West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Great to see that post 35000 is actually useful and positive!

 

Tame compared to Farcebook. A PLC board member is making reference to the ten as bullies this evening.

 

Would this be because they dare to have a difference of opinion?

 

The last time I bumped into a WSSRT trustee, I invited him for a coffee. The last time a colleague bumped into a PLC board member, he was invited for a roll on the platform.

Remind me, who are the bullies ?

 

The sad fact of now yesterday's results is that the WSR plc board can once again rely upon the WSSRT shareholding.

A lease agreement for BL and BA that hasn't yet been properly executed and registered, so again the WSSRT is at the mercy of the WSR plc board, and will vote as the WSR plc board requires, with this cosy arrangement of directing transfers of shares of dead WSR plc members to the WSSRT.

The retribution against the 10 is awaited, and removal of ID cards imminent, if the railway ever runs again. I can perhaps see in the cloudy crystal ball one station house being on the market.

'Never glad morning again'

 

I'm not planning to go anywhere.

Meanwhile, lets examine / translate a paragraph of text into English:

Steve Williams, acting chair of the WSSRT, commented: ‘This result is an overwhelming rejection of the tactics of those who sought to take over the Trust . The members concerned could have brought their plan to the WSSRT trustees in an open, collaborative and consultative way, rather than covertly proposing these additional trustees at the very last moment on deadline day for the AGM. We are also very sad that their confrontational approach, threats of legal action and reporting the Trust to the police led to the resignation of Chris Austin and David Baker from the resulting stress. This was a clear abuse of the Trust’s democratic processes and of the way in which volunteers are expected to behave. Those involved should now look at themselves in the mirror and hang their heads in shame’.

The members concerned could have brought their plan to the WSSRT trustees in an open, collaborative and consultative way = the candidates could have been interviewed and rejected by the Trustees under a process unknown to the Trust articles.

covertly proposing these additional trustees = openly delivering compliant nomination forms to the Trust's registered office

at the very last moment on deadline day for the AGM = 24 hours before the deadline for Trustee nominations set in the Trust's articles.

confrontational approach = proposing Trustees as provided by the Trusts's articles

threats of legal action = following repeated muliple data breaches in communications from the Trustees to Trust members, both in sending e-mails with multiple adressees and sending out a tendentious document designed to smear the candidates and including the names and home addresses of four Candidates, the candidates proposing a means of the breach being rectified WITHOUT legal action by way of an apology and a withdrawl of the offending document, and that course being accepted and acted on by the Trust.

threats of....reporting the Trust to the Police = identifying that the Trust was non-compliant with Data Protection legislation, was unregistered with the Information Commissioner and had no Data Controller.

led to the resignation of Chris Austin and David Baker from the resulting stress = two Trustees who had been saying since the first months of the year that they intended to resign at the AGM 'repurposed' their resignation to demonise the Candidates.

This was a clear abuse of the Trust’s democratic processes = there were no breaches or abuses of the Trust's democratic processes by the Candidates

This was a clear abuse of the Trust’s democratic processes = the Trustees: issued the voting papers for the original AGM before the deadline for Trustee nominations; delayed the AGM for no reason provided in the Articles; co-opted three new Trustees who were not in prospect at the original AGM; wrote a data breaching communication to Trust members casting aspersions on the Candidates; initiated a member recruitment campaign; rejected a number of entirely compliant member applications; preferetially accepted 'friendly' members' applications; for a second time issued voting papers before the Trustee nomination deadline had been reached; rejected two validly nominated Trustee Candidates. No breaches of a democratic process there, then.

This result is an overwhelming rejection of the tactics of those who = this result was achieved by a number of anti-democratic tactics by Trustees.

and of the way in which volunteers are expected to behave = differences of views are not allowed

Those involved should now look at themselves in the mirror and hang their heads in shame’ = Those involved should now look at themselves in the mirror and hang their heads in shame’.

I will leave others to form conclusions about the maker of such a statement now that it has been translated from 'Acting Chairman' into ordinary English.

Robin

 

Who really is surprised ? this was always going to be the outcome, it was the desired outcome of those within the WSSRT , and PLC who see any dissent as being traitorous to their regime. and you can bet many of the new members were those with a pro PLC agenda, its questionable if they were pressured into voting as they did, and if this does turn out to be the case, its the Chair, who should hold his head in shame, This does nothing to heal the diversions , but i guess some are not so blind , as those who will not see.

 

The WSRA stating in the synopsis posted on wsr.org that they will be abstaining from voting for 2 of the PLC directors at the PLC AGM hardly helps in healing divisions

 

Precisley what is wrong with that?

The WSRA has a shareholding in the PLC, indeed a significant shareholding and they have made a decision at the trustees meeting how to vote at the AGM and their reasons, note an abstention, not a vote against.

Whats wrong with that?

I would be more concerned if the WSRA hadn't made any decision on how to vote or blindly voted yes. At least some thought has gone into the matter.

 

To be honest its gone beyond healing, when you post such rubbish as the ten should be thrown off the railway, how is that healing? but you are obviously a plc apologist who, in your eyes do no wrong, So whats next on your agenda," the WSRA are not supporting the PLC, SO SHOULD GO" ?

 

What a quite unbelievable comment, but then that should be expected I guess given it's source....

How very dare they vote as they see fit, they MUST tow the line.

 

You ought to have a word with Steve Williams when it comes to divisive statements.

Btw when did you join the WSSRT? I am pleased to see you have developed a strong sudden interest in museums and carriage restoration and look forward to hearing about you efforts to restore those fine carriages.

Good news. Whose timescale is this? But it effectively means no trains into Minehead until the second half of 2021.

 

That's assuming the Council still have the funding to do the works required, The way things are i would not take anything at face value, Councils are having to face a lot of pressure on funding as it is, and i could understand if the financial officer took the view of this funding is needed elsewhere, as the railway doesn't look like being able to operate just yet, I would expect that IF the WSR does re open, it will only be between BL and Wiliton for next year due to the ongoing work needed on the rest of the track, and of course, takings will be a lot lower, the line will still be very much on life support .

 

Unhealthy. I don't see anything changing. It's a bit like the Republican Party in the USA. They can all see the reality, but few dare to speak out against Trump, so their party will be left behind. I only hope that the Culture Recovery Fund are keeping a close eye on the money and making sure that the taxpayers money isn't wasted.

 

So a process that, by all accounts, started in 2016, will be completed in 2021: five years to replace a level crossing.

 

Luke 6:42

 

I think on your last point we can contrast with the tone adopted by Biden in his victory speech after the contested and polarised US elections as an example of how to set the tone and the vituperative statement by Williams.

Williams' statement does not strike me as evidence of moving on and that concerns me given the challenges facing the WSR over the next few months. It seems scoring a few more points and macho posturing is more important than fixing Seaward Way, sorting out the ORR's concerns etc to many in the WSR.

 

>>>What is certain, or maybe not, is that the Railway Touring Company thinks it will be running a train from Paddington to Minehead next July so someone has been given a concrete date....

I would not place too much store by that 'fact'. Provided that the actual track is OK (remember the bit east of MD which had not been certified by a competent person at the time of the first lockdown?), then I would imagine that such a tour could run to MD and back as one of those 'exceptions' working the crossing with hand-signalmen.

 

A bit like an election in North Korea. 99.999% voted for the Dear Leader. The secret police are looking for the one who spoilt his ballot paper. It is a hopeful sign that the WSRA may be finding some courage.