West Somerset Railway General Discussion

S&DRT chairman has today updated Trust members. Confidential discussions with WSR plc, initiated by HRA, are continuing. S&D chair is hopeful a conclusion will be reached in time for S&D AGM on 25th July.

There are no clues or pointers as to what that conclusion might be, but it's good to know negotiations continue.

I suggest we now refrain from further speculation and await next update from the S&D Trust.

Barrie
S&DRT member

 

What we really need though is for the whole report to be in the public domain then perhaps the parties could speak more freely

(Written before @Barrie the Beer posted)

 

If negotiations are still ongoing - and it's good news that they are, I assumed the Bailey report was "it" - then it is perhaps best to keep that bit under wraps for now.
Oh and for what it's worth, I've never really bought the idea that their non-GWR-ish-ness had anything to do with the eviction. For once, I'm quite prepared to take the Plc's word for it that the eviction was because they didn't cough up enough cash for the WSR's liking, and after the fact they came up with some vague ambitions as to what to do with the site.
I do hope that PDG meeting properly addressed the Washford concerns though, if they didn't, September seems a long long way away. If reform is truly on the cards then it would seem very foolish to be making any big decisions like evicting the S&DT if in the foreseeable future the railway is to be governed in an entirely different way. Once all that has happened it may be that the new structure precipitates some new ideas.
I still find it a bit sad and odd that WSR volunteers don't feel represented by either the WSR Plc or WSRA representative. It might only be a small thing, but it highlights yet again that the way things are organised in Somerset to allow this to be the case is a little bit weird.

 

What really finished off the WR hydraulic fleet was the slow switch from steam- and dual-heat coaching stock to electric-heat-only stock. It was relatively straightforward to adapt diesel electrics to provide an electric heating supply; the hydraulic fleet had no existing high voltage circuitry and insufficient space inside to install a suitable generator.

 

The last message of the eviction was posted 12 days ago. IMHO it's much easier to keep the affairs of the WSR together as one topic.

Just a thought. <BJ>

 

Are you suggesting the eviction notice has nothing to do with WSR operations ?

 

Where did you get that idea from?

I'm suggesting that it's easier to keep news of the WSR, both operations and evictions, on one thread. <BJ>

 

I'll make some general points as a sort of rounding up, & try to link them in to the WSR.

Organisations that are dependant upon the public & volunteers should not only be doing their best to do the right thing, they should also be showing that they are doing the right thing.
In terms of communications, there is nothing wrong with giving out what appears to be too much information. Sometimes, more is better, especially if it helps give clarity & avoids people possibly interpreting things incorrectly.
You should avoid conflicts of interest, & do your best to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest. There are ways to get the most from your people whilst doing so.

If the WSR want's to speak with one voice, be One Railway, then when is it going to start doing so?
The plc, WSRA & WSSRT had the Bailey Report for a month before it was published, & they still couldn't arrange to publish their statements together as a package.

The Chair of the PDG is apparently a temporary Chair, so why didn't the WSSRT briefing on it state that? What would be wrong with that bit of info being included?
Why doesn't it mention that he is also on the plc Board, but presumably is sitting only as a WSSRT rep? What would be wrong with that bit of info being included?

The most recent plc Board appointment has the appearance of a conflict of interest. Even if it's been said on here that it's a 'personal' appointment, the statements from both orgs do not say that. There are mentions of 'collaborative work' & 'work together more closely'. There is mention of 'governance arrangements', but it doesn't say what they are.
Does collaboration need people sat on each others Boards? If so, where are the reps from other groups? If not, then why not do it that way?

I'm not expecting answers to those questions, but those involved with the WSR at any level should be asking them, & should expect them to be answered.

 

Are you (not) sure?

Robin

 

I am the man in the H. M. Bateman "The Man Who..." cartoons. I haven't seen the unredacted Bailey report. I thought someone ought to say it.

Patrick

 

Hi Martin,

I liked that; very clever, and nice as always to see from you a different approach from your fellow Moderator Alan.

Cheers,

Julian

 

What is it with railways and information? Why is it that getting any information out of a railway organisation is like drawing teeth (and that includes BR and its successors as well as the heritage sector)? You'd think that they'd all worked at Bletchley Park during WWII and still thought they were there.

 

I think it stems from the 'style' of Management and Governance of your typical Heritage Railway which is such that concrete plans are difficult to make and even more difficult to successfully execute. Cockups and poor decisions are rather more common place than anyone would care to admit. Added to that there is a ready audience of passionate bystanders ready to jump on any failing and say in hindsight how they would have done it better.

In such an environment those with the information quickly learn that letting to much out about your plans and past actions often comes back to bite you and is detrimental to long life in office.

I'm not defending or condoning lack of info. I agree that more is better for engagement. I'm just giving my thoughts on why so little of it seems to be a feature of our hobby.

 

Haven'y you yet realised that for many, being an official on a heritage line is one big EGO trip - and the higher up the greasy pole of official the bigger the ego and once attaining the post of chairman --Well it blows the mind completely. The WSR appears to be a text book example of the phrase "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely".

 

Well yes, there are plenty in the railway heritage world who want to be Sir William McAlpine and have their own private steam railway, but want to do it with other people's money. However, that doesn't account for the corresponding meanness with information that is also to be found on the "big" railway, although that has improved since the end of BR.

 

Surely, it is because you have a vested interest in it and therefore you want to be in the know. If I asked you whether you were interested in how your local bus firm was doing - the answer is probably not. Likewise, there are probably a few people who are concerned about the local bus to Minehead being funded and only take a passing glimpse at the WSR.

 

Yet another fund raiser. At least this one has a picture of said unit, unlike the saloon that has a 45 minute video with no real immediate impact on the potential donor showing the subject they need the money for.
https://justgiving.com/campaign/dmu...5r0OH9H0SY0x-tny6_E2I7dcrqdtXCWEQi2KKdSUf3h_s