Rother Valley Railway

It's those VBs again...

 

Never! It's Coopers for me: Australia's finest drop! (And it's such a shame that Asahi have stopped exporting Fullers beers, anywhere!)

 

Having known the owner of the 'Ugly', (to Whom I personally owe a debt of gratitude) this does rather confirm the situation which I felt was occurring at the time. (for the record I am still a member of the KESR)

 

Regardless of the circumstances leading to its departure the Ugly (RSH 7667; Stewarts & Lloyds no. 56 now at the Epping-Ongar railway) did several years of useful work on the K&ESR from about '76 to '80.

 

An extract from the minutes from May's Robertsbridge and Salehurst Parish Council meeting:

"Rother Valley Railway – the Chairman reported that the Council had received notification from the Department for Transport, following the Public Inquiry, regarding the granting of the Transport and Works Act Order (TWAO), which gives authority to complete the rebuilding of the track to Bodiam, including compulsory purchase of land. He was nota ware of any appeal pending to date. He commended the public statement made online by Cllr Prochak saying that the community must now make the best of the decision. The Parish Council needs to remain broadly neutral. Cllr O’Hara suggested that as the legal process has concluded, the community needs to move on."

 

I think it's rather sad that the local council will be neutral rather than supportive. Doesn't really fit with "making the best of the decision".

 

Such is the strength of feeling within the village that the Parish Council took the view that they should stay neutral. Comming down on one side or the other will not help the community to 'make the best of the decision'. Reading local social media suggest that those opposed to the railway really believed that the TWAO would not be granted and were really surprised by the outcome of the Public Inquiry.

 

I note from the quotes that these are individuals' views. As @H Cloutt observes, making the best of the decision is in reaction to what happens rather than taking a view on what that decision was.

 

There will be those who will be upset, that the outcome did not go as they had hoped, but as had been said, time to move on, and to be conciliatory, even had they won, I doubt they would have been, Its now down to the RVR, to be the grown ups, and offer dialog, but at the same time the land does need to be obtained, and stalling attempts should be rebutted if they can't come to an amenable solution, then the railway will have to use the powers the ruling has given it, I'm expecting there will be some last minute attempt to delay, or even a total refusal to talk,

 

Actually there is a good reason to remain neutral. A parish council is statutory consultee on planning matters and has to follow planning law. Were they to express any interest either way, members of their planning committee could be subject to exercising 'predetermined interest' and not viewing an application with an open mind. Were the railway to exercise any further application, predetermination would count and would be used in evidence at a planning inquiry and potentially a standards investigation by the monitoring officer. So let's say RVR were to put in application and it was refused by the parish, after the parish had made it known that they were opposed to the railway, it could be a predetermined interest. I recently, circumvented a parish council for this very reason which resulted in an intervention by the local monitoring officer. Planning law is a minefield.

Putting the predetermined issue aside, they are caught between a rock and hard place when it comes to local feeling.

 

At least there is still time, which is the ultimate healer.

 

Hopefully once trains start running they will wonder why they made a fuss. The A21 level crossing is a case in point - many who took to social media still seemed to think that it was going to be a hand operated crossing like the one at Rolvenden.

 

Well isn't that the trouble everyone wants the details laid out on a plate for them

 

That's the thing- they were. But there are always those who can't even be bothered with a plate!

 

When it comes to planning permission/public enquiries/twa/compulsory purchase, then things have to (quite rightly) be laid out in full for all to see.

 

The problem was that it was - there was a lot of information about the level crossings in the planning application and presented to the Public Inquiry. It's just that some have based their opinions on hearsay.

 

"My mind is made up. Please don't cloud the issue with facts."

 

It is always easier to convince people of negatives rather than positives, You only have to look at the journalism of various and diverse newspapers to see that, just have a look in a daily newspaper which I will not name here in order to see how negatives can convince the readers almost into paranoia. It's the basis of how conspiracy theories work. (or is it? maybe they are watching YOU!)

 

Very near the truth?

 

I agree, but this Parish Council is neither a planning authority or highway authority. Since the scheme already had planning permission and now has a TWAO I doubt the PC’s lack of support ever mattered very much and even less now. The District Council (planning) & County Council (highway authority for 2 of the three level crossings) came through when it mattered most.