WSRA Trustee Election Hustings

Spookily, this is quite like the original intentions of the promoters of re-opening the line in the early 1970's. The WSR plc was established to run the 'daily commuter service to Taunton' and the West Somerset Steam Railway Trust was to run the 'summer tourist steam service' as an element of 'cream on top', probably for a week around Easter and the peak summer holiday six weeks or so.....

To be fair, the 'daily commuter service' got ever-so close. There was a draft agreement in place with British Rail (remember them?) for running over their line from Norton Fitzwarren to Taunton, and work was proceeding apace to re-open the line back from Minehead. And then the NUR got involved on the not-unreasonable grounds of unhappiness about the Somerset County Council buying the line and leasing it to a bunch of enthusiasts rather than being willing to pay a subsidy to keep 'proper railwaymen' in a job. There was also the little matter of the possible competition with the Minehead to Taunton bus service, the drivers being NUR members as a hang over from the buses being ex-railway. An edict came down from the union Kremlin that Silk Mills level crossing would not be operated for WSR trains, and before that could be sorted out the initial enthusiasm (and solvency of the operating company) were lost.

How different things are now......or are they?

kind regards

Robin White

 

I think I number of heritage railways didn't set out to be steam railways, just carrying on a commuter service, but had to use whatever was at hand, ie steam engines, enthusiasts come along instead of commuters (as otherwise the line wouldn't have shut) and things go on from there. Wonder how many railways had this site story...

 

I would have thought that the best way for everyone would be to invite the likes of FGW to run the service and the WSR to collect the access fees. The link to Taunton is restored and the top has the risk

Simples.

Rodders

 

As far a a TOC-run "commuter service" on the Minehead Branch is concerned, I believe that is already on the discussion table. When the commercial balance is favourable, it might just happen. This option gets my vote.

Steve

 

I have heard much the same as Rodders and Steve, of some sort of trial service ex network to/from Lydeard, which is a developing residential area.Taunton station itself is some distance from the towns main commercial , educational and shopping hubs which may effect popularity for local usage. Specials using steam, diesel,including HSTS are regular features,as are the regular ballast and occasional stone workings.

 

I cannot believe what has just landed on my doorstep The new voting forms have come through with a letter signed from the 3 retiring trustees canvassing for votes.

All other nominations were only allowed 150 words to put across there election address and now I find that the WSRA trustees already in post are at unfair advantage with this going out to supposedly 6000 members.

What the ell is going on? Robin & Steve E you and I disagree with your candidature but I would like to think you had a chance with this the scales are hevely stacked against you.
Action needs to be taken but I am unsure of what action that is.

Rodders

 

I can only echo what Rodders has said, this is the most blatant piece of gerrymandering.
If I was in any doubt before then this seals it for me. The Chairman should not have permitted this and must go.

 

Utter disbelief when I opened the envelope this morning! I thoroughly agree it is completely wrong and unfair. All candidates are on their own as far as canvassing is concerned. Or so I thought...

I will be writing to the WSRA in the next few minutes.

Steve

 

Mine has arrived as well.I agree with Rodder's comments. I have e mailed the Trust secretary asking for public guidance on the actions at the AGM by those nominated by members to act as proxies. I hope for an answer early next week.
Looks like playtime is over, back to the hustings.

 

From personal experience of something similar many years ago, the only way to counter this is for the other candidates to put aside their differences and jointly require that they are able to make similar representations to the same audience - sadly, yet another cost which I am sure the WSRA could do without.

Steven

 

I see on the WSRA website, typesetting is to blame for the rerun. Traditional typesetting vanished years ago, replaced by onscreen design by a printer or secretary, then to a few sheets on copier to be proofread by client or manager , only with their approval does it go into production either on a copier in the office, or screen to plate to press at a printers. Draw your conclusions where the blame resides..

 

There may be grounds for an injunction here if the WSRA refuses to immediately rectify this in the manner suggested by Bean Counter. Personally I think you all ought to get together (all those who are not current Trustees) and force a vote of no confidence in the whole board. I'd suggest that singling out the chairman is insufficient. They are all responsible and culpable.

 

Unfortunately, Robin is in the box at Minehead this weekend, and as it is Thomas weekend, will be rather busy !!I would think she will make a forthright contribution when her duty finishes.

 

I have written to the chairman to express my disquiet at the tactics being deployed by the existing trustees and asked him to consider his position as a consequence.

 

To a neutral, this does increasingly feel like moving from the realms of "cock up" towards "conspiracy". If nothing else it goes once again to show the necessity of having carefully drafted rules, so that everyone understands how the election will be conducted, how to stand, what is acceptable in electioneering terms (particularly when carried out using Association resources, as in this case) and how to vote.

Of course, one would have assumed that the incumbent trustees would have sufficient faith in their own legacy that electors would readily perceive their suitability for re-election ...

Tom

 

The second run/letter return address is in Kingwinton, only a few miles from the editor/chair's address. I might wish to think he wrote the letter on behalf of the trustees, but others may think differently.

 

As I have explained I have the proxy of a friend and I will not be voting for these 3.
As a Lawyer Robin you must be able to see do something against the blatant disregard for fair play as seen by the man on the Clapham omnibus.

 

I have had a very pleasant (and busy !) day at Minehead box today. I have been thinking about this for much of the day today and have a significant contribution to make, which I will post later for wide distribution.

However , I am winding down and having something to eat. It is likely that I will post my response rather later this evening.

Kind regards

Robin White

 

This will be a rather long post, and I make no apology for that.

WSRA AGM Strategy

I have, over the past 10 days or so, been contemplating how to approach the forthcoming AGM. I am appalled by the approach of the Trustees with their Canute-like inability to react to the changed situation with the County Council, and their gerrymandering of the Trustee election process, firstly by the co-option of Chris Walters, and now by affording their own preferred candidates an ‘extra bite of the cherry’ with a further election statement. Their actions in excluding, or attempting to exclude, a number of persons from WSRA membership is, similarly not in accordance with the traditions of an inclusive organisation. Their ‘Stalinist’ approach to dissent has put them beyond the Pale, in my eyes. Our Railway is bleeding, and this must stop.
I have discussed the following strategy with a number of the other candidates and WSRA members. I am not aware of any better suggestion as to strategy, so I seek general support for what I set out below.

There is a desperate need now for rapid and significant change. This will not be achieved by merely electing four new Trustees, even of the most radical stamp. There have been suggestions of legal action against the Trustees, and renewed calls for an EGM to be called. Whilst the Trustee’s recent actions are unconscionable, unfair and unethical (and a number of other ‘un-‘s I could think of), I am doubtful whether they are in fact illegal. Litigation, especially litigation before an AGM and election on 19 July would be expensive and uncertain. An EGM will take time to call. We need, therefore, to make the best use of the forthcoming AGM.

By the provisions of the Companies’ Acts, it is not possible now to include any further effective motions in the AGM agenda. We, therefore need to work with the agenda as it is.

The meeting must not be allowed to dissolve into chaos. That will not achieve anything. However deeply feelings run, there must be restraint to avoid chaos. The real opportunity in the meeting is the vote to receive (or reject) the Chairman’s report. This can, effectively, be defined as a motion of confidence or otherwise in the actions of the Chairman and the Trustees. But, as I have said, we need to get there without chaos.

The first five items on the agenda are:

1. Chairman’s welcome
2. Apologies for absence and note of confirmed proxies
3. Minutes of the 2013 AGM
4. WSRA Chairman’s Report
5. Election of Directors

I would ask that folks restrain themselves during items 1 and 2.

I was unable to attend the 2013 AGM for personal reasons but I understand that there is a strong body of opinion that the published minutes are a ‘whitewash’ that do not reflect the meeting adequately. If that is so, no amount of amendment will correct them. Not much will be achieved by fighting over detail in them. I respectfully suggest that someone rapidly propose that they be rejected in their entirety.

We then come to Chairman’s report. Once again, I would ask for restraint during David Williams’ remarks which some will no doubt have strong reactions to. Receipt of the report will then be proposed and seconded. I then propose to speak urging members to reject the report, and to do so as an effective ‘motion of no confidence’. As a barrister, I am a professional speaker, used to addressing more senior tribunals than the Trustees of the WSRA. I am also a past WSRA Chairman, supported the WSRA freehold bid (but not the continuation of it now) and have never been a member or supporter of (what many regard as) the rival ‘FoWSR’ organisation. I believe that I am therefore uniquely placed to open the debate on the Chairman’s report in a way most likely to give a chance of a positive result. Others can, of course, follow with their remarks but it is important to open the debate in the right way.

I ask WSRA members, and other candidates, to place their trust in me to do this, and to do it right. I will need their help and restraint to allow me to speak first to open the debate, and to insist that I be heard, should there be any attempt from the Trustees to stifle the debate. I appreciate that I might not either be everyone’s favourite person, nor choice for Trustee, but I ask for your trust and support in doing this for our Association.

Should the vote on the Chairman’s report be lost by the Trustees by an overwhelming majority, I would then propose that the meeting be adjourned for 10 minutes for the existing Trustees to consider their positions. One might hope that the Chairman, and those who have most closely associated themselves with the position adopted publicly, would not feel able to continue.

We then come to the election.

Given the gerrymandering, I will be calling on the Trustees offering themselves for re-election, and Chris Walters, the co-optee, to stand down. Whatever has happened during or after the debate on the Chairman’s Report, the election cannot be altered to be anything other than an election of 4 Trustees. If there have been resignations by then, I respectfully suggest that the elected committee co-opt the next best supported but unelected candidates who are still willing to serve to fill any vacancies.

I do not promise that the above approach WILL produce the change that is needed. I do believe that it stands the BEST chance of doing so.
We cannot have another year of strife. If we do not get change on 19 July, I will be working with others to call an early EGM.

Please feel free to copy this post to anyone with an interest in the meeting. I have set out this strategy openly, in the sure knowledge that the existing WSRA Trustees will be reading it very shortly, because this thing needs to be done openly and done right. Any attempt by the present Trustees to interfere with legitimate discussion at the meeting will be all the more obvious because they will have seen this document.

It would be helpful to have some expressions of support.

Robin White

6 July 2014.