West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Meanwhile today the WSR friends facebook group have added another group rule:
"Any negativity about either the railway, its staff, board or volunteers will not be tolerated for whatever reason."

Someone's already made a comment that it sounds like a gagging order.

Dave B

 

I have no idea what may or may not have happened with Seaward Way but putting my Procurement hat on (after 9 years retirement) if there are contracts involved, and I suspect there will be as it is a council project then it is confidential. I spent many years telling our engineers at work that stuff was confidential when they could not seem to grasp the concept. Member, shareholder or just like me the man of the Clapham (should that be Dunster?) omnibus have no right to know

 

Not everyone. Some respect Mr Edge for his integrity and also respect that some things we won't be told. Happens in all walks of life.

 

That might be true in the private sector, but in the public sector there are duties to publish details of contracts.

On their website, Somerset CC state:

We are also required by the Transparency Code to publish details of:

• any contract, commissioned activity, purchase order, framework agreement and any other legally enforceable agreement with a value that exceeds £5,000. For each contract, the following details must be published:
  • reference number
  • title of agreement
  • local authority department responsible
  • description of the goods and/or services being provided
  • supplier name and details
  • sum to be paid over the length of the contract or the estimated annual spending or budget for the contract
  • Value Added Tax that cannot be recovered
  • start, end and review dates
  • whether or not the contract was the result of an invitation to quote or a published invitation to tender, and
  • whether or not the supplier is a small or medium sized enterprise and/or a voluntary or community sector organisation and where it is, provide the relevant registration number

​

The only obvious contract I can find relating to the Seaward Way level crossing is this one: https://procontract.due-north.com/C...b64545&p=696a9836-1895-e511-8105-000c29c9ba21 (But I didn't search hard ...) However, that is clearly only one part of the work. Why there is nothing else I don't know - two obvious possibilities are either that works are wrapped up in a much larger framework contract (there are some very big Highways contracts that presumably allow call-off for particular jobs); or else the data have not yet been updated if the contract is recent.

Tom

 

Very true Tom but with the effects of the pandemic, various change orders arising from unexpected issues, there will potentially be much that would not be covered by what is basically a contract synopsis. Plus that comes from the SCC not the WSR of course.
Mind you "start, end and review dates" is probably very relevant to the current situation.

 

Oh dear. This is, sadly, a too frequent response here. I have explained (a) how to go about getting the information you seek and (b) that I will respect a request for confidentiality. What the Dickens is wrong with that?

Anyway, do try (a) and then perhaps you will get the details you seek.

Also, I did not say there was a "perfectly reasonable explanation". I just said I now better understand. Please don't twist my words.

Steve
wsr.org.uk

 

Well, again, I didn't say the Plc "are", I said "I guess". But that is, whether we like it or not, accountability to its shareholders as far as it goes. There will be the usual company-staff relationships, and the volunteers are generally be seen as "staff" (allowing for obvious differences, such as pay, hols). There is a process by which any staff/volunteer can ask questions, usually via their line manager. I know Plc directors seem happy to deal with queries (well, some times not with the topic). I'm not aware of any "distinct gap" as mentioned above (and earlier).

All I can say to those seeking info about the crossing is if at first you don't succeed, try again and again.

Steve
wsr.org.uk

 

There are many things in life that we wonder about that we know we'll never know, like why members of the opposite sex behave as they do. An expression of interest in something does not necessarily translate to a demand for information about it.

Because, as others have pointed out upthread, information that is available to you is not, it seems, available to others, so your post ends up reading like "that's for me to know and you to wonder".

Perhaps, perhaps not. I'm not in charge of the WSR's main PR platform. However, the fact that that information is confidential probably tells me all I need to know.

Indeed you didn't, it was an assumption on my part on what you now understood. Apologies and thanks for clearing that up.

 

There are lots of things in this life we have no right to, but have a reasonable expectation of obtaining. In any case, you miss the point. The Seaward Way project looks like a cock-up. Unless you are disputing this, you must accept that, unless those in charge of the project don't mind it looking like a cock-up, with the consequent questions that brings up about their competence, it is incumbent on them to explain why it is not, in a way that will convince the potential donor on the Clapham omnibus. A business that depends on public donations cannot afford to say to that same public "none of your business, go away" about any aspect of their operations, as demonstrated by the lacklustre response to the latest appeal.

 

Tom, am I missing something here, or is the answer not just as simple as submitting an FOI request to the council then?

 

Well, an FoI request might drag up more, but takes more than five minutes, and might be refused!

I was simply making the point that public sector contract information is generally in the public domain already (and therefore exempt from FoI, though that is something of a technicality). If there is a direct contract between SCC and the WSR, I would expect it to be published in due course. It would be possible (but don't look at me to do it ...) to make an FoI request for all correspondence relating to the crossing, though the Council might then claim some legitimate grounds for refusing to release some or all of it.

If I were a betting man, I suspect there is a strong element of cock-up rather conspiracy in all this. Somerset CC's highways budget is largely sub-contracted out (to Skanska) in a contract worth £394millon over ten years between 2017 - 2027. That company will clearly have some rolling programme of works to manage their requirements. Somewhere there will be a forlorn project manager trying to co-ordinate the various stakeholders; notably the railway (who will have signalling interface requirements); a contractor to build that interface; and Skanska to manage the road works. There will have to be a road closure order agreed some way in advance, communication in the town etc. If one of those moving pieces doesn't drop into place when required, you may end up missing your slot in Skanska's programme and thereby have to wait for a period until there is capacity. Moreover, to a forum of railway enthusiasts it might seem a no-brainer that you don't close the level crossing at the height of the tourist season. To the Skanska programme manager, doing what probably amounts to £25k or £50k of road works within a near £40million annual budget is not going to be high on the priority list.

I think the railway as a whole has done a pretty shoddy job on communications. But my guess is that if you had all the evidence laid out before you, you'd probably see they are a fairly small cog in a large machine and have relatively little influence over dates.

Tom

 

Companies House tells me the WSR PLC has a director 164 miles from base. Nearer than 211 to Kent, but the same brickbat would apply. Glass houses, stones... is there need for this?

Patrick

 

And you'd never guess what it got filled up with....

 

Thanks. It might be better for folks to realise that sometimes we can't pass things on, especially if specifically asked not to. Ignoring such requests would hamper or stop any future requests for information. I'm certainly not in the "that's for me to know and you to wonder" camp. I don't play some kind of oneupmanship game. If I am able to publish stuff then I will do so. I should also point out that I am not the WSR's main PR platform, as you kindly put it, and have never had any ambition in that regard. I have to fight for some of the information I am able to publish and it might be better to say I am, at best, a "fast follower" of WSR news. I look forward to the day when the WSR is run by a single membership charity with its commercial wing, having a website with regular churn of information, news and photographs and so on. Then I can pack this in.

Steve
wsr.org.uk

 

Hear hear!