National trust AGM

[Theif]

I always make it my mission to take part in the National Trust AGM. I love the organisation and it's mission to get people out and about. I’ve started going through the National Trust AGM booklet, and I try to do my best to take it seriously and read it fully, i don't mind taking NT steer on how to vote, but do think I should understand their recommendations.

Restore Trust have been raising concerns about the NT for a number of years over pre-filling votes, I’ve never had strong feelings about it either way because if I don't like an option I just change it. But this year there are close to 200 candidates for the members’ council, and after reading through the submissions, a fair number come across as quite minimal or generic.

The size of the list alone makes it difficult for members to make informed choices, and it does seem to even further encourage people to just follow the NT’s preferred selections. I’m not against open participation, but it feels like there should be some kind of basic filter or clearer criteria in the application process, at least to ensure candidates provide a meaningful statement and are properly engaged with the process.

It almost feels like having such an unwieldy list is making it less democratic and harder to engage.

I’ll carry on working through it, but I can see why many don’t.

If the NT are filling it with candidates in the way you say that sounds like a “fix” to allow their preferred candidates to stand out and be voted in.

Bring back proper scones....we don't eat at nt anymore as the quality of food is so bad now. We just visit the house and grounds

I'm a sausage roll fan rather than a scone, so can't say I've noticed. But this is why I think the AGM is important. I liked one lady's submission because she talked about missed revenue opportunities and the need to make the shops and cafes work harder, it was really different to the others and so I thought a good voice to add balance- but you did have to wade through so much to find her!

I also would like fewer candidates in more detail. All I know about this one for example is that she wants more up selling in the shops- she might be a complete loon.

When someone's answer to what can you bring to the council is "I try to understand, and help others to do so" it certainly feels NT are really diving to the bottom of the barrel for the shittiest candidates. Beyond clogging the list so much people can't find decent candidates and so have to go for the NT recommended ones I can't see any other reason for allowing time wasters like this.

I’m cross with them for a number of reasons - don’t want to bore MN posters!

About 15 years ago they were so, so ridiculously precious that visits were quite nerve-racking. And they kept some rooms so dark that you couldn’t see anything (I was a museum curator- I know about light damage) and I used to wonder just WHO they were preserving these things for!

So what do they do? They swing to the opposite extreme- aarrgghhh. I’ve been to some houses in recent years where everything has been removed from some rooms and replaced with ordinary sofas, bean bags and toddler toys. I don’t go to a historic house to see toddler groups! Put them in a separate area.

Plus, the NT’s stewardship is very dodgy. They’ve allowed several buildings to burn down on their watch. Shocking.

They need to focus on their core purpose.

I lost sympathy too when they built that enormous HQ in Swindon at how much expense?

I rarely go in the houses anymore to be honest. I like the countryside, but tend to use them rather than service stations on journeys to use loos and cafes. Whilst I quite like the gardens, most are in such a state now they aren't worth going to just to enjoy nice surrounds and planting. If I want nice gardens I tend to go to an independent, historic houses property or RHS.

I hate all the lawns being left unmowed, windfall apples left on the ground and beds left unplanted. I don't mind areas being turned to wildflower meadow, but I've never seen NT do this- they just seem to leave grass uncut. It is using environmental concerns as an excuse to be lazy. These gardens and how they were planned are as important from a design POV as a room or house, they should be preserved in the same way.

I agree. I do tend to vote but this time I just thought there was no way I had time to go through all of them.

200 is far too many for a meaningful election. I know I tend to give up on elections (reps at work and union) if there are more than about 15 candidates, and none jump out at me. These are often transferable-vote elections, too, which means you need to rank them all. I end up going through and giving them a score out of 5, and then by the time I get past the highest scorers, I just do random order for those who have scored the same.

But how do you restrict the numbers standing? You obviously don't want the organisation filtering them. Some elections require that candidates have a certain number of supporters for their nomination, but in something like the National Trust, that's going to bias things - retired folk who volunteer will probably have plenty of contacts, but younger folk and those from less middle-class areas may not know enough other members.

One possibility might be to divide things up geographically, so that you vote only for people to represent your part of the country. My union also has some seats reserved for particular under-represented groups, so that splits it up a bit more.

I'm a trained gardener and volunteer for various environmental and wildlife charities.

I also volunteer in the garden of a NT property.

Those uncut grass areas are probably one of the best, most cost effective and sustainable things the NT does for wildlife in the UK. Long may they continue.