S&D Railway Trust

Do I recall that JJP has the final say on who is appointed to the board ? The most powerful person on a board after the chairman is the secretary. A quick look at companies house is quite revealing.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01010188/officers

Looking at how the board is made up, two directors may hold an opposing view but they would be easily voted down. A former director was booted off the board and also de-rostered as a driver. It would appear to be another case of the Minehead Cuckoo throwing a chick out of the nest.

Pour encourager les autres n'est pas ?

 

Brian, it's the shareholders who have final say....
Ian

 

I feel for Steve Edge, he at the moment is trying to polish a turd so it would seem to a number of people.

But turd the WSR is not.

It is a great railway and has many positives, however, the current management do seem to have a knack of undermining the good work of those on the ground.

The railway (WSR) needs to be congratulated to have pulled itself back from the cliff edge, only for, one could suggest, it to have a better run up at the abyss.

I am not a WSR member but am of MN and a new one for SDRT.

Steve

 

Ian, in theory, you are correct, but with the thousands of small shareholders there are really only two that matter, namely the WSRA and the WSSRT.

Sent from my SM-T590 using Tapatalk

 

In which case, who voted to remove the former General Manager ?

 

Comment deleted .

Have got my facts wrong. Thanks

Nick

 

I would disagree. Many commentators have remarked on NatPres about the low number of visitors to Washford outside of special events etc. When the possibility of having to leave Washford first came to light circa-2010, there was a realisation among the more realistic S&DRT members that the S&DRT could not survive simply as an attraction in its own right, it needed to be somewhere where it could be a 'extra attraction' to a location which already attracted lots of tourists.

Consider for example the situation at MSN - it may be in the same local authority district as Bath, but (having lived in both places) I can assure you that from a tourist perspective it might just as well be on another planet - people simply do not go to the MSN area in large numbers. Fortunately the S&DRHT has reached the point that it can at least on occasions offer steam-hauled rides on a train which does actually go (almost) somewhere, but I think I would be right to say that - at the moment - demand does not outstrip capacity.

 

Assuming Facebook is not a significant plc shareholder what do you mean?

 

In the meantime, the real question is going unanswered in that why did the plc cause the money to be redirected from what had been agreed ? What is the explanation behind the comment "lessons have been learned " ? That is admission of a mistake being made.

 

A common response to posts critical of the WSR Plc board or it's chairman is to point out how well things are going "on the ground", as if the criticism were directed at the workforce. If the worst came to the worst, the WSR would not be the first company run into the ground by its management, despite a willing and capable workforce, by a very long way.

 

Alternatively, they may just be telling the truth.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing a Minehead Cuckoo in a large cage.
Robin L.

 

I believe they are. But, based on what has been said here, this is an example of where bare facts may obscure the underlying story.

I have no doubt whatsoever that the moneys have been spent on legitimate community engagement projects, and that these projects have been agreed with the donors. I have equally no doubt that those projects are not those that were not the projects in which the bid was based, and the beneficiaries are not those originally intended.

Taking the bare facts of why this has happened to be as related by [mention]Andy Norman [/mention] , and I notice the factual accuracy has not been challenged, I’ve drawn my own conclusions about the good faith shown by the plc over the last 18 months to its agreements, there and elsewhere. Others are of course free to draw their own conclusions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Posted in error

 

Sadly, it seems that people’s loyalty to the line has become a misplaced loyalty to the line’s senior managers.

It isn’t my line right or wrong.

There is also, an overweening sense of victimhood from some on the WSR. That if it weren’t for the traitors within such as the S&D, or the enemies outside such as nasty on National Preservation posters constantly sabotaging the WSR, then all would be glorious and rosy. It is always someone else’s fault.

Has the WSR actually put forward any concrete proposals for Washford? The petting zoo sounds like something someone came up with in the pub? Also, who would own it, run it and profit from it?

 

Just for balance and a little clarity the WSRA press release (already linked in this thread) was issued in response to this:

http://www.wsr.org.uk/ilg-mp-press-release-9-march-2020.pdf

The following may also help to illuminate the stated funding objectives which any successful applicant for a grant must meet and abide by.

https://www.hpcfunds.co.uk/

Others more qualified can comment on the accuracy of the MP's statement.

 

However, what kicked this whole process off was a complaint that the "educational trips for thousands of children from 18 schools along the line, enabling them to learn about the railway’s history and heritage" part of the scheme had not been delivered. The WSRA press release makes no mention of this aspect.

 

Doesn't "lessons have been learned " mean "OK, we got it wrong, now go away, stop bothering us and let us carry on exactly as before"?

 

I found the Wikipedia entry regarding the MP very interesting.

In particular, the efforts to have him deselected on the grounds of’divisive’ and ‘unsupportive’ behaviour.

Sound familiar?

 

He certainly seems a most unpleasant character, and not one I'd wish to have any association with. However, if he's the local MP and you have an issue you want to raise what choice to do you have?