West Somerset Railway General Discussion

And the odds of it going to housing?

 

Two very different views, from two very committed supporters of the Minehead branch. Two very different presentations of particular sets of events.

I rest my case that it is not enough to rely on people of good will working effectively together in harness, because if that good will isn't there, they won't work effectively. And an alphabet soup of different organisations, with different power bases and agendas will not create the climate that drives resolution of the tensions of the tensions that arise from the differences of agenda of those well motivated, conscientious people.

 

Quite right, Peter.

I wouldn't agree with the word 'glib' but you make valid points. I acknowledge change would involve some lengthy, careful and professional work but change is certainly not impossible. The justification, a plan and costings - yes, goodness, I agree all needed but it is not something to rush. I'll just say I know other competent people who share my thoughts are independently looking at those aspects, thankfully, as I have too little spare time, let alone expertise.

What we do need - as ever - is friendly debate and avoidance of unpleasant/harmful divisions. That's the way to make progress. Together. Each of us can dare to be a Daniel and I hope the rest of us can listen/respond politely to 'Daniel'.

Steve

 

The organisational structure is a red herring in my view. It doesn't matter how the groups are aligned. As long as we have decent honest individuals who leave their egos at home then almost anything can work well. For example, the basis of the relationship between the WSRA and the Plc has not fundamentally changed, we just have two people in the chairs who are good friends and suddenly everything falls into line. What we must guard against is allowing tin pot little dictators anywhere near the controls or allowing them to become so, should they sneak in under the radar. How we do that, I don't have an immediate answer but we must be forever on the alert.

 

The problem is that some armchair experts just can’t debate without losing their tempers. It is very easy to say that the WSR should adopt the Bluebell, or some other, organisational model without thinking of all the complex detail hence the word glib. If an different organisational structure can be shown to be financially viable and will produce really tangible benefits then I would support it. What I would never support is arbitrary change. For example the individual Friends groups running individual stations generally works well though there has been the notable failure at CH. Despite this the system has been repeatedly critcsised by those from outside without any credible reason. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it comes to mind. That is not to say it is perfect but generally works well. I make no apology for referring to Juvenal again. It is interesting that both FOCHS and WSRA had very domineering ex military personnel in senior positions who had not adapted to civilian life. That is not to say ex military should be excluded but care needs to be taken. The supervision of the station Friends groups is an area where the PLC needs to improve.

 

If so, it's perhaps time to get proactive. Might there be a section 106 (?) opportunity here to get funds or maybe something useful constructed by a developer?

 

Well, since it seems that tax-free money raised by the existing charity can't be provided to the PLC for track maintenance, apparently not!

Noel

 

If you were a member of the Association or looked at the Charity Commission website you would see that:
"OUR ASSOCIATION IS ESTABLISHED TO PROMOTE EDUCATION IN THE HERITAGE OF THE RAILWAY FROM TAUNTON TO MINEHEAD BY RESTORING, PRESERVING AND DISPLAYING RAILWAY LOCOMOTIVES, CARRIAGES, WAGONS AND OTHER ARTEFACTS (INCLUDING DOCUMENTS, DRAWINGS, PHOTOGRAPHS, RECORDINGS AND FILMS) OF HISTORICAL INTEREST AND THE BUILDINGS CONNECTED THEREWITH."

These were adopted by the members with the permission of the Commission at the end of September this year, after many years of assertion by former trustees that it was not possible to make such a change.

Paul

PS I shall post later to correct the many misunderstandings about the relationship between the Association and the plc, as well as what can and can't be done charitably, which have littered this thread recently. Vison and determination is required!

 

In fact two chances. Slim and none. S106 replaced by CIL. In any case this money is unlikely to improve infrastructure or provide community facilities such as playing areas.

 

I do not propose "arbitrary change", and would not wish anything done in haste; I do however believe strongly that there is an opportunity for the WSR to grasp.

 

This seems like as good a start as any to set the record straight. The Association is a significant minority shareholder - well over 5%, which is an important number in the Companies Act. The Steam Trust also has a significant shareholding.
The Association cannot buy shares in the Plc since they do not have a resale value, but that isn't the end of the matter. There has not for some considerable time been any joined up thinking between the Association and the Plc but this has changed. The Plc needs to determine a strategy for the railway which will enable it to improve and grow. The Association needs to determine a strategy which will enable it to support the Plc's strategy. It follows that those two strategies have to be developed together so that they work for both organisations. A first step will be for the two Boards to meet and hear from someone on another successful railway how they have achieved their goals. That will enable the directors/trustees to be enthused about the possibilities and to realise what can be done together. This is currently being arranged.
Next, we have to dispel this continuing idea that the Association cannot raise funds for the good of the whole railway. I am delighted to say that Richard Maw, the Plc's Head of Finance appointed earlier this year, has been the treasurer of a large national charity. He understands, as I do, that dealing with what charities can do is like dealing with lawyers. You never ask a lawyer, "Can we do this?' You may get the answer you don't want. Instead, you ask "How we can do this please?'
Richard and I had just such a conversation earlier this week, in the middle of a wider discussion on that very point. The Plc have to craft their requests in a way which will meet our charitable objectives. We can discuss how such a request might be framed, just as for example many grant-giving bodies offer advice on how to make your bid more likely to succeed. This will form a vital part of the strategies I have already mentioned. Both the Association and the Plc need to sign up to an agreed method of achieving what we know is our common goal, to ensure the continued operation of a heritage railway which attracts sufficient tourists to bring in meaningful income. We haven't written that down yet because we haven't had time but we shall get there.
So let's look at the Association obtaining more shares, which some subscribers to this thread have suggested. Perhaps it would be possible for an individual to buy shares in the Plc and then donate them immediately to the Association, which might attract Gift Aid? I don't know, but has anyone ever asked, and it that won't work, what will? What we need on the WSR is more vision and ambition. Fortunately there are now two Boards which are determined to achieve this.
This determination to work together is manifested in the fact that Alan Nicholson (Chair of the Plc) and I have this week signed a Memorandum of Understanding (and we both hope that Chris Austin, Chair of the Steam Trust, will sign as well) about our wish to work towards using the Norton Fitzwarren site, which is owned by the Association, for the benefit of the railway as a whole. That work will be in the context of a strategy for the whole railway. How Dunster and the PWay Yard (or any other stations or spaces on the railway) fit into that I have no idea, but one thing is certain, we shall succeed by having a vision, a plan to implement that vision, and then a whole hearted commitment from all who have the best interests of the West Somerset Railway at heart to put their backs into supporting it.

Paul
Chair of Trustees
WSRA

 

Very good news indeed Paul. I look forward to a progress report in due course.

 

Thanks Paul

Such a refreshing positive message, plenty of grounds for hope that after the rather messy and protracted WSRA wars that the desired One Railway with a common objective may be almost in sight but just over the horizon.

I understand that some may which to split hairs about the phrase One Railway but of course it is the common, achievable, affordable, sustainable objective that is really important.

Here's to a joined up future for the WSR

Jeff Price

 

Delighted to see this.

Especially the 'V' word - VISION.

'On a clear day you can see forever...'

Robin

 

Ex-WSR Platform Benches now at Robertsbridge.

David Felton of the Rother Valley Railway has kindly sent me some photos of the ex-Southern Railway, SE&CR pattern benches, which had holidayed on the WSR for 30 years at Stogumber and Blue Anchor. Earlier this year they were passed on to the RVR. Plainly loved and likely to have a long life in their new surroundings and now repainted in RVR / K&ESR colours of 'Victorian mid-purple brown and black.'

A great example of what making connections and co-operation, in this instance between heritage Railways, can achieve.

Long may that continue.

Robin

 

A vastly improved approach, Paul, which certainly improves the future of our railway. The key sentence for me is "in the context of a strategy for the whole railway". Brilliant. My thanks to those involved for this work.

Steve

 

You seem to be angry Paul!
Was there a need to launch into shouting (capitals) particularly as QB Steward answered my question yesterday for which I thanked him.

 

I imagine that was just a 'cut n paste' from the charity commission website. Not shouting!!

 

Thanks Ian. You are quite right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Dennis , does it necessarily need to become a scrap yard ? With the relocation of Dunster P W could it not be an opportunity to start afresh in a tidy way and hopefully maintain that ?
Paul . K.