West Somerset Railway General Discussion

No quarrel with the sentiment, but might we make the whole thing Latin? Something like "Sic transit via ferri"?

 

Hein was a remarkable man. A teenager in Holland during WW2 he hid under the floorboards to avoid being dragged off to a labour camp by the Nazis, emerging after dark to raid allotments for cabbages. He joined the Dutch navy and rose to rank of Captain, taking his vessel all over the world. Seconded to NATO he worked in London and on retirement chose to live in Minehead rather than return to the Netherlands. And he devoted the rest of his life to the WSR, always as a volunteer. I was pleased to know him during his final years as the Cash Office Supremo.

 

For many years Hein was the WSR. He had been an officer in the Dutch navy who was seconded to Northwood. On his retirement, he decided to stay in the UK and he retired to Minehead. Looking for something to do in his retirement in 1979, he wandered into Minehead station and the rest is history. He held pretty much every post on the railway - Ops, PW gang, DMU driver, guard, publicity and marketing, signalling and finance - the latter for which he is probably best known - i have been phoned at home several times late in the evening because my booking office returns did not add up..... When I started as a signalman in 1983 he was my mentor and teacher and i still remember his crib sheets of signalling rules and regulations. Without his input we almost certainly would not have a WSR today. Hein retired from the railway in 2020 after 40 years of work. I last saw him last year and then he was as sharp as ever....I am very sorry indeed to hear about his death.
Ian Coleby

 

Bayard said: ↑
and you don't see anything wrong in that, either?

I didn't say you did. If you notice, there is a funny squiggly thing at the end of that sentence, that indicates it's a question, not a statement, a question which asks you whether you see anything wrong in a railway that depends on people giving it money has decided on a "minimal/practically non existent PR policy", which question you have not answered.
Quite possibly this suicidally wrong policy might be condoned by the WSR shareholders, but that doesn't make it any more a sensible policy, does it?
I would agree that posting on Nat Pres rarely achieves anything, regardless of what you are posting about, but Nat Pres is not intended for that, it's intended as a forum, where people can come together to discuss matters of mutual interest. If the topic of discussion is the WSR's PR policy or lack of one, then pointing out that it is non-existent and that this appears not to be beneficial to the long-term health of the Railway, is a very germane point.

 

It was an absolute privilege to work with Hein, although very briefly in my case. My direct dealings with him only came about once WSRA handed over management of the Quantock Belle to WSR plc from 2017, and then essentially only when paying in and accounting for gala operation takings. His attention to detail was second to none.

 

Can anybody tell me what time tomorrow's 'Whistle Up' train is booked to arrive back at BL please? I believe it is running in the path of the now cancelled morning Panto train but can't find any indication of return timings WN to BL for either train. Thanks.

 

Happy New Year Barrie and to everybody, whether friend or “foe”, concerned/
associated with the WSR.

Today, whistle up : Williton depart 12.05 BL arrival 12.35.

May 2025 be a good and prosperous year for the Heritage Railway community.

Michael Rowe

 

Given that a New Year has dawned:

(1) Any news on the DMU Appeal?; and

(2) Is the WSRA to make an announcement to its members about the ‘bonfire of the Trustees’?

 

Write to the Chairman, he will answer both questions as you are a member. As an ex chairman you should be able to get an answer.

 

What Chairman do you mean,

 

Capital suggestion.

I have done as you suggest. It is appropriate to allow time for a reply.

I will publish my request and any reply received on 1.2.25.

Robin

 

Given the speed of response received, herewith my e-mail of 5 Jan, Geoff Garfield’s reply of 6 Jan and my further e-mail of the same date.

5 Jan RW to GG

Geoff

(1) I am concerned to note the resignations of three Trustees in recent weeks, close in time with each other and as yet unexplained to WSRA members.

What reasons did the Trustees give for their resignations?

Was there a common factor?

(2). I am concerned that the DMU appeal made by the WSRA is not being promoted in any sensible way and is just making the WSRA look silly.

What sums have been raised to date?

Is the rate of contributions increasing or dwindling?

What does the WSRA plan to do with this appeal?

Regards

Robin White

Life member 2221

GG to RW 6 Jan:

Robin

Thank you for the e mail.

We were sorry to loose the trustees. Each of them expressed a wish that the reasons were not shared publicly. We plan to respect the requests.

As far as the DMU is concerned, we are expecting an update from the plc shortly

Regards

Geoff

Geoff Garfield
Chair of Trustees

6 Jan RW to GG

Geoff

Thank you for your prompt response.

It is plainly not reassuring for members to learn that 3 Trustees all chose to leave in quick succession but for the reasons to remain hidden.

I note that you have NOT said that the reasons were personal to the Trustees who have left or are unknown to the Trustees who remain. In that circumstance I feel that, whatever the views to the individual Trustees, I am surprised that the charity seems not to feel it has an obligation to its members and the public, to offer something by way of an explanation rather than nothing. Concealed reasons can only lead to negative speculation about a malign root cause.

As far as the DMU is concerned, I believe you have misinterpreted my question. It is the appeal, apparently being run by the Association but without any sign of life, about which I am enquiring. Surely it is easy to say how the appeal is doing?

Regards

Robin

 

If the departing trustees requested that their reasons for leaving should not be publicised, can't you respect this?

 

If they were personal reasons, yes, of course.

But apparently they were not, and their view was that matters were so serious that they had to resign. So no, I don’t respect being kept in the dark in such circumstances.

 

Why "apparently"?

Have the trustees themselves said anything different?

You may want to know something, but does that justify trying to dig up things or making assumptions?

 

I suspect she already knows and is stirring the pot, as usual.

 

Depending on the reason for the resignations, which perhaps we have had hinted earlier in these pages, the pot might be worth a stir? Not for the public disclosure, but to focus the right minds on resolving the issues?

 

Well, ‘apparently’ means ‘to judge by appearances’, and I am drawing the obvious conclusions from what GG has, and has not, said.

Further, how likely is it that three Trustees all had personal crises within days of each other?

It seems to me that there is something fundamentally wrong at the WSRA that has caused three decent, honourable folk to resign as Trustees and I believe the membership should be told what is going on.

The WSRA is guardian of significant sums collected or donated for its charitable purposes and the good governance of that is of considerable importance.

 

Do people in your profession usually work on assumptions? What ever happened to facts?

 

Evidence in this case...not facts...