Boston Borough Council overhauls committees to save cash but members warn it will lead to ‘diminished’ scrutiny

Boston Borough Council is set to overhaul its oversight arrangements by replacing two existing committees with a single, larger standalone body—a decision opposition members warn will lead to “diminished” scrutiny.

At its annual general meeting on Monday (May 19), councillors voted to establish one committee in place of the two existing overview and scrutiny committees: the corporate and community committee and the environment and performance committee.

A report to councillors stated that reducing the number of committees from two to one would save £7,500 a year by cutting the allowances paid to committee chairmen and vice-chairmen under the Members’ Allowance Scheme.

The new committee will be made up of 15 members, compared with the previous total of 11, and could meet more regularly. A review is set to take place in six months.

Presenting the report, Councillor Paul Gleeson (Independent) said: “When I was re-elected back onto the council I was surprised that we were still following the same arrangements we were in 2011.”

The two overview and scrutiny committees were updated in 2011 following a review by the audit commission, which led to them being realigned with cabinet portfolios. The committees remain linked to the council’s old corporate policy areas:

Corporate and Community: People; Public Services

Environment and Performance: Prosperity; Place

Coun Gleeson also argued there had been duplication of work between the two committees. “I think we owe it to the people of Boston to ensure that we have the most robust remnants of local government in the town,” he added.

However, opposition leader Claire Rylott (Conservative), who has chaired the Environment and Performance Committee for the past two years, questioned the timing of the change, pointing to plans for a new unitary authority expected by 2028 under Local Government Reorganisation.

She told members: “Myself and Councillor Gleeson had a conversation on February 10. Cllr Gleeson was keen to merge the two committees. My comment at the time was: why change the format now, when within two to three years we will become a unitary and it will all change then?”

She continued: “The report mentions consolidating to one committee would lead to cost savings—this is not about saving £7,500, this is all political. The council back in January awarded massive allowance increases, way above what the IRP recommended. The leader had a 49% increase, and now we have an extra portfolio holder costing £10,000. Clearly, the Cabinet are struggling with their workload.”

Fellow Conservative councillor James Cantwell echoed her comments, adding: “This will result in diminished scrutiny at the council, and I think it really should be rejected tonight by all councillors across the chamber.”

Coun Rylott has since written to Democratic Services, stating the Conservative group will boycott the new scrutiny arrangements for the next six months.

She told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: “We have been promised a review after the first six months. If the scrutiny arrangement changes to a committee that will hold this council to account, we will then reconsider our engagement with the new scrutiny committee.”