West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I know that I am an old codger that has been around the railway for over 40 years, but I actually preferred the museum as it was. There was more ambience to it and just lacked regular looking after. Why we have a model train set in there when there is a better one just along the platform I shall never know. Just my opinion.

 

I note that another Forum mentions the weeding that has been done on the WSR. A photo from a WSR web site shows a weed free station at Blue Anchor but a motorist who passes over the level crossing frequently says the weeds have taken hold again quite well in the three weeks since the weeding was done. It might appear that the weeds are following the weeders?
The impression given on NP was that the line would be weed free for some while after hand weeding.
I wonder what the actual position is?

 

I've lost track-it now seems the weeds are taking control of the WSR in what I presume is a hostile takeover,but are these fresh weeds,established weeds extending their patch, or ex-weeds making a comeback?

Jon

 

more to the point, are these weeds pro , or anti the PLC? if they are pro, I expect no action will be taken, but if they are troublesome Weeds, i expect they will be told to get packing, and their right to grow on the WSR removed immediately.

 

By definition there is not good governance if you cannot demonstrate how it is working.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

 

Not only that.

I need to tread carefully here, and won't mention any names, but I view past experience and performance of key personnel to be a useful indicator as to whether good and safe systems are likely to be ingrained in the culture of the railway.

And as has been highlighted before on NP, there are several instances of corner cutting and a lack of safety systems and procedures in public transport operations not that far removed from Minehead. If I worked for the ORR, it is something I'd be wanting to ensure weren't carried over to the WSR.

 

A thought occurs wrt "how many charities".
When we (my family) visit a heritage railway, we pay a fixed fare to enter or travel. At some point I will stick a twenty in some collection or other for "the good of the railway". It could be that I am an hour at Bishops Lydiard, look round the museum there, am impressed, and believing I am assisting with a general WSR fund, put my donation in their bucket. Or we might have 5 minutes before the train, travel happily to Minehead, and dazzled by the MPD lineup, put the crinkle in the pot there, again believing that is the common pot. If I visit the gauge museum on return to BL, they probably won't get any cash out of me-I put some in the pot at Minehead.
Whilst it might be argued that this is just business- the charity with the best window display gets the donation, it might also mean that the charity with the least need gets the most money.
The carriage and wagon team, with a line of unrestored coaches, might be greatly in need of funds-and those carriages, in operation, would contribute to the line's earning potential. But a sad looking line of rusty rolling stock doesn't open the wallet.
The MPD might be well funded already from revenue and glamour-induced generosity, but will likely get more donations because it has less apparent need. But me and joe citizen don't know that these collecting boxes are funding small jealous cliques rather than the common fund.
Surely a well-run organisation would see the wisdom in a collective charity, with funds being dispersed according to need and prudence?

 

I assume the top option was 'Yes', but what were the 2 'No' options? (Only on the WSR could a Yes/No question be made into a 3 option poll!)

Keith

 

I had a good chuckle at that!

 

Yes, No opinion, No maybe?

Or yes, - No (for WSR board members only) and No (for all the other peasants)

 

I think that's a little unfair. For example, when I visit the GCR, the bucket may be for the GCR itself, or it may be for RVP (who are a rolling stock charity and provide the TPOs). Individual charities are entitled to be independent, and focus on the specific aspects that define them, and to co-exist within a single setting. And while the railway may consider a particular cause paramount, I may actually wish to give to a specific aspect - using your example, say, to the museum at BL rather than the railway at large.

The issue is that the independence of individual organisations appears to be jealously guarded and reflect more than just the specific objectives of the individual group. The argument over the WSSRT, for example, is only really of relevance when you consider it has a substantial shareholding in the WSR plc, and is therefore a player in questions over the future of the WSR. If it didn't have that additional string to it's bow, it's unlikely that it would be caught up in the wider politics of the WSR; it's to the detriment of the WSR that it has evolved a structure where such a position has come to exist.

 

Yes, Not sure, No?

 

True, the other issue of course is the matter of the WSSRT Trustee who is also a member of the PLC board, which has had the effect intentionally or otherwise of putting the WSSRT in the PLC camp in many peoples eyes.

 

I interpret 37401's post as raking over the 6412 sale as a source of bitterness. That came about as a rare example of a democratic decision on the WSR and made sense at the time.

 

That's a very interesting question. The trustees of the WSSRT have decided that they want to stay independent, but what do the membership feel? Do the trustees actually know?

We know that the Trust's membership is fairly small so the Trustees individual votes are fairly significant. However, assuming that anyone standing as a Trustee needs to be a member (I don't know this for sure, but it's a reasonable assumption), there are 15 members (14 plus 1) whose opinions are at odds with the Trustees. So is the postponement of the AGM to allow time for enough of the PLC board's acolytes to be signed up as members to tip the balance back in favour of the Trustees?

 

There seem to be a lot of people around West Somerset who don't believe in the democratic processes. We've been told that the Plc Board is not answerable to its Shareholders , that individuals should not be able to put themselves forward for election to a Board of Trustees, that they are abused if they do, and those raising issues with the PLC management can expect to be both abused and thrown off their railway.
It is astonishing that anybody finds any of this acceptable - some of you guys need to take a long hard look at yourselves.