West Somerset Railway General Discussion

That cuts both ways. Maybe you ought write to the PLC board telling them that and see how far you get.

You are either naive or an enabler, if you think that 'pulling together' and holding your nose and giving to the PLC is going to induce a Pauline conversion of the board.

It is cause and effect. The cause is the behaviour of the PLC, the effect is that people do not trust them to do the right thing to ensure the line survives.

The PLC created this situation. It is up to them to do what is necessary to change it.

 

Whilst I can appreciate the reason for that condition, I feel that might be a 'step too far'. After all, in years to come the situation might change and become one where it is the S&DRT that becomes clearly at fault for some reason that is clearly to the detriment of the well-being of the WSR (OK, probably unlikely, but who knows?), in which case no doubt there would be a rash of commentators on NatPres complaining about the 'stupidity' of the Plc having entered into such an agreement

What would be needed IMHO would be some sort of 'guarantee' that - should the need for some form of action against the S&DRT ever arise again for any reason - the Plc should be more open and transparent in its process and perhaps be required at at least discuss the 'need' in the PDG first.

 

well here we go, have donated to the nhs, the railway will be next in the hope that it gets through this sad time, if not, then at least it will stop the sniping on here with no thought of how they would do things any other way, me i just want to see trains on the wsr, sort it out afterwards so put your money where you know what is and help.

 

But the Partnership Development Group hasn’t met since 2018 having seemingly failed in its mission to develop an effective partnership.

 

Its good to explore fears such as this, But its not a problem. In that (hopefully very unlikely) circumstance, the charity's first duty would be to return the donation to the donor. Gift aid comes through quite quickly these days and certainly formed part of the 6-figure spend on infrastructure this winter supported by donations given during the winter.

Robin

 

Aside from the fact that Robin had said that's unlikely, I suspect people would be happier seeing their money go to another railway then lawyer fees. Indeed menu people at the moment are simply cutting out the middle man (the WSR) which kind of proves my point.

As for "the plan" that somewhat implies that you're happy to allow this eviction to continue, the continuing absence of HR policies and abusive behaviour leading to resignation to continue, simply because you can't think of an alternative? Sounds a bit grim really.

 

That's not a plan, that's just a wish (and one that we all share)

Steve

 

Why is it that people can see that there is a clear and present danger to the WSR because of COVID-19, but at the same time think that everything can simply carry on as normal, except for an injection of cash from the railway's supporters to tide it over the shutdown. Like the spendthrift who can never see the connection between their buying habits and the negative balance in their bank account, such people are determinedly ignoring the connection between the lack of response to the appeal and the recent decisions. Just look at how much of the money pledged to the volunteer group trying to buy 4110 transferred to the WSRA appeal once the Plc refused to sell the loco to that group and see that exactly the same effect is applying here - if you piss people off, they don't give you their money.

 

And that my good friend, is an assumption. Here's to happier times.

 

My impression - purely as an ordinary member looking in from'outside' - was that the PDG seemed to be going in the right direction generally. As has been discussed here already, it appears that the WSRA currently holds the chair of the PDG, so it would seem to be within their capability to call a meeting as/when they feel that it would be of benefit.

 

But they haven’t. Recent WSRA board minutes expressed dismay at the plc’s failure to implement an agreement that new volunteers must join the WSRA or one of the other WSR support groups; and concern at the plc’s failure to appreciate the importance of cooperation with fundraising. The minutes requested a joint WSRA/plc board meeting. No suggestion of a PDG meeting to discuss these ‘one railway’ issues which indicates to me they don’t consider it worthwhile.

 

How much do you know about railway track?



Robin

 

Have all of the regulatory issues that got ORR directly involved been resolved?

Pissing off the regulator is worse than upsetting a minority of supporters.

 

About two years ago then.

Actually the next meeting should have been held on 7th January 2019, so six meetings have so far been missed, assuming they kept up the quarterly frequency.

 

Other groupings (WSRA/DEPG/WSRRT) should be concerned about the lack of progress with the much vaunted PDG. The lack of response by the PLC Chair and the alleged verbal altercation between the PLC and WSRA Chairs should be a cause for concern for all the groups. Much was planned and discussed by the participants in the PDG at their meetings up until 2018 but presumably not everything hoped for has since been achieved. To onlookers it did seem that at long last some of the groups were prepared to discuss and assist the WSR with its continuance and hopefully avoid 'doing their own thing'. One item mentioned was of a focused and combined approach to fund raising rather than the piecemeal efforts which still continue.
http://wsr.org.uk/pdgminutes290118.pdf

 

I don’t have a plan, but I’m not prepared to entrust resources to the current management of the plc; for me, their behaviour is sufficiently disgraceful that my refusal extends to donating via a restricted channel where the funds may free up an equivalent amount for purposes that I outright oppose. That position may be at an extreme, but it is one caused by the board of the plc, and no one else.

It is for the body appealing for resources to justify why it is worthy of them, not for the would be donor to justify why they won’t donate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I administer Gift Aid for my church; payments are usually credited within a week of my submitting the claim, and always a fortnight. I can submit claims as often - or rarely - as suits me as the administrator; the process is straightforward following implementation of an online system.

I have occasionally had a donor inform me that they have mistakenly declared themselves eligible for Gift Aid. In those cases, I have always as a matter of ethics refunded the Gift Aid claimed to HMRC and provided the donor with a letter stating as much rather than compel the donor to do so - as @Forestpines says, the declaration by a donor is very clear that liability is on them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

If only....

• 

 

History books (and the collected WSRA Journals) are full of folk who thought themselves indispensible. And the world still turns.

Robin

 

“The cemeteries are full of indispensable men.”
― Charles de Gaulle