West Somerset Railway - Removal of the PLC Chairman and related matters

I don’t know if Jonathan Jones-Pratt has all or any of those attributes. But I do know he is not short of a bob or two....

 

That is how I remember it also , pleased as it means my memory isn't so foggy then .

 

Who is lochness8???
So much insight
So many questions
Jeff Price

 

Except Jonathan Jones-Pratt owns 7027 Thornbury Castle 7017 was G J Churchward

Patience everyone I am sure that your questions will be answered shortly!

 

Well what a fascinating post

We have dire consequences for everyone - the last time something like this was brought forward, WSRA 4160 shares were sold at mates rates

We have I doubt whether any further interference in the running of the plc will be tolerated What is this about???

Then particularly the WSRA if they are foolish enough do anything. A threat to the WSRA, the WSR major support organisation that can bring so much to the WSR party.

SO either we are looking at some insider information or the ramblings of a uninformed WSR fundamentalist

Richard, do let us all know

Jeff

 

Don't know what makes it so fascinating Jeff!!

It is only an opinion it is not life threatening but here is my response for what it is worth

"We have dire consequences for everyone - the last time something like this was brought forward, WSRA 4160 shares were sold at mates rates!" So pray tell us in what way the sale of those shares has anything to do with the plc please? Surely this is an internal matter for the WSRA and those of us who are members - for the present at least!

"We have I doubt whether any further interference in the running of the plc will be tolerated What is this about???" I take it you do not regard an instruction from the WSRA to the plc to dispense with the services of two of their Directors as Interference then? Sorry but I do Jeff!

"Then particularly the WSRA if they are foolish enough do anything. A threat to the WSRA, the WSR major support organisation that can bring so much to the WSR party." I believe that the WSRA as a 'Major Support Organisation' should behave as such don't you Jeff?

Remember Jeff my association with the WSR goes back to early 1970's and involved cutting back the brambles on Blue Anchor station on my own, re glazing Williton Signalbox @ 5.30 am and then moving onto Minehead Station, sleeping rough in Barry Scrapyard for many weekends to secure the Prairie tanks and in Carriage Scrapyards, sleeping on the floor for a week in the Goods Office at Pwllheli to secure the turntable and water tower you enjoy today.

I believe I am fully entitled to express my opinions today although I have not unlike yourself volunteered for years. Ever since my first day of involvement I have experienced this political nonsense it has NEVER been any different and now it must CHANGE or we will destroy the very thing we most cherish - I believe it is as serious as that!​

 

Just to lighten the mood, the two Russian "tourists" have given another interview...…

"Our friends are now telling us about the beautiful British railways. Next February, we are visiting the West Somerset Railway. We have already booked our hotel in Cambridge. We intend to visit the famous Doniford station for 10 minutes however if it is cloudy, we may have to return the following day to see the beautiful curving platform and the famous bench. The platform is 42.3 meters long. We will then catch our flight back to Moscow that evening."

 

Your last paragraph is key. However, this current spat started with politicking by individuals, leading to a political response by an organisation.

ALL actively involved in that spat need to look closely at their consciences, and ask whether their behaviour has helped limit the politicking that has been endemic to the WSR these last 40+ years, or embed it further. They should do so from the perspective of the Minehead branch, and what has been achieved with it these 49+ years, not any one of the organisations - all of which are servants, not owners.

Signed,

A voyeur


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I assumed the ‘private company’ referred to was the company which owns Thornbury Castle.

 

He's not really started on the restoration of 7027 yet. However much money he may or may not have, that's sure to leave a bit of a hole....

 

Yes I read that he will start on 7027 when Kinlet Hall is finished

It costs a lot of money to do a ten year you know and there are few people or organizations that can fund two at once!

 

The WSR as a whole probably needs to be completing one complete loco renewal every 12 - 15 months to operate the service it aims to run (based an operational need for about 8 nominally serviceable locos, to allow for washouts, minor repairs etc). Add to which renewal of perhaps 1/2 mile per year of p/way (based on a 40 year lifespan over a 20 mile line) and a complete ground up overhaul of one carriage per year (based on needing to keep about 30 carriages operational, each needing complete rebuild roughly every thirty years).

That's probably close to £1m per year in renewal expenditure just to keep the railway running. Which is hard to see being financed completely from revenue, nor from share sales - hence the need to have a fully engaged, and motivated, membership body to support the railway.

Tom

 

You are so right, Tom - but the WSRplc supporters seems to see the WSRA role as being handing over large sums of cash and asking no questions. While nothing I have seen suggests that the WSRA 'instructed' WSRplc to remove 2 Directors (I seem to recall the resolution authorised members of the WSRA Board to seek their removal, which is not an instruction to the WSRplc to do anything but surely a request), as I believe the largest single shareholder, you may expect the WSRA to wish to have some say in how the WSRplc is governed. If it is a major funder, likewise, some 'say' might be expected (not to mention, Charity Law wise, requireed!).

I was glancing at the latest Steam Railway yesterday, which had a large piece on the present problems. Whilst it appeared to contain an error - stating that the 2 Directors had been removed from both WSRA and WSRplc Boards - there is a lengthy section of quotes from 'an informed source' which I think may add a little to what has been said here - basically, that there had been a 'falling out' between another Director and the Chairman, and that reluctance to take the sort of difficult decisions that Ian had referred to in his Chairman's address to the AGM were factors in his removal. Oddly, I seem to recall both as being denied by 'sources close' to some who have clearly been 'movers and shakers' in these events, so we appear to have two conflicting versions, although from all that has been said, it may be possible to decide which 'feels' more accurate!.

In a way, what has happened has happened but, if a reluctance to take difficult decisions to salvage the financial situation is indeed even just one of the root causes of this, then probably all who love the West Somerset Railway have cause for concern, and indeed, what - heaven forbid - might in the worse case happen if this alleged refusal to take necessary action continues could have wider ramifications for the whole preserved railway world.

Steven

 

Steven I am going to respond to the first paragraph only - my opinion on the degree to which the WSRA should influence the way in which the plc should be run have already been expressed but I do feel the WSRA could by acquiring owning and maintaining Railway artefacts which are used by the plc could still correctly maintain its Charitable Status and significantly contribute to the all important costs of the plc.

 

Don't we come back, though, to the fact that the WSRA a registered charity, cannot simply hand over cash to the PLC, or invest in projects over whch it has no control. This structure is the wrong way round, the PLC should be the trading arm of a controlling Trust and covenant its surplus to that Trust. I assume that the current PLC is a registered "not for profit" body, but is that enough? A radical restructure seems to be needed, to create a primary charitable body with supporting groups able to freely do just that, or be folded into it.

 

As an (interested) outsider my interpretation of a confusing situation is that :

1. FC resigned from the WSR Plc Board
2. A director of the WSR Plc Board - and also a director of WSRA Board - sought to have FC co-opted onto the WSR Plc Board as a representative of the WSRA Board
3. IC checked this with the WSRA Board who denied any connection with this move and subsequently dismissed both individuals from the WSRA Board on the grounds of "unacceptable behaviour"
4. IC was asked by members of the WSR Plc Board to remonstrate with the WSRA Board to reverse the dismissals; he refused on the grounds that the WSRA affairs were none of the WSR Plc's concern
5. IC was dismissed by WSR Plc Board embers who disagreed with his decision but felt that he had much to offer the WSR hence his retention as a Board member

As this is my understanding I am open to correction but, from what I have read on this thread and the statements reported in Steam Railways, my analysis seems to fit the facts so far released to the public domain. I hope, therefore, that it is both correct and makes it easier to discuss the salient points re the inter-action of both groups who each profess to have the WSR's best interests at heart.

 

Fred what is your source to suggest that Frank Courtney was co-opted onto the board of the plc as a Representative of the WSRA and not of his own volition at the suggestion of a fellow Director?

Is your source currently on the Board or NOT?

This is a very important detail and central to this argument!

Just as the Affairs of the WSRA are nothing to do with the plc it applies in reverse as well

 

Au contraire, the WSRA are the largest single shareholder of the plc.

I wonder if they have been told of the recent appointment of the latest director and future chairman ? Mr Loch Ness seems to be very well informed. Perhaps he would be so kind as to pick my lottery numbers ?

 

I keep my ears open. Only reporting what I hear in the Bishops Lydeard messroom. I know it’s gossip, but usually turns out to be true. And think this development is something people ought to be aware of.

 

That is pretty much where my understanding is after reading here and Steam Railway, with the only omissions being Steam Railway's reference to a once former but now again serving WSRplc Director having 'fallen out' with Ian earlier in the year, and, one can't but help feel crucially, the quite considerable and detailed reference in Steam Railway as to how the need to take action in respect of the financial situation, stressed by Ian in his Chairman's address to the AGM, and the reluctance of others on the WSRplc Board to do so ties in to all this. That is, I suggest, the key element of this sorry tale and the one that should concern West Somerset Railway supporters rather more than their prejudged position as to whether they support or condemn WSRplc or WSRA as a reflect reaction.

(I am not saying that the fact that clearly a number of West Somerset Railway supporters do instinctively view one or other of the 2 main members of the West Somerset Railway 'family' with considerable enmity is not a problem and a very serious one that could well block part of the solution to the West Somerset Railway's financial problems, but I would suggest what seems to be an unwillingness to address, perhaps even acknowledge, those problems amongst those currently holding sway on the WSRplc - an inescapable conclusion to all that has been said, not least the lack of any real visible action since Alan Nicholson's warnings now nearly a year ago - is the more pressing issue and maybe the core point at issue here).

Steven