Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

I respect your opinion but sadly I must disagree, especially in relation to the recent Sec 73 applications. In my view, formed in part as being a very minor player in part of the design work, it was a reasonable idea that was poorly designed and badly presented without almost no obvious serious attempt to allay the fears of potential objectors and rally support from the local population. Even when several 'key issues' arose from the flood of objections, we saw nothing coming from the Board to correct misconceptions.

 

Well yes but technically the CIC is locked to the Trust, the award was given for the volunteers at Chelfham, The Hendy and Pendle Trust award for volunteers

 

Well I think that is what I was driving at.

 

As you say, technically true - being an occasional judge for the NRHA (naturally, I recuse myself from any L&BR entries ) I am aware of the basis for the H&PT award.

My point is that the casual visitor reading the plaque might assume that the work was done by, or on behalf of, the CIC rather than by volunteers belonging to the Trust, so I feel that it does not give obvious adequate recognition to the actual work-force. It should be remembered that the actual working on the plaque is the choice of the entrant, not the NHRA, so it could have been worded differently and/or more explicitly if the CIC had so chosen.

 

Maybe EA could simply take over the Trust ...

 

If only if it was that simple, more to the point, I think it is the group culture that has become poisoned by just a few people which has created this situation we find ourselves in.

It can be fixed, but it is not going to happen overnight. As Chris Duffel has pointed out we now need time to reflect and put right what has gone wrong. Rebuilding that trust with-in the membership first of all is not going to happen this week or next month. Once that rebuilding has started, we can also then move on to start to rebuild the trust with the local community.

As I have said on a number of times before, there is a group with-in the L&BR that wants this railway to succeed and we are not doing this for the self gratification or for the free beer, but because we believe this to be an important heritage based project.

Sadly I don't think that the management have in my view totally engaged with the membership, if they had have done this wouldn't never have happen and we would have all been singing from the one hymn sheet by now .

 

Is that seriously a charge that some do not want the L&B to succeed?

I agree with you entirely that there needs to be a period of reflection, but that needs all parties to show some calm and reflection. What's happened is about more than how the trustees have engaged with the membership, and it is deluded to believe that the L&B family could ensure success in the face of opposition when there are also legal hurdles involved.

 

Are you suggesting that there is anyone within any of the organisations who does not want this railway to succeed?

 

I get the impression that the charge is that some people enjoy the “position” rather more than they should, and that as a result they act in their narrow perception of the best interests of the organisation of which they are a “managing” person rather than the big picture project aims.

As the L and B project has a bewildering array of organisations it must be a nightmare trying to keep them all pointed at the same broad objective and not bickering over minutiae.

 

I just feel that the trust should allow EA to deal with all property negotiations. Who pays for a particular purchase and which name lands up on the Land certificate can be decided once the purchase is agreed.

 

I'm perfectly open to that as an answer. I just think that getting to that position requires some other questions answering first, which are probably more important for the future of the L&B.

 

No it is not a charge as you might see it. It is that some people just can't see the big picture and what is involved to achieve that. Nor do they want to engage with the membership at large.

Again I repeat myself it is a culture thing that needs to change, so this situation can't happen again.

 

In which case, I suggest that you are much more careful with your language, and consider how it might be read. I also suggest, strongly, that those close to the L&B but not aligned to the current Trustees' view of the world, start putting forward constructive alternatives rather than throwing rocks.

 

Maybe there's only so much "sit down, be quiet, and keep it shut, because we know best", before the human spirit rebels. After 5 years of keeping it buttoned, this is what you are now seeing. It may not be helpful to certain parties, but it is a natural, time-driven reaction.

 

Maybe not entirely mistaken, but I do feel you are taking the discussions to date too seriously. The L&BR Trust has over 3,000 members, and many more supporters and enthusiastic friends. A few of them appear on this platform and others elsewhere.

Nobody on National Preservation has the remit to express anything other than their own personal opinions, nor represent the views of other individuals, groups, or organisations, but we are all passionate about making a success of the L&B, how ever we may measure that success.

Woody Bay, LYN, the carriages, and many other aspects of the L&B are indeed wonders to behold, but it doesn't take away from those things that some individuals have different ideas on how we move forward from here.

 

I have been trying for some while to find 'constructive alternatives' to suggest as part of - hopefully - a future debate about how to go forward, but I find it hard to do so when so much depends upon an understanding of (a) the precise current situation and (b) the future 'plan' for the railway, when - as an 'average member' - the necessary information seems at best unavailable to the wide membership and (b) at worst may even not be available at all anyway.

 

I have already replied to the trusts request so how do you see this working out? and what is your strategy for rebuilding the L&BR then?

 

Ok, I’ve done my company searches, and I do find it very odd that a Director of Exmoor Associates should be so at odds with the L&BR Trust Board.

I think myself that I would also have gone down the s.73 route, and kept my cards close to my chest.

Lots of things go on behind the scenes, and that must of necessity be kept private and confidential.

 

It is alleged - but I can not confirm it - that the Board kept the News Bulletin so close to their corporate chest that not even the CIC Directors knew of its existence/contents until one of them was shown a copy of it by a Trust member ! Yet this is the same CIC which (presumably) would be expected to manage and operate whatever new section of railway the Trust decided to build next.

 

You haven't shared your strategy to this forum - so you can't expect others to share theirs.