Sometimes it seems as if the weeks and months all merge into each other, and everyday brings the same repeated events as those from yesterday. Every week in the local rag - the same names, the same offences; the same drug possession, drunk driving, thieving and vicious assaults. Soon all of this will change.

Dense areas of population are considered to be the breeding grounds for crime, and Boston is increasingly becoming a more populous area. Government figures show the borough's current population to be over 58,0000 with roughly half of these living in Boston town itself. Government and local authority figures fail to show the scale of the current migrant worker population, however The Boston Community Safety Partnership - Crime Audit of 2004 suggests; "The sudden population influx has resulted in some community tensions which have spilled over into violence, damage and disorder."

So, it was comforting when Boston Borough Council's Head of Community Development, Bev Smith announced "Reducing anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime is one of the top five priorities for the Boston Community Safety Partnership".

This week we have cause to wonder what these "top five priorities" are when the council has shown its commitment to our safety by cutting down the number of eyes watching us through CCTV by half. The Council have held secret meetings, free from the public gaze to approve an 'improvement' policy where only one CCTV operator will be watching the entire town's 70 cameras. When this person has a break, has a piss or nods off, then no one will be watching out for criminal behaviour. Councillor Sandra Bakewell is either misinformed or spilling blatant lies when she says "CCTV will continue to be monitored 24 hours a day seven days a week". Clearly her statement is false since one person cannot work without taking breaks. So unless the council plans to break health and safety laws, CCTV will not be monitored 24 hours a day.

In a survey as part of the Councils Community Safety Strategy, one of the things people in Boston are most concerned about is 'levels of crime', and that 'better community safety' would improve quality of life. This is reflected in the "Priority 1" of the Community Safety Strategy as "A Safe Boston". 'Priority 2' is shown as aiming for "A Healthy Boston".

Apparently, documents leaked to The Target show plans for £166,690 worth of cut backs from the Community Safety budget. In an unlinked article in the same issue, Boston Council has set aside £172,500 additional funding to be given to the 'white elephant' that is the Princess Royal Sports Arena.

So it is unusual to see how the council is giving £172,500 to its secondary priority, yet is cutting £166,690 of funding from its supposed primary "Safe Boston" priority! Clearly they are confused about the order of their own priorities. Surely the safety of citizens must come before unused and tax-draining leisure facilities?

Since Boston was rated the Fattest Town in England, the council has certainly failed in its 'priority 2' for "A Healthy Boston". Maybe now it is attempting to spectacularly fail in its first priority of "A Safe Boston". Cutting the amount of people operating CCTV cameras is comparable to cutting the numbers of Police officers; neither will result in improvements to community safety and can only be putting our safety at risk.

Unless the council are guilty of gross incompetence, then it appears they are purposefully wishing to fail the people they are supposed to serve. Why does their passion for cuts not extend to our council tax bills and their own expenses? Why is it that they put so much effort into keeping us fat, poor and dumb victims? In November I wrote about the Council's attempts to Kill Off CCTV, but maybe it is not CCTV staff but US that are the intended victims.