central policy on Brexit has been rejected by her former Foreign Secretary, two former Brexit Secretaries, and now by Parliament on three separate occasions.
So great is the disconnect between the promises made and the delay and distrust now delivered, we call upon the Prime Minister to now resign. We call for this with much regret but for the good of the Party we love, the Brexit the people voted for, and securing a stable government for our country.
It is necessary to enable a successor to be chosen who can restore trust and goodwill within our Party, and to regain the faith and confidence of our voters and supporters; a successor who would be best placed to deliver the Brexit that the people of Boston were promised. These are the views of moderate and loyal Conservatives. We are thoroughly appalled at a Prime Minister who promised to deliver Brexit, who repeated “No deal is better than a bad deal” ad nauseum (sic) now selling out to Jeremy Corbyn. Some of us were prepared to compromise to get Brexit over the line through Chequers and the Withdrawal Agreement, but this is now a betrayal too far.
These views also reflect the opinions of so many voters canvassed over the course of the local elections and are representative of the local people who have supported the Conservatives, who want to vote for us, but feel utterly betrayed by the present leadership.
This is likely to have a real impact on blameless local Conservative candidates across the country. Despite our positive local messages, good record in office, and effective future plans, the damage done to our Party by the failure of our Leadership to get on with Brexit will harm the delivery of good local services, and the jobs and investment local people rely on. Only by a change at the very top might we reset the trust and good will which has been squandered and deliver the Brexit that was promised.
We trust you will convey these views to relevant colleagues and to the Prime Minister.

The main signatories are Councillors Tom Ashton, Paul Skinner, Nigel Welton, and Mike Cooper – respectively Association Deputy Chairman; cabinet member and branch Chairman; cabinet member and branch deputy chairman and Leader of the Council.

***

The letter is also “subscribed to” by the 22 remaining candidates in next week's elections.
Subscribed by the following local candidates for Boston Borough Council: Frank Pickett, Sue Bell, Katie Chalmers, Judith Skinner, Jonathan Noble, Yvonne Stevens, Martin Griggs, Alistair Arundell, Sarah Fitzgerald, Matt Barnes, Gerry Roffey, Alastair Hamilton, Anna Szwedzinska, Martin Howard, Deborah Evans, Shaun Blackman, David Brown, Paula Cooper, Aaron Spencer, Chelcei Sharman, George Cornah and Anton Dani.

***

It is scarcely a case of reading between the lines to interpret the final two paragraphs …
The voters who feel “utterly betrayed” are telling candidates who bang on their doors that they are so fed up with the antics of MPs in the Brexit debate – which some have cynically used to skew matters into a leadership contest with themselves in poll position – that they will not be voting Tory.

***

The signatories doubtless include themselves among the “blameless” local candidates – and the bottom line is that they are scared stiff of losing office … and with very good reason.

***

We suspect that by signing up to the Daisy Must Go movement after so many other associations have paved the way indicates a certain disline at having to stand up and be counted – but overall we suspect that with less than ten days before the local elections the move may be too late to save many Tory councillors from losing their seats ... both here in Boston as well as the country as a whole.

***

Local MP Matt Warman told Boston Eye that he was not a signatory to the letter – but did not respond when asked if he endorsed the contents.


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 

Sunday 14 April 2019


Special election issue

We hope you found last week's election headlines helpful – now for the meat on the bones and some interesting snippets that we’ve come across. 

*** 
First, an explanation.
Last week we pointed out that 26 of the 74 candidates seeking election – almost half – are refusing to say where they live.
This is the first time that such an option has been possible after the introduction of the Local Elections (Principal Areas) (England and Wales) (Amendment) (England) Rules 2018, which removes the requirement for candidates to have their home address published on the ballot paper and statement of persons nominated at principal area elections.
It comes into force for all principal area elections held in England on or after 2nd May.

***

Where candidates choose to use this new right, the council area in which they live is published instead. The change follows the Committee for Standards in Public Life review of intimidation in public life and brings the law for these contests into line with that for Westminster elections where, due to concerns over personal safety the law was changed a few years back.

***

All well and good – and when we briefly joined a Twitter discussion on the issue, Councillor Paul Gleeson told us: “I've always had my contact details in the public domain and always will. However, I've had my car vandalised and until I had my phone line shielded would regularly receive threatening and abusive phone calls. So in a week when a plot to murder an MP was revealed I understand why.”

***

We can understand that as well – but there are aspects which still concern us.
Westminster MPs must surely run a far greater risk of attracting the unwanted attentions of the lunatic fringe than local councillors, and we suspect the incidence of problem voters is mostly confined to over-persistence rather than anything else.

***

Over the years, we have encountered a number of councillors who have sought to perform from the wings rather than the stage – giving Worst Street as their address and a mobile phone as their contact number.
This is the next worst thing to not bothering at all in our book – and it is noteworthy that over time, we have noticed that such cavalier councillors also tend to have poor attendance records.

***

So – to recap – there 74 candidates are contesting the 30 seats in the 15 wards up for grabs.
26 are Conservative, 22 Labour, 14 Independent, 4 UKIP, 4 Blue Revolution 3 ‘others’ and 1 Liberal Democrat.
Of the ‘others’ two have declared no political position, and so are presumably counted as independent, and one is from the Veterans and Peoples Party … “a new vibrant, radical, open and transparent political party, founded by UK Armed Forces and Emergency Services Veterans.
Of the 26 refusing to say where they live – all but one confine their information to “address in the Borough of Boston” whilst another owns to an address in South Holland.
Ten of these represent Labour, 9 Conservative, 1 UKIP, 1 Liberal Democrat, 1 Blue Revolution and three others. And one standing in distant Staniland Ward declares a South Holland address.
In one ward –  Swineshead and Holland Fen –  none of the three candidates say where they live.
And in Fenside six of the seven candidates are likewise coy – whilst the seventh lives in Wyberton.

***

So, on to the individual wards, and items of interest.
Going down the list alphabetically, we see that former Tory grandee and council leader Peter Bedford is standing as an Independent in Coastal Ward, which he has represented for more than a quarter of a century.
He quit the party after a change of leadership and previously stood as an Independent in the 2017 county council elections where – despite such dedicated political service – he lost out to … a Conservative.
This proves the point that we have made time and time again – service counts for nothing if a scarecrow in a blue suit is put up as a candidate in some wards despite the incumbent party policy of charging more for less and making cuts at every opportunity.
Councillor Felicity Ransome – who currently represents the seat for UKIP – is also seeking re-election.
There are four other candidates for the two seats; two Tories, one Labour and an Independent.

***

In Fenside Ward (two seats) we find one-time UKIP/BiG councillor turned Tory Anton Dani seeking re-election – and if successful, he will be the next Mayor.
A name on the list familiar to regular readers will be Tiggs (Patricia) Keywood-Wainwright – a UKIP Boston borough councillor between 2011-2015 and a Lincolnshire county councillor from 2013-2017 – and now standing as an Independent.
There are also two Labour candidates, one Lib-Dem and one Blue Revolution.

***

Fishtoft Ward (three seats) sees a bid to become a councillor once again by octogenarian Ossy Snell, who has been a parish councillor for more than 30 years, served on Boston Borough Council for 16 years and Lincolnshire County Council for four years. Although he is a member of the Lib-Dems, he is standing as an Independent.
The three Tory holders are seeking re-election and Labour if also fielding a candidate.

***

Five Villages Ward (two seats) has four candidates. Tory Leader Michael Cooper and his Deputy Aaron Spencer are seeking re-election. The other two candidates are Labour’s Ewa Thorley and Joseph Reid for the Veterans and People’s Party.
Councillor Cooper is one of three candidates who does not live in the borough, but in East Lindsey.

***

Kirton and Frampton Ward (three seats) will have entirely new faces after 2nd May.
Tourism and culture cabinet member Claire Rylott is not seeking re-election – and neither is her Tory sidekick Colin Brotherton, a former mayor who has represented the ward since 2011. The third councillor to stand aside is UKIP’s James Edwards.
Step up five contestants – Conservatives Nigel Welton and Shaun Blackman, Labour’s Mick Gall and Patrick Glennon and Independent Peter Watson. Councillor Welton is portfolio holder for the town centre, and is currently a Fenside councillor, where he was elected for Labour but defected to the Tories at the end of 2017. Doubtless he is hoping that his chosen ward will prove a safer Tory berth. He is another contender who doesn’t live in the borough.

***

To Old Leake and Wrangle (two seats) now. Both incumbents are seeking re-election. They are professional councillor Tom Ashton for the Conservatives, and Barrie Pierpoint standing as an Independent.
We call Councillor Ashton a pro, since, according the Boston and Skegness Conservatives website, he has been the East Lindsey District Councillor for Sibsey and Stickney since 2015.
He was elected to the Lincolnshire County Council Tattershall Castle ward in 2017, and along with these jobs is also chairman of the Boston and Skegness Conservative Association.
Oh, and he’s a parish councillor as well.
In fact in 2015, we noted that his enthusiasm to serve was so great that as well as standing in Sibsey and Stickney for a seat in East Lindsey,  he campaigned alongside former Boston Borough Council leader Peter Bedford in Worst Street’s Coastal Ward as well – losing to a UKIP candidate.
Councillor Pierpoint is at present leader of the Bostonian Independents Group but is unable to say so on the ballot form, as the party name was deregistered at the start of the year.  The same goes for several other candidates – despite a big plan by BiG and a casual partnership with the Blue Revolution party, which has four candidates for next month’s elections.
Also contesting Old Leake and Wrangle is another former Conservative councillor – Frank Pickett, who served between 2011-2015, and Labour’s Christopher Dorrington.

***

On now to Skirbeck (three seats.) Just one sitting tenant is seeking re-election – Labour veteran Paul Gleeson who has spent a doubtless uncomfortable time as an Independent for committee chairmanship reasons after becoming the sole proprietor of the Worst Street Labour group. On the defection of Nigel Welton (see above.)
Councillor Martin Griggs, the portfolio holder for housing, property and community
is standing down in Skirbeck but popping up seeking election in another ward (see Trinity further down the page) as is BiG’s Stephen Ball who may not be much missed having been absent from meetings for 80% of the time.
Skirbeck has the most candidates of any ward – three Tories, three Labour, two Independents and a Blue Revolution.
Two names from the past that you might recognise among them are Paul Kenny – another Labour veteran and parliamentary candidate for Boston who has contested general elections since 2005 – and Anne Dorrian.
Ms Dorrian was a political chameleon during her time in Worst Street starting out with the Boston Bypass Independents back in 2007, then forming the splinter Better Boston Group. More recently, she has stood as an independent at both the local and county elections.

***

Now to St Thomas’ Ward.
The incumbent of this single seat ward seeking re-election is another political veteran – Alison Austin, a founder member of the Boston Bypass Independents who morphed into a Boston District Independent to lose the dreaded B word before becoming simply Independent.
She is being challenged by another Independent, Darron Abbott, and Labour’s Maglione Mauro.
Mr Abbott will be well-known to readers of Boston Eye as a persistent critic of Boston Borough Council, and someone who as also had a few run-ins with Mrs Austin. Given the new issues of where candidates live, Mr Abbott says he can claim to be the only candidate who lives in the ward.

***

Staniland Ward (two seats) is being contested by one of the two incumbents. One-time BBI/Better Boston Group/Independent/UKIP/BiG councillor Brian Rush represents BiG at the ballot box but as with Councillor Pierpoint is listed as Independent due to party de-registration.
Tory Councillor Ben Evans, Vice-Chairman of BTAC, is not standing.
Other candidates are: Conservatives Deborah Evans and Martin Howard, with Ben Cook and Pam Kenny for Labour.

***

Station Ward (one seat) is being defended by UKIP incumbent Sue Ransome, who is up against Blue Revolution founder and former Tory councillor Mike Gilbert, with Paul Goodale for Labour and Gerry Roffey for the Tories.

***

Swineshead and Holland Fen (two seats) is another ward that will see all new members.
Veteran Tory Michael Brookes – overlooked when the joint deputy leadership at Worst Street merged into a single post – is standing down ... as is UKIP’s Elizabeth Ransome.
Councillor Brookes is a long serving politician and remains a county councillor – a role that he has held since 2009.
Two Tory candidates and one Labour are also contesting the seat.

***

Trinity Ward (two seats) has one incumbent – Tory Councillor Yvonne Stevens – seeking re-election. Her present Tory colleague Doctor Gordon Gregory is doing the decent thing after an appalling attendance record which at its worst – between April and October last year saw him attend just one out of 14 meetings – an absentee rate of 93%. His attendance to date since then marks him absent 86% of the time.
As we mentioned earlier, Conservative Martin Griggs – currently cabinet member for housing, property and community – is hoping to move from Skirbeck to this currently safe Tory ward. He is also county councillor for the Skirbeck division. Other contestants are Labour’s Andrew Finch
and William Lawrence and Independent Andrea Keal.

***

Things look interesting in West Ward (one seat.) The current incumbent last time we looked was a former mayor and one-time Tory cabinet member Stephen Woodliffe. But now Worst Street lists him as unaligned and he is seeking re-election as an Independent.
Some disharmony in the blue camp, perhaps?
Other candidates are: Labour’s Andy Cook, Gavin Lee for the Blue Revolution, and Conservative Paula Cooper – other half of leader Michael and another candidate with an address outside the borough she is seeking to represent. She is presently a county councillor for Boston West.

***

Witham Ward (two seats) has UKIP incumbent Viven Edge seeking re-election against two candidates each from the Tories and Labour and one Independent.

***

And finally, Wyberton Ward (two seats) sees both incumbents – Independent Richard Austin and Conservative David Brown seeking re-election.
Also standing is Independent Tracey Abbott – the other half of St Thomas Ward candidate Darron who is challenging Mr Austin's wife Alison, along with Labour’s Malcolm Limbert and UKIP veteran Don Ransome  who has still to taste success at local and county level even though his wife and daughters have all held office.
Having said that the good news for some of the contenders is that they have won uncontested places on Wyberton Parish Council ahead of the elections.
Mr Austin, Mrs Abbott, Don Ransome and his wife Sue were all elected unopposed along with a fifth member, Rachel Lauberts.

***

That’s it for this week.
Betwixt and between the names are some interesting stories which we hope will give you food for thought – and perhaps even inform your decision when you vote.
And please – do vote ... it's no use moaning about what your council is up to if you let others do the choosing. 

***

There’s no blog next week because it is Easter. We’ll be back on Monday 29th – just days away from a new Boston Borough Council.

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











Monday 8 April 2019

Nominations for next month's elections are in – and as you might expect there are a few surprises.
Cabinet member Claire Rylott    portfolio holder for Tourism, Arts, Culture and Heritage  is not seeking re-election, whilst her colleague for the town centre – Nigel Welton, is after a new, safer seat after defecting from Labour.
A number of other councillors are not seeking re-election, and quite a few more are trying to make a comeback after an absence of one or more four year terms.
They include Anne Dorrian - who was a pioneer member of the Boston Bypass Independents all those years ago, and octogenarian Ossy Snell.
A number of UKIP-pers are standing under that party banner, whilst there might we be some confusion for people looking for the right Independent candidate after the Bostonian Independents Group deregistered the party with the electoral commissioners and so cannot use the name on their nomination papers.
Whilst we already knew that several candidates live outside the borough or do not live in their wards, the precise number of candidates in exile will not be known as a large number have decided not to say where they live in the borough.
In total 74 candidates are contesting the 30 seats in the 15 wards up for grabs.
Of these, 26 are refusing to say where they live – all but one confine their information to “address in the Borough of Boston” whilst another owns to an address in South Holland.
In one ward   Swineshead and Holland Fen –  none of the three candidates say where they live.
Whatever the reason so many are being so coy – and no doubt they will likely claim it is to avoid abuse or annoyance – this is a new and unwanted move … and one which we think says much about these candidates in advance.
One final statistic – then we’ll have a more detailed anaalysis for you next week.
Of the 74 candidates, 26 are Conservative, 22 Labour, 14 Independent, 4 UKIP, 4 Blue Revolution and 3 others and 1 Liberal Democrat.

***

The end of last month saw something called Discover Lincolnshire Weekend – which was celebrated by Worst Street with its customary lack of imagination.
The usual suspects – and nothing special or out of the ordinary – were promoted on WorstWeb … which remains as bad as ever, and almost impossible to follow as easily as it used to be.
Whereas other places in the county offered free admission to sites that normally charged – Worst Street listed 'attractions' that normally were free to enter (even including Central Park) and which in many cases were only open on the Saturday.

***

This was an example of Boston Borough Council at its can’t be bothered worst – listing something for the sake of it apparently to be involved in a county-wide event, without taking the trouble to lift a finger.

***
And among the attractions, it listed one of our favourite bugbears – The Lanes!
To quote the Worst Street handout … “The lanes – the medieval feeder lanes leading to the Market Place. Explore these for unique and individual traders and places to eat and drink some of Lincolnshire’s finest fare.”
What a load of bollocks.
Take Dolphin Lane  pictured below just six months ago on Google street view


There are at least four empty shops – one of which is the disgracefully neglected former Milletts which runs down the lane for at least 40 feet opposite the wall of a pub for another similar distance.
There there's a barber’s shop, a perfume shop, a dry cleaner, a letting agency, a butcher’s shop, a couple of coffee shops, a vaping shop, optician, brow bar, opticians and a florist which also sells fruit and veg.
And what about Emery Lane?
A vast slab of Cash Generator occupies much of the start of the lane from the Market Place, then there’s a pet shop, a card and soft toy shop, a European supermarket, nail bar, jewellers, a tattoo parlour, phone shop, and cafe and a couple of cheap clothes shops.
“Unique and individual traders and places to eat and drink some of Lincolnshire’s finest fare” they are most definitely not – yet amazingly at one time a senior officer in Worst Street likened them to the Shambles in York.


As we said at the time – our lanes are a shambles, but that’s where the resemblance ends.
Luckily for Worst Street, the Trades Descriptions Act doesn’t apply to such desperate and phoney attempts to con visitors, or the council would have been in court time and time again.

***

Among the issues we’ve been discussing in recent weeks has been the important one of councillor quality – or the lack of it.
This has prompted an e-mail from our occasional contributor Scanner – whose words of wisdom are well worth noting ...

May will soon be here and, once more, Boston’s residents will be asked to choose our ‘leaders’ for the next four years.
I am a member of a political party, but, over many years it has been regrettable that party politics, self-interest and personal animosity have cast their shadows over the administration in West Street.
The cabinet system, hailed by Labour as democratic and more efficient, has led to a small group making all the decisions knowing that their majority will carry them without any problems.
The councillors’ system of remuneration was altered at the same time. Councillors used to be paid for the number of meetings they attended. This was replaced by a yearly payment ‘decided’ by a so called ‘independent panel.’ In effect, this means that councillors can do as much or as little as they wish without loss of pay. This has led to poorly attended meetings and therefore, I’m sure, some of them not bothering to turn up as the decisions have already been made.
I hope that any new councillors will put the district’s well being and its future before party politics.
I had the pleasure of knowing the former Councillor Mrs. Margaret
Howarth. I didn’t always agree with her but she would have been my ideal
representative on the council.
Mrs. Howarth was Boston from head to toe and became known for standing up for the district at county, regional and national level. She never took no for an answer. Even after she retired as a councillor, she kept her eye on West Street, almost up to the time of her death. I wouldn’t mind betting that Chief Executives had misgivings when they saw her name in their appointments diary. I have a hope that any new councillors will share her passion for the area, forget party politics and have the motivation and courage (yes courage) to work towards solutions to the challenges we have.
I will be judging any prospective candidate myself for these qualities. That’s if any of them manage to reach my doorstep in person. I must be getting old and cynical.

***

A couple of weeks ago, we mentioned a farce at a recent meeting of BTAC-ky in which an officer’s report became a frantic photocopying exercise due to lack of foresight when anticipated electronic assistance failed to materialise.
Although complaints to Worst Street are inevitably whitewashed, one was made, nonetheless – receiving a response that included the lines: “The officer was not ill prepared for the meeting, the necessary equipment was not available. He was able to print hard copies of the presentation and hand them round at the meeting so the presentation went ahead as planned – just on paper instead of on the screen.”
BTAC-ky meetings begin at 6-30pm, whilst we imagine that an officer's day ends about an hour earlier – which gives ample time to check the availability and functionality of any necessary equipment.
So really, there was no excuse.

***

Which of course does nothing to diminish the downward loyalty which the complaint generated – something that it worrying in itself as it reflects an attitude  from higher up that we could do without.

***

Which brings us on to job descriptions
The response to the complaint was signed by Worst Street’s £60,000 a year Head of Place – a job that once upon a time was known more prosaically as Head of Town Centre, Leisure, Events and Culture … more of a mouthful, perhaps but a job we could all understand.
Head of Place is a meaningless job title.
But in Norway, a head of plaice is considered something of a delicacy.
Appropriately for Boston, plaice and flounder are closely related – so at least something makes sense here.

***

Another recent post with a questionable title was that of Growth Manager. Can you spot why we don’t like that?

***


We mentioned Worst Street’s new look website last week – and we’re sorry to say that it remains as opaque and as bad as ever.
Initially, we gave it the benefit of the doubt and concluded that much of what was wrong with it was down to teething troubles -– but it seems that it will need more than a rub with a drop of Bonjela to ease this painful sore.
One thing that we have noticed is that so much of what was formerly easy to find is now absent ... the news archive is a good example. Whereas Google posts a link to it, the WorstWeb cannot find it. More records that are no longer available.
Once it was possible to browse the council website and learn a lot about about the it, which must surely have its benefits for the authority.
But we wonder if the aim of this new site is to conceal information rather than to share it.
If it is it would be entirely in line with the apparent policy of reducing the data made available to councillors and taxpayers.
Some years ago, a Conservative election candidate told of a unanimous shout of agreement when a demand was made to seize power back from the hands of officers to councillors if the Tories gained a majority.
Whilst the latter occurred the former did not.
The problem now is that senior officers consider themselves the conductors of the Boston Borough Council Brassy Band rather than the instruments, and this attitude needs to be reined back.

***

Which brings us back the matter of the arbitrary decision to cancel the recording of council meetings – and the waste of £25,000-plus spent on state of the art recording equipment bought little more than a year ago.
Labour councillor Paul Gleeson tells us: “As I understand it the recording of council meetings was stopped because of the amount of staff time dealing with enquiries, providing extracts of recordings etc. If of course the recordings were made available online, as many councils do, that would not be an issue. If, after the elections, my group is in a position to re-introduce recordings we will do so.”

***

That, of course, is if the work-shy officers decide to go along with any such decision.

***

Having said that we note some progress being made – although nothing has officially been announced by Worst Street.

***

MP Matt Warman told us on his Facebook page how pleased he was that the government has given £145,000 to Boston Borough Council to support rough sleepers in the area ‘into safe and stable accommodation where they can rebuild their lives.’
He said that the money will be used to help rough sleepers into accommodation, increase existing accommodation and providing new temporary accommodation, including night shelters and hostel spaces.
As far as we can discover, Worst Street has had nothing to say about this so far.
But expect to see an advertisement for a two year £25k pa homelessness officer post any time now.

***

The second disclosure was by Clive Gibbon – the Economic Development Manager at Boston Borough Council, who told us: “Our Future High Streets bid has now just been submitted. A massive thank you to all stakeholders who attended the consultation workshops, especially those students from our schools and ⁦‪at Boston College – your fantastic ideas and conversations helped bring this about.”
The fund comprises a government kitty of £675 million and a place like Boston needs help badly.
That’s why we hope that more information will be made available soon and also to hear that more input has been received than that of a group of students – helpful though it may have been.

***

It’s a couple of years since we published the picture on the left of one of our Welcome to Boston signs in poor condition on the A16 approach to Boston from the south.
Needless to say nothing has been done to improve it.
But now we’ve seen worse.
The appalling mess below is on the Sleaford Road heading east towards Boston from Downtown.
We don’t know whose job it is to look after these signs – but as they are at the moment they say a lot about the powers that be and their attitude to Boston.



***

Our Smile of the Week award goes to Lincolnshire County Council and the long-awaited clean-up of St Botolph’s footbridge … something that we pointed out was needed a long time ago.
Ahead of closing the bridge, a spokesman at Clownty Hall told us: “This is a difficult bridge to clean, so we have to bring in specialist equipment to get the job done.”


Specialist equipment?
How far can our council be behind the times when it uses that description for men dangling from ropes with buckets?



 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