UPDATE: Bournemouth council 'in negotiations' with owners of Hengistbury Head Noddy Train

Bournemouth Echo: Hengistbury Head Noddy Train operators 'in negotiations' with Bournemouth council Hengistbury Head Noddy Train operators 'in negotiations' with Bournemouth council

A MASSIVE swell of public support for the threatened Hengistbury Head land train has forced Bournemouth council to reconsider taking over the service.

The council had served a notice to quit on operator Joyce Faris and announced it would bring the train service in-house from October, a decision that would have consigned the much-loved “Noddy trains” to the scrap heap.

But a huge public outcry, which saw more than 21,000 people sign an online petition, has prompted the council to think again.

It has now revealed it has started talks with 88-year-old Mrs Faris and will have a further meeting in a fortnight’s time.

The possibility of a reprieve for the 45-year-old train service has delighted campaigners.

As well as the online petition, a Hands Off Our Train (HOOT) Facebook campaign has 2,700 ‘likes” and radio broadcasters Chris Evans and Alex James also voiced their concerns.

Mrs Faris said: “It’s marvellous but I don’t want to get too carried away. It’s encouraging though.

“I’m very grateful to everyone who has supported us, the support has just been marvellous. We just can’t get over it.”

Peter Simpson, who attended the Hengistbury Head residents’ meeting on Wednesday to voice support for the current service, said: “I’m cautiously optimistic we will reach an acceptable solution. I can understand Bournemouth council wanting to run an attractive transport service to Hengistbury Head visitor centre but I cannot see why it’s necessary to take over the existing service – integrate it and link up with it but don’t ruin what’s there at the moment.”

Steve Barratt, the chair of the Mudeford Beach Hut Association, said: “Our position was that we felt it was a hasty decision that was taken without enough thought and preparation.”

Cllr John Beesley, leader of the council, confirmed they had met with Mrs Faris and her representatives on Wednesday. 

“Both parties were keen to work together to find a solution beyond the autumn which meets current operating standards and the council’s aspirations for this environmentally sensitive area, but to continue to retain the nostalgia people hold for the service,” he said.

“Our initial discussions went positively and we will be meeting again shortly to progress details.  Over the past two weeks we have also met with other interested parties and users of the land train and in the meantime the service will continue to operate as usual.”

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:47pm Thu 3 Apr 14

skydriver says...

Fingers crossed, that is a glimmer of hope
Fingers crossed, that is a glimmer of hope skydriver
  • Score: 19

2:53pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Townee says...

Perhaps the people running the train now could invest in some new rolling stock to bring it up to date. Nothing flash but something that doesn't look worn out and within keeping with the emissions limits.
Just a thought and perhaps the council would look more favourable on the old team.
Perhaps the people running the train now could invest in some new rolling stock to bring it up to date. Nothing flash but something that doesn't look worn out and within keeping with the emissions limits. Just a thought and perhaps the council would look more favourable on the old team. Townee
  • Score: -5

2:53pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Molecatcher says...

Hurray!
Hurray! Molecatcher
  • Score: 15

3:05pm Thu 3 Apr 14

BarrHumbug says...

Thats all well and good but if the council say that the contract requires modernisation of the trains and carriages and better disabled access, what then? I'm guessing Mrs Faris won't be interested in that?

Usually when the council wants to outsource something the public are up in arms about it, in this case they want to do the opposite and the public are up in arms about it? :D
Thats all well and good but if the council say that the contract requires modernisation of the trains and carriages and better disabled access, what then? I'm guessing Mrs Faris won't be interested in that? Usually when the council wants to outsource something the public are up in arms about it, in this case they want to do the opposite and the public are up in arms about it? :D BarrHumbug
  • Score: -26

3:20pm Thu 3 Apr 14

PUZZLED ONE says...

If the train currently meets the requirements of the users and also meets 'Elf n Safty' rules, why change.
As the saying goes 'If'n it ain't broke, don't fixit' !
Councils should stick to what they are supposed to be able to do. I say supposed because we see so many examples where councillors and council officers show evidence that they couldn't organise the traditional party in a brewery.
I wonder how long it would take to make enough profit from the proposed council replacement to cover the set-up costs?
That doesn't matter though cos it is only tax-payers money that the proposed new train would be liberally spreading about.
If the train currently meets the requirements of the users and also meets 'Elf n Safty' rules, why change. As the saying goes 'If'n it ain't broke, don't fixit' ! Councils should stick to what they are supposed to be able to do. I say supposed because we see so many examples where councillors and council officers show evidence that they couldn't organise the traditional party in a brewery. I wonder how long it would take to make enough profit from the proposed council replacement to cover the set-up costs? That doesn't matter though cos it is only tax-payers money that the proposed new train would be liberally spreading about. PUZZLED ONE
  • Score: 26

3:21pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Lucky Rich says...

Fingers crossed,,,,,one or two padded cushions for us older lot should be enough of a mod to the old trains ....good luck Noddy Train.
Fingers crossed,,,,,one or two padded cushions for us older lot should be enough of a mod to the old trains ....good luck Noddy Train. Lucky Rich
  • Score: 27

4:03pm Thu 3 Apr 14

BmthNewshound says...

I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term.
.
Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service.
I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term. . Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service. BmthNewshound
  • Score: 30

4:12pm Thu 3 Apr 14

chridrum says...

Well done people of Bournemouth, Christchurch and the World but keep a close eye, our lovely council will try to find another way to get rid of these trains. Beesley does so hate us to show we are in charge.
I do hope someone who knows their little 'ways' is helping with negotiations.

I think we have had public consultation and overwhelmingly shown we wish to retain the quirky heritage bottom bashing 'Noddy Train' we take visitors to ride on it just because it's quirky, we wouldn't do that on a lotto train.
So can we please have the Land Train staff smiling and waving again and be careful not to have any safety incidents.
Chris Evans is doing a classic car day tomorrow the Land Train should definitely feature. Get posting on Radio 2 breakfast people
Well done people of Bournemouth, Christchurch and the World but keep a close eye, our lovely council will try to find another way to get rid of these trains. Beesley does so hate us to show we are in charge. I do hope someone who knows their little 'ways' is helping with negotiations. I think we have had public consultation and overwhelmingly shown we wish to retain the quirky heritage bottom bashing 'Noddy Train' we take visitors to ride on it just because it's quirky, we wouldn't do that on a lotto train. So can we please have the Land Train staff smiling and waving again and be careful not to have any safety incidents. Chris Evans is doing a classic car day tomorrow the Land Train should definitely feature. Get posting on Radio 2 breakfast people chridrum
  • Score: 21

4:21pm Thu 3 Apr 14

politicaltrainspotter says...

And Councillor Coope recently said when the story broke 'What all the fuss about. ? ' It's called people power and a petition.Is it yoga that he has taken up as i swear i saw him with his head up his backside ?
And Councillor Coope recently said when the story broke 'What all the fuss about. ? ' It's called people power and a petition.Is it yoga that he has taken up as i swear i saw him with his head up his backside ? politicaltrainspotter
  • Score: 20

4:24pm Thu 3 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

Don't worry, come the next council elections they'll be using the Noddy Train as an example of how they used public consultation to find out what the users of the service really want - and that's what the council provided.
Don't worry, come the next council elections they'll be using the Noddy Train as an example of how they used public consultation to find out what the users of the service really want - and that's what the council provided. JackJohnson
  • Score: 3

4:29pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Controversial But True says...

Off with the heads of all involved in the consideration of terminating the Noddy Train contract! Just a typical Tory attitude to ignore the voice of the people!!!
Off with the heads of all involved in the consideration of terminating the Noddy Train contract! Just a typical Tory attitude to ignore the voice of the people!!! Controversial But True
  • Score: 5

4:34pm Thu 3 Apr 14

skydriver says...

BmthNewshound wrote:
I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term.
.
Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service.
Yes your correct, what an idiot he is, and to think its his neighbours who voted him in, I bet they rethink that next time around. , I suggest they give this spineless man a very wide berth
[quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term. . Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service.[/p][/quote]Yes your correct, what an idiot he is, and to think its his neighbours who voted him in, I bet they rethink that next time around. , I suggest they give this spineless man a very wide berth skydriver
  • Score: 15

4:37pm Thu 3 Apr 14

skydriver says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
Thats all well and good but if the council say that the contract requires modernisation of the trains and carriages and better disabled access, what then? I'm guessing Mrs Faris won't be interested in that?

Usually when the council wants to outsource something the public are up in arms about it, in this case they want to do the opposite and the public are up in arms about it? :D
Good title for you...Barrhumbug, it's as well 21,000 plus don't view it your way, thank goodness for common sense folk, clearly you are not one of them .
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: Thats all well and good but if the council say that the contract requires modernisation of the trains and carriages and better disabled access, what then? I'm guessing Mrs Faris won't be interested in that? Usually when the council wants to outsource something the public are up in arms about it, in this case they want to do the opposite and the public are up in arms about it? :D[/p][/quote]Good title for you...Barrhumbug, it's as well 21,000 plus don't view it your way, thank goodness for common sense folk, clearly you are not one of them . skydriver
  • Score: 12

4:44pm Thu 3 Apr 14

speedy231278 says...

Tories listening to people? Is there an election looming?
Tories listening to people? Is there an election looming? speedy231278
  • Score: 10

4:55pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Bob49 says...

Whilst a possible 'change of hear' is welcome, it does bring into question Cllr Williams implacable belief that it was a done deal and no amount of protest would change things.

Sadly, where protest is urgently needed elsewhere in the borough we are met with almost total apathy.

Takeaway a 'Noddy' train and all hell breaks loose, take away car parks, open green park land and virtually anything else that isn't screwed down ..... and what, nothing.

Carry on Looting, so it would seem.
Whilst a possible 'change of hear' is welcome, it does bring into question Cllr Williams implacable belief that it was a done deal and no amount of protest would change things. Sadly, where protest is urgently needed elsewhere in the borough we are met with almost total apathy. Takeaway a 'Noddy' train and all hell breaks loose, take away car parks, open green park land and virtually anything else that isn't screwed down ..... and what, nothing. Carry on Looting, so it would seem. Bob49
  • Score: -1

5:21pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Avengerboy says...

No, I insist, waste some more of my council tax and run the Noddy train at a massive loss.
No, I insist, waste some more of my council tax and run the Noddy train at a massive loss. Avengerboy
  • Score: 1

5:22pm Thu 3 Apr 14

ShuttleX says...

BmthNewshound wrote:
I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term.
.
Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service.
Mr Wiiliams is fuming that Mr Beesley has gone over his head. As has been pointed out to you before Mr Wiiliams, you don't have a God given right to be on the gravy train. If you don't start listening to people, instead of just dictating to them, you will find you butt on the pavement, wondering what went wrong. Arrogance is not a nice trait in anybody. It certainly isn't in somebody who is supposed to represent the people of Bournemouth. As for his comment about this being a done deal, and that's that. He wasn't happy to be told he had overstep the mark on that one. I would take a photo of your cabinet seat Mr Williams, it might not be yours for very long. Don't let Mr Beesleys smile fool you, the bloke will drop you like a brick if you cause him any more grief.
[quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term. . Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service.[/p][/quote]Mr Wiiliams is fuming that Mr Beesley has gone over his head. As has been pointed out to you before Mr Wiiliams, you don't have a God given right to be on the gravy train. If you don't start listening to people, instead of just dictating to them, you will find you butt on the pavement, wondering what went wrong. Arrogance is not a nice trait in anybody. It certainly isn't in somebody who is supposed to represent the people of Bournemouth. As for his comment about this being a done deal, and that's that. He wasn't happy to be told he had overstep the mark on that one. I would take a photo of your cabinet seat Mr Williams, it might not be yours for very long. Don't let Mr Beesleys smile fool you, the bloke will drop you like a brick if you cause him any more grief. ShuttleX
  • Score: 17

5:39pm Thu 3 Apr 14

eyesropen says...

I'd like to think that this was a genuine move on the part of the council to do the right thing but I can't help thinking that it's more likely a way to placate the electorate and then do what they were always going to do by making the conditions untenable for Mrs Faris and claiming that she 'refused' to agree to their offer, making themselves look like the good guys in the process. I hope I'm wrong but nothing they say should be taken at face value.
I'd like to think that this was a genuine move on the part of the council to do the right thing but I can't help thinking that it's more likely a way to placate the electorate and then do what they were always going to do by making the conditions untenable for Mrs Faris and claiming that she 'refused' to agree to their offer, making themselves look like the good guys in the process. I hope I'm wrong but nothing they say should be taken at face value. eyesropen
  • Score: 20

5:47pm Thu 3 Apr 14

KLH says...

There is a comment on the Facebook story on this about using the train designated to replace the Noddy Train to provide a service to Sandbanks, I think this is a fantastic idea. Train could run from Alum Chine to the chain ferry. I've walked it and often wished there was a land train!!
There is a comment on the Facebook story on this about using the train designated to replace the Noddy Train to provide a service to Sandbanks, I think this is a fantastic idea. Train could run from Alum Chine to the chain ferry. I've walked it and often wished there was a land train!! KLH
  • Score: 3

5:50pm Thu 3 Apr 14

skydriver says...

ShuttleX wrote:
BmthNewshound wrote:
I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term.
.
Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service.
Mr Wiiliams is fuming that Mr Beesley has gone over his head. As has been pointed out to you before Mr Wiiliams, you don't have a God given right to be on the gravy train. If you don't start listening to people, instead of just dictating to them, you will find you butt on the pavement, wondering what went wrong. Arrogance is not a nice trait in anybody. It certainly isn't in somebody who is supposed to represent the people of Bournemouth. As for his comment about this being a done deal, and that's that. He wasn't happy to be told he had overstep the mark on that one. I would take a photo of your cabinet seat Mr Williams, it might not be yours for very long. Don't let Mr Beesleys smile fool you, the bloke will drop you like a brick if you cause him any more grief.
Williams comes from the same mould as the Christchurch leader, Nottage
He too thinks it's his way or no way , another idiot in our midst.
[quote][p][bold]ShuttleX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: I am cautiously optimistic that the Council has bowed to public pressure. Even Beesley must realise that a public backlash of this scale against a Council decision in usually passive Bournemouth cannot be ignored. There are local elections next year and a u-turn on the Noddy train is a small price to pay to retain votes and ensure his leadership is secured for another term. . Interesting to note that it was Beesley who met with Mrs Faris and her representatives rather than Cllr Laurence Williams who is portfolio holder for leisure, tourism and culture. Cllr Williams credibility is now in tatters after his earlier claims that the Council decision was final and could not be challenged and the way he derided the petition to save the service.[/p][/quote]Mr Wiiliams is fuming that Mr Beesley has gone over his head. As has been pointed out to you before Mr Wiiliams, you don't have a God given right to be on the gravy train. If you don't start listening to people, instead of just dictating to them, you will find you butt on the pavement, wondering what went wrong. Arrogance is not a nice trait in anybody. It certainly isn't in somebody who is supposed to represent the people of Bournemouth. As for his comment about this being a done deal, and that's that. He wasn't happy to be told he had overstep the mark on that one. I would take a photo of your cabinet seat Mr Williams, it might not be yours for very long. Don't let Mr Beesleys smile fool you, the bloke will drop you like a brick if you cause him any more grief.[/p][/quote]Williams comes from the same mould as the Christchurch leader, Nottage He too thinks it's his way or no way , another idiot in our midst. skydriver
  • Score: 16

5:59pm Thu 3 Apr 14

s-pb2 says...

Bob49 wrote:
Whilst a possible 'change of hear' is welcome, it does bring into question Cllr Williams implacable belief that it was a done deal and no amount of protest would change things.

Sadly, where protest is urgently needed elsewhere in the borough we are met with almost total apathy.

Takeaway a 'Noddy' train and all hell breaks loose, take away car parks, open green park land and virtually anything else that isn't screwed down ..... and what, nothing.

Carry on Looting, so it would seem.
Totally agree with you Bob. The noddy train protest was utterly pathetic when matters of life and death to do with services to the vulnerable in this town are met with complete apathy by the general public. It seemed the basis of the protest was nostalgia. Seriously! Nostalgia! But then again I shouldnt be surprised it appears most of what the people of Bournemouth want is what life was like in the 1970s. (a 5 second view of the Purbecks...cost £8m), bus hubs (buses still manage to get in and out of the town centre without it....cost £5m), and a permanent ice rink in a seaside town (cost £2m). Closing down day centres and schemes, including employment, to help those with special needs (barely a whimper from the public)
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: Whilst a possible 'change of hear' is welcome, it does bring into question Cllr Williams implacable belief that it was a done deal and no amount of protest would change things. Sadly, where protest is urgently needed elsewhere in the borough we are met with almost total apathy. Takeaway a 'Noddy' train and all hell breaks loose, take away car parks, open green park land and virtually anything else that isn't screwed down ..... and what, nothing. Carry on Looting, so it would seem.[/p][/quote]Totally agree with you Bob. The noddy train protest was utterly pathetic when matters of life and death to do with services to the vulnerable in this town are met with complete apathy by the general public. It seemed the basis of the protest was nostalgia. Seriously! Nostalgia! But then again I shouldnt be surprised it appears most of what the people of Bournemouth want is what life was like in the 1970s. (a 5 second view of the Purbecks...cost £8m), bus hubs (buses still manage to get in and out of the town centre without it....cost £5m), and a permanent ice rink in a seaside town (cost £2m). Closing down day centres and schemes, including employment, to help those with special needs (barely a whimper from the public) s-pb2
  • Score: -7

6:01pm Thu 3 Apr 14

s-pb2 says...

Avengerboy wrote:
No, I insist, waste some more of my council tax and run the Noddy train at a massive loss.
The one in Boscombe seems to have done alright
[quote][p][bold]Avengerboy[/bold] wrote: No, I insist, waste some more of my council tax and run the Noddy train at a massive loss.[/p][/quote]The one in Boscombe seems to have done alright s-pb2
  • Score: -13

7:01pm Thu 3 Apr 14

THEREDS1892 says...

Need a change!the trains are out of date&shabby.....the trains around the town look great and more modern.
Need a change!the trains are out of date&shabby.....the trains around the town look great and more modern. THEREDS1892
  • Score: -20

7:21pm Thu 3 Apr 14

shoppingnoodles says...

I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years.

The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds.
I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years. The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds. shoppingnoodles
  • Score: 14

7:30pm Thu 3 Apr 14

rozmister says...

shoppingnoodles wrote:
I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years.

The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds.
They may not be able to release the figures in detail to you as it's commercially sensitive data which is protected under the Freedom of Information Act. I wouldn't count on getting all the information you want!
[quote][p][bold]shoppingnoodles[/bold] wrote: I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years. The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds.[/p][/quote]They may not be able to release the figures in detail to you as it's commercially sensitive data which is protected under the Freedom of Information Act. I wouldn't count on getting all the information you want! rozmister
  • Score: 1

8:05pm Thu 3 Apr 14

shoppingnoodles says...

rozmister wrote:
shoppingnoodles wrote:
I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years.

The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds.
They may not be able to release the figures in detail to you as it's commercially sensitive data which is protected under the Freedom of Information Act. I wouldn't count on getting all the information you want!
Time will tell if they are forthcoming, but as you know they cannot simply refuse, but must explain their reasons.

I shall very much look forward to them attempting to explain why the information would be deemed "commercially sensitive", when it has never been put out to tender!
[quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]shoppingnoodles[/bold] wrote: I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years. The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds.[/p][/quote]They may not be able to release the figures in detail to you as it's commercially sensitive data which is protected under the Freedom of Information Act. I wouldn't count on getting all the information you want![/p][/quote]Time will tell if they are forthcoming, but as you know they cannot simply refuse, but must explain their reasons. I shall very much look forward to them attempting to explain why the information would be deemed "commercially sensitive", when it has never been put out to tender! shoppingnoodles
  • Score: 4

8:07pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Lewcee says...

Do not trust a politician...they don't do backtrack, or "Yes, voters, you're right, we must see if there is some common ground for us in this". I expect the train will run to the end of the year, and then it will close "Being financially unable to comply with the new conditions imposed by the council".
Do not trust a politician...they don't do backtrack, or "Yes, voters, you're right, we must see if there is some common ground for us in this". I expect the train will run to the end of the year, and then it will close "Being financially unable to comply with the new conditions imposed by the council". Lewcee
  • Score: 7

8:24pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Lucky Rich says...

If the council were not so short sighted they could of helped Mrs
Faris out a bit with what is obviously a well known & loved tourist attraction, then just used the new land trains to fill in gaps between stations at various points from say the chain ferry at sandbanks to hengestbury head ....
If the council were not so short sighted they could of helped Mrs Faris out a bit with what is obviously a well known & loved tourist attraction, then just used the new land trains to fill in gaps between stations at various points from say the chain ferry at sandbanks to hengestbury head .... Lucky Rich
  • Score: 0

9:03pm Thu 3 Apr 14

rozmister says...

shoppingnoodles wrote:
rozmister wrote:
shoppingnoodles wrote:
I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years.

The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds.
They may not be able to release the figures in detail to you as it's commercially sensitive data which is protected under the Freedom of Information Act. I wouldn't count on getting all the information you want!
Time will tell if they are forthcoming, but as you know they cannot simply refuse, but must explain their reasons.

I shall very much look forward to them attempting to explain why the information would be deemed "commercially sensitive", when it has never been put out to tender!
It's commercially sensitive what people charge for things as it could prejudice their competitive position. So it could affect information about the cost of new trains/building work/etc. They would still have to give you an overall figure for the cost though but I wouldn't be surprised if some information in the balance sheet is blacked out! Good luck though, the freedom of information act is a great piece of legislation because it gives people the power to question government and hold them to account at least to same extent.
[quote][p][bold]shoppingnoodles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]shoppingnoodles[/bold] wrote: I feel sure that the press have requested the consultation documents and business projections for the proposal, as have I, which should hit our doormats any day now. It is almost a certainty that their plan will run at a loss, as the figures just don't add up and that means that the Council Tax payers of the area will be subsidising a loss making business instead of cheering on a business that had run perfectly well for 45 years. The embarrassment factor to the Council is potentially huge if they keep pushing this, but the publicity must be kept up so they don't get the chance to sneak the plan through, costing the borough hundred of thousands of pounds.[/p][/quote]They may not be able to release the figures in detail to you as it's commercially sensitive data which is protected under the Freedom of Information Act. I wouldn't count on getting all the information you want![/p][/quote]Time will tell if they are forthcoming, but as you know they cannot simply refuse, but must explain their reasons. I shall very much look forward to them attempting to explain why the information would be deemed "commercially sensitive", when it has never been put out to tender![/p][/quote]It's commercially sensitive what people charge for things as it could prejudice their competitive position. So it could affect information about the cost of new trains/building work/etc. They would still have to give you an overall figure for the cost though but I wouldn't be surprised if some information in the balance sheet is blacked out! Good luck though, the freedom of information act is a great piece of legislation because it gives people the power to question government and hold them to account at least to same extent. rozmister
  • Score: 1

10:16pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Mike R-B says...

Replace it with a Pony and trap.
Replace it with a Pony and trap. Mike R-B
  • Score: 0

9:23am Fri 4 Apr 14

BarrHumbug says...

skydriver wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
Thats all well and good but if the council say that the contract requires modernisation of the trains and carriages and better disabled access, what then? I'm guessing Mrs Faris won't be interested in that?

Usually when the council wants to outsource something the public are up in arms about it, in this case they want to do the opposite and the public are up in arms about it? :D
Good title for you...Barrhumbug, it's as well 21,000 plus don't view it your way, thank goodness for common sense folk, clearly you are not one of them .
I'm not in support of either side to be honest but I can just see how councils think:
1. Cancel contract with popular service provider.
2. Public up in arms over situation, complaints and petitions drafted.
3. Council back down, being seen to listen to what the council payers want.
4. Public happy again as negotiations begin.
5. Details of council contract require modernisation of the trains highlighting on fuel efficiency, disabled access and environmental impact.
6. Current operator plans to run the service exactly as they have for the past 45 years and does not have the money for the investment the contract terms require.
7. The council withdraw the contact based on the current operator failing to meet the terms, leaving them to bring the operation in house.
8. Council explains to the public that they made every effort to allow the current operator to continue but they wanted to offer the public a first class service that they think their tax payers deserve and despite lengthy negotiations the current operator failed to agree to meet the requirements bla, bla, bla.
[quote][p][bold]skydriver[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: Thats all well and good but if the council say that the contract requires modernisation of the trains and carriages and better disabled access, what then? I'm guessing Mrs Faris won't be interested in that? Usually when the council wants to outsource something the public are up in arms about it, in this case they want to do the opposite and the public are up in arms about it? :D[/p][/quote]Good title for you...Barrhumbug, it's as well 21,000 plus don't view it your way, thank goodness for common sense folk, clearly you are not one of them .[/p][/quote]I'm not in support of either side to be honest but I can just see how councils think: 1. Cancel contract with popular service provider. 2. Public up in arms over situation, complaints and petitions drafted. 3. Council back down, being seen to listen to what the council payers want. 4. Public happy again as negotiations begin. 5. Details of council contract require modernisation of the trains highlighting on fuel efficiency, disabled access and environmental impact. 6. Current operator plans to run the service exactly as they have for the past 45 years and does not have the money for the investment the contract terms require. 7. The council withdraw the contact based on the current operator failing to meet the terms, leaving them to bring the operation in house. 8. Council explains to the public that they made every effort to allow the current operator to continue but they wanted to offer the public a first class service that they think their tax payers deserve and despite lengthy negotiations the current operator failed to agree to meet the requirements bla, bla, bla. BarrHumbug
  • Score: -1

9:34am Fri 4 Apr 14

localopinion says...

Congratulations everybody for widening the circle of life and responsibility
to allow the Noddy train a second run for the following generations.
I am a 57 year old ex driver from the 70's and as such the new high standards might diminish my memory for foolishly trying to repeat my student occupation.But I wish everyone well. I edited the Mudeford sandbank news, Hengistbury head Times and Christchurch harbour Chronicle a decade or so ago you can read at msbnews(dot)co(dot)u
k which contains my phone number. The PO Box is deleted now. I relaunched recently a voluntary Mudeford Sandbank beach hut security website at PanopriconSecurity.w
ordpress(dot)com which might be of further interest.
Especially as a reward is currently offered to convict some recent break in perpetrators for the huts many of which the train effectively polices in the daylight hours just be being a responsible agency.
I have (as shared with others) extensive files, clippings and photographs that have been pressed into service or not in the past, from the 1960's onwards. If anyone with a view to some supportive action wants to consult this independent if retired source ( if it helps) they are welcome to my cooperation provided it does not disrupt proceedings reaching a successful conclusion. The aim must be to secure an eternal return for the Noddy train!
Tim Baber.
Congratulations everybody for widening the circle of life and responsibility to allow the Noddy train a second run for the following generations. I am a 57 year old ex driver from the 70's and as such the new high standards might diminish my memory for foolishly trying to repeat my student occupation.But I wish everyone well. I edited the Mudeford sandbank news, Hengistbury head Times and Christchurch harbour Chronicle a decade or so ago you can read at msbnews(dot)co(dot)u k which contains my phone number. The PO Box is deleted now. I relaunched recently a voluntary Mudeford Sandbank beach hut security website at PanopriconSecurity.w ordpress(dot)com which might be of further interest. Especially as a reward is currently offered to convict some recent break in perpetrators for the huts many of which the train effectively polices in the daylight hours just be being a responsible agency. I have (as shared with others) extensive files, clippings and photographs that have been pressed into service or not in the past, from the 1960's onwards. If anyone with a view to some supportive action wants to consult this independent if retired source ( if it helps) they are welcome to my cooperation provided it does not disrupt proceedings reaching a successful conclusion. The aim must be to secure an eternal return for the Noddy train! Tim Baber. localopinion
  • Score: 2

9:56am Fri 4 Apr 14

localopinion says...

Barr Humbug is an accurate cynic but in this extraordinary case that general condition of how Council's are free to operate might be changed by a White Knight or Champion for Mrs Faris's and mechanic Alan Barnard's Noddy train. Sometimes it is not a change of train that is needed, or a change of line, nor a change of passengers (obviousl;y) but a change of heart.
And as for a White Knight or Champion I am thinking we are talking image here, not cash, All it takes is the confidence and support and bold statements to complete this circle in favour of the Noddy train. Even a reverse takeover! My money would have been on Roger Slater well known in the town but sadly deceased. But generations change and the wheel of life can fall on anyone. Personally I think all Chris Evans would have to do is employ experts to agree a plan. caress a few stray hairs from the earlier debate and underwrite a sure thing...that and use his considerable skills as a broadcaster to "get it right". I was just a journeyman driver, fluid with the joy of student life and now a worn out old coupling who loved the train.
(Someone like) Chris Evans would be like connecting up a dozen Ferraris
and allowing them to precede the train in a public relations triumph bringing style to substance and laughter to a track not of tears anymore but real genuine travellers. Vote this way or that way, the best train and outfit will win if we are served not a meal on wheels that is tasteless, but one of true British heritage, honoured by Ferrari, even (for the publicity). Tim Baber
Oh. Top Gear...hmm. too controversial?? They say what they think.
and might reveal an ironic risk with the Noddy train having a top speed of 10 mph. Hmmm. and Chris Evan's Ferrari's are fast...good idea to slow them to 10mph by connecting them all together. So do we want Chris Evans as a Champion (using long or is it short heat path spark plugs?) or say that hero of saying it like it is Jeremy Clarkson? James may or Richard Hammond...you see ..the train has friends. The Prom Puffer simply has paying customers...and it is German.
Barr Humbug is an accurate cynic but in this extraordinary case that general condition of how Council's are free to operate might be changed by a White Knight or Champion for Mrs Faris's and mechanic Alan Barnard's Noddy train. Sometimes it is not a change of train that is needed, or a change of line, nor a change of passengers (obviousl;y) but a change of heart. And as for a White Knight or Champion I am thinking we are talking image here, not cash, All it takes is the confidence and support and bold statements to complete this circle in favour of the Noddy train. Even a reverse takeover! My money would have been on Roger Slater well known in the town but sadly deceased. But generations change and the wheel of life can fall on anyone. Personally I think all Chris Evans would have to do is employ experts to agree a plan. caress a few stray hairs from the earlier debate and underwrite a sure thing...that and use his considerable skills as a broadcaster to "get it right". I was just a journeyman driver, fluid with the joy of student life and now a worn out old coupling who loved the train. (Someone like) Chris Evans would be like connecting up a dozen Ferraris and allowing them to precede the train in a public relations triumph bringing style to substance and laughter to a track not of tears anymore but real genuine travellers. Vote this way or that way, the best train and outfit will win if we are served not a meal on wheels that is tasteless, but one of true British heritage, honoured by Ferrari, even (for the publicity). Tim Baber Oh. Top Gear...hmm. too controversial?? They say what they think. and might reveal an ironic risk with the Noddy train having a top speed of 10 mph. Hmmm. and Chris Evan's Ferrari's are fast...good idea to slow them to 10mph by connecting them all together. So do we want Chris Evans as a Champion (using long or is it short heat path spark plugs?) or say that hero of saying it like it is Jeremy Clarkson? James may or Richard Hammond...you see ..the train has friends. The Prom Puffer simply has paying customers...and it is German. localopinion
  • Score: 0

11:55am Fri 4 Apr 14

skydriver says...

s-pb2 wrote:
Avengerboy wrote:
No, I insist, waste some more of my council tax and run the Noddy train at a massive loss.
The one in Boscombe seems to have done alright
No resident from Boscombe can pay the price I don't think ,as yet, get a free pass vis the social security.
[quote][p][bold]s-pb2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Avengerboy[/bold] wrote: No, I insist, waste some more of my council tax and run the Noddy train at a massive loss.[/p][/quote]The one in Boscombe seems to have done alright[/p][/quote]No resident from Boscombe can pay the price I don't think ,as yet, get a free pass vis the social security. skydriver
  • Score: 0

9:57pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Turtlebay says...

It smacks of Communism that a council can help themselves to a private company. How would Beasley and co feel if a taxpayer took over the council offices and rented out their offices out to private businesses?
It smacks of Communism that a council can help themselves to a private company. How would Beasley and co feel if a taxpayer took over the council offices and rented out their offices out to private businesses? Turtlebay
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree