West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Whatever you do in terms of changes to the Swanage, please don’t follow the disastrous road that the NYMR has done in terms of its structure and management.

 

Most of your post was plausible, but that particular thought, I think many of us might disagree with. Shakespeare on lawyers comes to mind; add politicians to the list. (Apologies for the off-topic, but my reaction was too powerful to contain.)

Noel

 

(Apologies for continuing the thread drift, but Gift Aid does seem to be a significant subject for heritage railways in general, and @35B isn't the only person on here paying higher rate tax.) For many years I was including Gift Aid payments on my tax returns. Then, around this time last year, when I went to fill in my return on line, it wasn't possible. Several exchanges of letters with HMRC eventually established that they knew how much I had paid, presumably from Gift Aid claims submitted by the various charities.

 

Certainly the logic escapes me. In general, donors may receive "no more than minimal benefits in consequence of a donation". That make sense so far. Paying for a ticket for one day, which is a significant benefit, does not qualify. However paying the same price for a ticket for a whole year, which is a much greater benefit, does qualify.

 

The changes at Swanage - essentially combining the Trust and the operating company into a single charitable body - have been discussed and approved by the Swanage membership. I’m just a technician helping to get the job done.

Robin

 

It's a trade off, where the charity is giving the benefit and deterred from seeking Gift Aid too lightly

 

You understate the significance of the change in Articles! More seriously, you highlight the difference between constitutional change and managerial changes - where the majority of what @Steve describes at NYMR is "managerial", albeit enabled by constitutional changes

 

Beware of the lack of accountability of a CCBS. As a shareholder it is one vote no matter how many shares you hold (and there maybe restrictions on the number of proxy votes) In effect this means that, assuming the Chair of the meeting is holding a number of votes, together with the existing Directors having a vote any challenge is virtually impossible.

 

So many people in so many places need to understand this right now...

 

Some wise words from you in the above post.

A while back, I spent some time looking through WSR annual reports and accounts. It was apparent that WSR passenger numbers peaked in 2009, followed by a steady decline in subsequent years until they stopped publishing the data.

I suspect that the figures for many of Britain's heritage railways will show a similar pattern, largely reflecting the general economic state of the UK. I don't think the country has ever fully recovered from the 2008/9 banking crisis. We seemed to be getting things sorted-out by about 2015, but then along came Brexit followed by Covid. More recently, the big increases in employers' national insurance will not have helped heritage railways. At the same time, the supply of volunteer staff seems to have reduced. With fewer volunteers and the increased expense of paid staff, railways will inevitably find it more difficult to maintain services at the same level as before. But fewer services will likely mean fewer passengers and reduced overall income, meaning less money to cover fixed infrastructure overheads.

Given all these factors, I think we are very lucky that none of our major heritage railways has yet become insolvent (leaving aside the special circumstances of the Llangollen). Perhaps a tribute to the many heritage railway leaders who have managed so far to keep heads above water, plus the donors who contribute to the many appeals. In the short term of course, if Trump and Putin could be induced to stop making wars and causing mayhem, then at least the coal and oil supply costs would ease!

 

the NYMR has been badly managed for a number of years, principly because the Trust seemingly sits back and lets the PLC get on with things with the Trust apparently having no control over what is happening. The adoption of a nominations committee has just served to worsen the situation as is seemingly configured to maintain the status quo and prevent those wanting change from being voted onto the board. It is not helped by the postal voting system whereby people generally vote for what the Board recommend and that is also made worse by the chairman being the default holder of proxy votes. There is nothing wrong with the PLC controlling the day-to-day runing of the railway as long as it is capable of doing so, which it apparently is not. Just look at the NYMR thread for all the information.

 

As a casual visitor I feel that the railway missed out on a golden opportunity last weekend. I was in Pickering for their 1940s weekend, there were alot of both reenactors and Joe public about, some reenactors (including myself and three friends) even had a ride on the railway.
What did the railway do to attract others? Nothing.
I know that the railway has been involved in the past, and the reason for its pulling out years ago, but you would of thought anyone with any commercial sense would of tried even a bit.
Having been to the event at the north Norfolk railway a few weeks back and seeing packed out trains and a healthy reenactor presence (as well as in sheringham itself) the difference was startling.
One would of thought that a railway in dire need of money for bridge work would of tried to earn a few extra quid.