West Somerset Railway General Discussion

It does seem that way...……..

 

Isn't the root cause related though, which is a lack of effective pan-railway governance?

I might also consider that a board of four people is far too small for an organisation of the operational, regulatory and financial complexity of a heritage railway. At the very least it puts a huge burden on the incumbents bearing in mind they are volunteer positions. More fundamentally, it potentially prevents the development of a diversity of ideas and therefore runs the risk that a strong executive presence can push initiatives through without adequate scrutiny or consideration of alternatives.

Tom

 

The current board seem to be doing a good job of poisoning the wells from which the much-needed donations are to be drawn if the line is to meet its track renewal targets. If the current company goes bust, it would be a good opportunity for a much needed reform of the governing structure of the railway. Whenever anyone suggests that the reason that the WSR seems to be unique in its ability to create internal antagonism is because of the way that it was set up, there are always those ready to pooh-pooh the idea, but never those who can come up with another convincing explanation. Instead, we usually get something along the lines of "everything would be rosy in West Somerset if only people would stop knocking the railway on Nat Pres".

 

Chris,

How many of those named in the report are still with the railway (Numbers not names)

 

Agreed. A debate on the current structure of the PLC with its three main shareholders and many hundred largely voiceless minor shareholders (100 10p shares !? ) is long overdue. In the meantime, however, it is worth noting that the GWSR (for example) has nine directors, with the portfolios of responsibilities well spread amongst them.

 

I do have some sympathy with those involved in the WSR who may disagree with the decisions the PLC is making, given how many people have been run out of the railway in recent months, it seems to me that speaking out comes with some risks.

I hesitate to describe it as a culture of fear but from the outside, it looks like a very clear message has been sent to individuals and groups, if you disagree, speak up or speak out, then we will kick you out. You can either be loyal or we will make you leave.

It is hard to work out if this is just very incompetent management, ie people who have watched too many episodes of The Apprentice, and think shouting is the way to run an organisation, or if there is some underlying objective to getting rid of people and groups. (Afterall, we are always being told there is a volunteer shortage, so getting rid of skilled volunteers would seem a bit arsey-versey).

Perhaps management assumes a few things - that some people love the line so much that they will tolerate anything as long as they can stay on the line, or that some people simply don’t care about these issues and are only interested in ‘look a steam train/daffodil’.

I can understand that the fragmented nature of the WSR means that some kind of reform is necessary, however, it looks more like a power grab.

 

Well, the current Chairman's company wasn't exactly a roaring success; not sure if there's any connection, but it's curious.

Noel

 

Perhaps that’s not entirely fair - we know JJP Holdings closed their bus company in Weston Super Mare after regulatory issues but I’m not aware of any bad news about their other, much larger, bus operations, or other businesses.

 

It may not be fair but its not exactly helpful either.

 

I see that the Gala Planning Team have announced that Deltic 55019 ‘Royal Highland Fusilier’ is visiting the Railway for the Diesel Gala (June 4th to 7th inclusive).

It proved to be a very popular visitor at the 2018 Diesel Gala.

 

Omg yes brilliant. A 50 would be nice

 

That’s why I pointed it out.

 

Ah, didn't realize there was another one; thanks for the update.

Noel

 

During the past year or so, a small number of this forum's posters have been consistently critical of the WSR's direction of travel. I think most of us, however, even if we had some misgivings, have given the WSR's leaders the benefit of the doubt, recognizing that they were undertaking a difficult job in difficult circumstances. That situation has now changed, with an avalanche of concerns arising from the Washford affair, and criticism no longer coming just from "the usual suspects". Controversy now looks as if it is widening to other issues beyond Washford and may spread beyond the ranks of us railway geeks into the wider community of West Somerset.

In spite of the thousands of comments, it is often difficult, for those of us at a distance without close personal connections, to work out the facts. A decade ago, the WSR seemed to be in very good shape, but feuds also seemed to start around 2010, with the X6 perhaps just the most prominent of a number of mutually antagonistic groups and individuals. Infighting must have drained the energy of key players during subsequent years, when the railway's finances appear to have been on a path of gradual decline. Nevertheless, it is only 2 or 3 years since the railway was discussing a major "Southern Gateway" development and was increasing its wage costs, presumably to pay for extra staff that had been recruited. So it came as a shock (at least to me) when the railway was suddenly declared as being near bankruptcy at the end of 2018.

Different sources have given varying accounts of what happened, but I don't recall seeing a convincing explanation of what triggered the transition from problem to crisis. In the world of politics, it is accepted practice for a new government to exaggerate financial and other problems that it has inherited (and which the outgoing regime will have sought to minimize). This approach has the advantage of establishing a lowered "opening baseline", from which any subsequent claimed improvements can be similarly exaggerated. I don't know whether anything like that has happened on the WSR, but such an approach would hardly be unique and might go some way to explain the differing perceptions from apparently well-informed sources.

If the WSR was just an ordinary heritage railway, sorting out its problems by discussion and compromise behind closed doors, then of course attention would be focussed on the coming gala.

 

In reply to 'bluetrain', the problem with the WSR is how it was originally set up, with a quite separate WSR PLC with no controlling shareholding by the WSRA, and the WSSRT having a further separate shareholding. The whole legal set up, with hindsight, is 'nuts'.

The Coombes report addressed an issue with the WSRA, not expecting or even predicting in the future, and now currently, that the WSR PLC board might ever do the sort of things it has done of late. I never saw it coming at the time, and I doubt anyone else did, but I should have done had I analysised the shareholdings of the WSR PLC at the time.

Currently, the WSR PLC board is pretty much able to do whatever it likes.

Perhaps a new Coombes Report is called for dealing specifically with the WSR PLC this time?

Cheers,

Julian

 

Whilst this plays to your current sentiments about the WSR Board's actions, Julian, I'm sure you know it is not actually true. Any heritage railway Board has to work within the constraints set out by the regulator (the ORR), it has to work within whatever financial parameters exist (i.e. it has to balance the books), it has to work within company law and all other relevant legislation, and - very significantly - it has to work with the over 1000 active volunteers that ensure the trains actually run in West Somerset. Those volunteers have a range of ways of making their views clear to company directors, and I have no doubt that some of the points that have been discussed over the last several pages of NP will come up with Directors in the various start of the season staff meetings.

As we all know heritage railways prompt passionately held views. But just because you are passionate about something doesn't necessarily mean you are right. Or that what you would like to happen is actually realistic and sustainable.

Frank

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but other railways such as the SVR* and the GWSR grew up with a similar structure and seem to function perfectly well.

*At least in the present day, see next post

 

That rather brings to mind the SVR under Nabarro, an example of a board led by a dominant chairman. I sincerely hope history doesn't repeat itself in this case.

 

What exactly happened?

 

https://www.svrwiki.com/Sir_Gerald_Nabarro

Planned to sell Bridgnorth station site off for housing and hotel.