What's up with the RTM ? (was Government support (was 4001))

[catchpoints@my-dejanews.com]

In previous posts, I have taken issue with Messrs. Gioia and Yates on the
subject of RTM management.

However, recent events should be aired ... like the fact that 3 Directors have
resigned since the Elections last year, AND the General Manager.

What is going on ? It is well known that the RTM Board has never let its GM
manage the company ... small wonder, then, that the opportunity to do so
elsewhere would entice him away.

One of those who resigned recently was the editor of the Members' newsletter,
which, like it or not, from time to time actually told things the way they
were. Can we expect such open and honest communication to continue, or will
the Board be more selective in what the Members are told ?

Since most of you know who I am now, I will admit to being a former Director.

Regards,
Lindsay Lucas
(soon to be ex-member ????)


In article <vN8t2.1$j33.337246@news0.optus.net.au>,
  "Rob" <blobigus@optus.net.au> wrote:
> Maybe it's time that the RTM tried a different approach to running the
> loopline. Perhaps something along the lines of the RTM maintains the
> permanent way and restores the line back to Colo Vale. They then lease the
> rolling stock / locomatives at a nominal sum to individuals / groups who
> then raise the funds to get the equipment restored. As part of the agreement
> the restored equipment must run on the loopline for X number of days, be
> stored at Thirlmere, etc etc. A bit like the way some of the English
> preservation lines operate who often swap locomotives as well. One thing
> that would come of this would be that popular loco's would be first in line
> for restoration as opposed to restoring 27 class. Also some carriages (like
> the EAM) may get restored.
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
> Darren Yates wrote in message <36b211f5.0@occy.pnc.com.au>...
> >Paul,
> >On some things I agree with you but the problem is that most of these
> >collections are sitting around doing nothing.
> >
> >I think railfans have reason to be a bit narrow-minded, paranoid, whatever
> >you like, particularly with NSW's history of looking after our heritage.
> >The Victorians had good sense to store a large number of steam locos in
> >parks. NSW just decided to cut most of them up or put all their official
> >eggs into the one basket with the RTM.
> >Victoria now has groups pulling locos out of parks, doing them up - the RTM
> >barely has funds to keep one going.
> >It is impossible for any one group to look after a wide cross-section of
> >rail heritage and keep it operational.
> >
> >Successive NSW governments could easily be seen as simply seeing rail as a
> >way of keep SimsMetal in operation. I think that's why people want to keep
> >as much as possible.
> >----------------------
> >Darren
> >
> >
> >Paul Hogan wrote in message <36b12d25.0@139.134.5.33>...
> >>"Darren Yates" <dyates@pnc.com.au> writes: > This is nonsense.
> >>> There is something called "preserving our heritage".
> >>> The National Trust has a huge number of buildings and historical
> >articleson
> >>> its books.
> >>> Are you, Bill, interesting in everyone of them?
> >>> If not, then by your argument only those people who are interested in
> >those
> >>> "old things" should pay for their upkeep.
> >>> IMO, this is a silly argument.
> >>> ----------------------
> >>> Darren
> >>
> >>Darren, I suspect the right answer lies somewhere between the two
> >>extremes.  NSW has certainly dragged behind other states in
> >>recognising that their moveable rail heritage artifacts are an
> >>important aspect of our short history, and deserving of a similar
> >>level of support to that provided for fixed heritage assets,
> >>such as buildings.
> >>
> >>Bob Carr, in full election mode, has belatedly started to drum up
> >>support for heritage conservation, and was quoted this week extolling
> >>the virtues of preserving our past.On past experience, this
> >>enthusiasm will be short lived.
> >>
> >>In respect to the RTM, successive State Government and state rail
> >>administrations have been happy to allow a largely volunteer
> >>organisation to take care their heritage fleet, often struggling
> >>to stay afloat financially. Yet if the collection were to be broken
> >>up or deteriorated to unrestorable condition, they would be the
> >>first to point accusing fingers and decry the neglect of our
> >>railway legacy!
> >>
> >>On the other hand, railfans are an insular and narrow minded lot,
> >>and they seek to try and preserve anything that survives the scrappers
> >>attention, regardless of historical significance. This inevitably
> >>results in a collection that is beyond the ability of the
> >>group to ever restore to presentable condition.  Both RTM and Dorrigo
> >>are examples of this . Culling any collection is an emotive subject,
> >>and most attempts to adopt a sensible curatorial policy usually
> >>fail due to members who oppose disposal of their "pet" exhibits.
> >>
> >>I doubt that any Government would ever fully support the conservation
> >>of a collection as large as the RTM's -  however I believe they
> >>do have a community obligation to ensure that a representative
> >>collection of our railway history is accessible to the public
> >>as both an educational and recreational resource.
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>
> >>Paul Hogan
> >>(former RTM Secretary and Director)
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own