FR/WHR and WHHR relations

I received, recently, a copy of the letter from the FR/WHR fund raiser on FR company headed paper asking for more money to finish building the WHR.
At a time when there seems to be some progress in the relationship between the FR/WHR and WHHR this letter seems not to be very diplomatic and (as I have found out) the most accurate.

FR/WHR claim (in the letter) that WHR Ltd is the first in a list of reasons why the FR has not completed its railway. (Actually it says WHR 64 co !!!!)
FR/WHR applied for a grant in 2004, and was awarded nearly four million pounds. In the application form for that grant, it says that no-one else is supposed to be helping with building the line, and it also says that the "WHR 64 co" will provide only £60k, something it has spent already.

In the letter from the fund raiser, it states that the FR has had no increase in its grant, even though the costs have gone up. Wrong! On 14th July 2008, the Welsh Assembly Government and Europe gave them an extra £1.8m. The decision notice is here:
- http://tinyurl.com/fr700k

I am quite willing to e-mail the copies of the documents to anyone who asks for them including the grant application form if you PM me with an e-mail address

 

Are you saying it is OK for the FR to send out letters to the public domain which puts the WHHR down but for WHHR members not to send out information which shows the WHHR is not to blame?

 

Oh no, not again...

And the posters stuck up at Tremadog Road slagging off the FR were what, exactly?

For God's sake let this lie. The companies are finally talking again, it does no good to restart this never-ending slanging match. Even I played a small, informal part in the run up to the talks resuming and if I can bite the bullet and try to help patch things up, surely anyone can.

Give it a rest, eh?

 

Oh ffs lets move on eh?

 

Exactly my point Andrew, why did the FR start the slanging match again by posting a letter out to the public that states that the reason for the need for more money is the WHHR's fault as the first reason?

I am assuming, of course, that due to the letter being on FR headed paper the senior management of the FR approved of the letter.

 

I had Sheff, untill I got the letter.

 

Maybe given it was mentioned the letter was far from accurate that things are left until it is resolved. Afterall that both sides are now talking is surely good news.

 

Appears as though the FR/WHR public relations team might have made a bit of a balls up blaming the WHHR for their woes. I wonder now if the peace talks will continue? No mention of it also being the Trunk Roads Agency`s fault too?

 

I'm sure I'm not alone in expressing my disappointment that some members cannot let sleeping dogs lie. AST is right, if he can 'bite the bullet' why cannot we all?

 

But it wasn't a letter posted to the public. It was a private letter sent to contributors to the appeal.

 

Perhaps the FRCo. are testing how much WHRLtd. are willing to take, to see whether they want to enter further discussions, don't you just love consipiracy?

 

They have been "testing" them since the early 90's, it doesn't seem to work very well.

 

Keep up, lad. There was a meeting between the two companies last month and a date has been set for a second.

There are vastly more important - and interesting - issues on all three railways than who did what to whom, when and with what and whose mother smells of wee.

The endless name-calling can only protract a stupid and irrelevant argument that benefits no one. Can we move on now, please?

 

Hi. This is a fascinating debate and i would like to make the following point. Considering the amount of public money which has gone into this project, is it not normal that the public should have a right to know what's going on ? Surely all this squabling can not be good for the image of the FR.

 

hello renovator!

mods?

 

Given the way our legislators have been trying to prevent the public finding out how they have been spending our money (duck houses and the like) I think you are being a tad optimistic there !

Richard

 

The public has a right to know whether this public money was spent in accordance with the conditions attached to the funding but nobody has seriously suggested it wasn't. The public might have a right to know if a charity was using its funds not in accordance with its charitable aims, but nobody has suggested this has happened.

The public surely has no right to know the details of a private dispute between two companies until one or both sides decide to make it public.

 

For god's sake stop this bitching and slanging match about the WHR/FR some people never learn even after the other thread was locked they keep banging on war drums and bitching away because they don't like the new WHR, the only way to stop it is for the mods to lock every thread you create.

 

Before this descends into oblivion (again) let's try at least and focus on all the positive things that have been happening on all three railways with 134, 138, 140, Russell, winter works programme...the list could go on. It would be a shame if with all this heated discussion is going on that positive things happenning on all three railways is missed.

Let's settle our differences and move on.

Regards

Duncan