West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Perhaps others will correct me but I'm beginning to think that many if not most of the arguments here are driven by divergent business philosophies.

On the one hand we have the cost controllers who believe in austerity and balanced budgets with a safe risk averse approach and who would often be summed up as "knowing the cost of everything and value of nothing" on the other we have those who wish to "speculate to accumulate" by trying new and imaginative things where almost by definition the income is impossible to predict so the kind of business case wanted by the cost controllers is impossible to produce.

Railways and other forms of public transport are often loss making undertakings which struggle with this sort of dilemma and many of us will be well aware of how British Rail's philosophy was to manage costs by reducing services until they were so sparse that nobody used them. Post Privatisation entirely different approaches have seen operators such as Chiltern putting tracks back, raising line speeds and vastly increasing usage and returns to invest in future improvements and expansion.

If instead of a succession of own goals, internal spats and disagreements the WSR adopted some of the Chiltern* philosophy maybe things might turn out very differently.

*I fully recognise that unlike Chiltern (M40 Trains) the WSR is not blessed by operating between major cities but how much passing leisure traffic might WSR (M5 trains) attract?

 

Not far from me there is a heritage railway organisation...

Its current Board has embarked on a course of action which is felt by many members and supporters to be contrary to, and potentially destructive of, the original 'ethos' of that railway. It did this apparently without any prior detailed consultation with, or agreement of, its members. Those who now speak out against the Board are labelled as 'nuisance makers' and people who "have never done anything to help the railway", yet their numbers include several former Chairmen and Trustees, existing members in key posts within the organisations, and many other well-known and much-respected 'senior members' of the heritage railway community with years of relevant management experience. One of their 'special interest' groups has been told to leave the site and many of the dissenting members have been threatened with termination of their membership, despite the effect that this will have on the ongoing activities of the railway.

Sound familiar? So, the WSR is not unique in this respect, it just seems to get embroiled in such things more often than others.

 

I tend to prefer a “Roundhead” and “Cavalier” distinction - it leaves more to the imagination and is less prescriptive! More seriously, I think you hit on something important, but struggle with the Chiltern comparison, on several levels. Firstly, I don’t believe there is serious disagreement about whether the focus should be on the Minehead branch, even if the section to Taunton is more contentious. Second, the Chiltern comparison also needs to be considered as a cautionary tale. The original, Adrian Shooter led, Chiltern franchise ran into financial trouble making those enhancements, and has been taken over by Arriva leading to a much more conservative financial approach for a not particularly financially healthy franchise.

What I like about the HPC funding was the prospect it opened up of new income streams to the railway, which could ease the reliance on the farebox, especially with the significant capital investment requirements now known to exist. And that’s where the Roundheads’ approach bemuses me, as it seems simultaneously to recognise the need for extra resources yet reject options that might provide them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

FWIW Michael has hit the nail firmly on the head.
I really don't care how people help but if there cannot be common goals and a common purpose at this most difficult time then God help us all.
My thought extends to the WSR, the wider preservation sector and the country at large.

 

I was in the court during that episode and while it is strictly true that the virtue of the case was not properly tested, the judge made it clear that he was taking the unusual step of not awarding costs. Read into that what you will, his message was crystal clear.

Where the real damage was done was that the 6+1 had clear instructions from their insurer over what they should and should not do to keep their financial cover. The 6+1 of course thought they knew best and carried on regardless, voiding their cover.

We appear to be in a similar situation where "management knows best" and everyone who does not agree is a troublemaker. My prediction for what it's worth is that history will repeat itself. The S&D have been forced into an unfortunate position which has nothing whatsoever to do with external comment. This will not end well. History will also record where the chain of events started.

 

I am well aware of the outcome of Whitehouse vs WSRA, specifically wrt the CC's required
consent. ( Personal experience in 2016 wrt WSRA Trustees, past and then current
suggested obtaining a CC ruling on any matter was at best a very protracted affair )

AFAIK the WSRA dispute with 4160 ltd is not about to go to court ( I hope it never does
and whether CC approval to proceed or not has been sought/given I know not. )

As I have stated often IMHO I think 4160 is the best ( ie appropriate to traffic
requirements and economical ) loco to have worked on the WSR and to see it
return for another ten years would be something to look forward to.

Based on the £30K already given, post the virus outbreak, survival to operate
the WSR in 2021 appears to be not just a dream.

Great, news. Michael Rowe.

 

Except how much of that £30k is going to be squandered on a totally pointless legal action (even if it doesn't end up in court) to turf the SDRT out of Washford instead of keeping the railway going? As @35B put it, he is currently deciding which railway appeals to support and has decided not to support the WSR because of what is happening. For the exact same reason, my money is going nowhere near Somerset. I take no pleasure in writing that as I did financially support the process of getting rid of the EX6+1 (which was a result entirely of the very effective online campaign run through this forum and the website) but cannot support the present management of the railway. Sad times for so many reasons but being totally unnecessarily compounded by the actions of the few at the top. Yes, they may have saved the railway from going into receivership last year (even though that was done with the 4110 debacle) but that does not give them carte blanche to do whatever they want without regards to the effect their actions have.

 

Absolutely, this a thousand times. And in anticipation of those who point out that the money donated will be spent on track renewal or whatever through protected funds, that really misses the point.

 

The insurers subsequently offered a sum in part payment of the WSRA costs. A sum very much
appreciated post the February EGM by a cash strapped oerganisation.

I believe in terms of "knowing best" the then WSRA legal team advised the 'other side' that
the judge would be unable to make a judgement due to lack of CC approval a week ahead of
the hearing date. The advise for whatever reason was apparently not considered.

Overall a legal action that assisted nobody. Moral is what we all know. Avoid the courts.

Michael Rowe

After posting I note Snifter asked "why did the ex6 + 1 not take this advise". Far from
wishing to excuse the ex6 + 1 of anything: it was the Whitehouse team who brought
the case ?

 

Sage advice. Try Googling "Jennens v Jennens" for what can happen when it's ignored.

 

In which case you have to ask why the 6+1 spent £20k, clearly not following their own advice. Management always knows best, eh ? I totally agree with avoiding the courts and a perfect way to ensure it does not happen is to not break contracts or waste funds issuing ill considered legal letters. Sadly, the Dear Leader thinks otherwise.

You do make an excellent point about 4160, where do you stand on 4110 and management knowing best ? The fundraising team were set a very challenging task and it must have come as quite a surprise when they rose to it.

 

Absolutely so, but in which case why - at this of all times - has the PLC chosen to take the action it has with the S&DRT, given that there is at least a reasonable likelihood that the eviction would be contested? Regardless of whether the previous (2017 era) board exceeded their authority in seemingly granting a 50 year lease, the trustees of the S&DRT - as recorded in their annual report to members, believe such a lease to be in place; therefore they are almost duty bound to contest the eviction notice, up to and including testing whether the lease is legally valid or not.

If the mantra is "avoid the courts", surely that matter should have been one of negotiation.

You can't have it both ways - you can't say that at this time the railway needs all the support that is possible, when the PLC is acting in such a seemingly aggressive way, and in a way that can't even be justified on financial grounds. In what way does forcing the issue with the S&DRT right now provide any much needed cash right now? Instead, it seems counter-productive: a management distraction at best; a massive disincentive for donation when urgently needed at worst.

Tom

 

So why then do you support the eviction of the S&DRT?

 

Tom, I have posted more than once that I think the Plc and the S&D should negotiate.
Inter alia post 23746. Indeed I said I would prefer the S&D to remain at Washford but
I trust that the S&D would enthusiastically embrace a Plc presence on the station.

I sometimes wonder why I post, since many appear to assume that I am a Plc stooge.
It is the WSR I care for.

Michael Rowe

 

If the newspaper report is to be believed, the crisis appeal has in reality only raised around £19K as £11K has come from station group funds - its money that was already in the "one railway" coffers. one has to wonder how much the ill-advised action against the S&DRMT has affected the level of donations. I also wonder why said station groups have also not been told to f**k off for being cuckoos in the nest by not donating said funds earlier to the rail replacement fund!

 

I dunno, some might be encouraging the SDRT to 'stand their ground'. But I do think there is near-universal regret that it has come to this.

Noel

 

Kind of you to say. I had some small involvement in that process and now am a Trustee of the WSRA, having stood to one side for a time as recommended by the Coombes Report.

Anyone who has followed the saga will know what I think of and how I am likely to act towards those who do not show others respect, or act for the good of our movement. It is, of course, not always easy to judge that remotely, or on limited facts, as occurred with the X-6.

The WSRA has a significant track record over the past couple of years of raising significant sums and ensuring they are spent for the long term good of the WSR. You can be assured that the WSRA Trustees will continue ensure that is so, as required by our charitable duties.

And, of course, if you are a U.K. taxpayer any donated sum has 25% added by HMG.

Anyone who is hesitant about donating is welcome to PM me (I am the Trustee with the lead fundraising role) or WSRA Chairman Mike Sherwood (‘aldfort’) who would be pleased to discuss with how your donation can be certain not to disappear into any black hole, and be certain to be used for the purpose you wish (consistent with our charitable objects).

The WSRA Trustees are very clear that no railway equals no charity, so we have that clearly in mind.

Finally, please support the heritage railway movement generally, and the WSR in particular, in any way you are comfortable with at this difficult time.

And keep watching WSR-TV. We should have a new video up in the late afternoon / early evening most days showcasing the WSR.

Robin

 

Glad to learn this. It is all too easy for outsiders to believe Plc supporters are required to be stooges.

 

I read two news items today concerning Heritage lines.
One was that the Severn Valley Railway has recently raised £120,000 t offset the closure period with lack of much income. Compare that with the WSR recent announcement, quoted in post 24295 by 60044, raised for the same reason and over the same period of time.
The other is that 4110, now that 5329 has returned after its major overhaul to South Devon, being at the ESR will, 4110 when completed, operate on the EAST Somerset Railway for three years. So it will be able to see and ride behind 4110, in Somerset, in the future - just in a different part.
Someone mentioned that none of their money would go to Somerset. The East Somerset is worth helping as far as I see.

 

From someone who spent his working life negotiating contracts (both purchase and supply) you need to have an element of trust with those you are negotiating with, even if you hate them as individuals. From what I have seen on here and in the press trust is sorely lacking.
Due to all this free time I am finally reading A Long Walk to Freedom. Even Mandela had an element of trust even if he despised those he was negotiating with.