Neil Oliver is new president of NTS

[Fixmylife]

This seems to be causing a bit of upset! I have seen a few comments that people want to cancel their NTS membership because of this.

Well, he did describe the Clearances as "migration".

Yes someone described that as being a 'holocaust denier' as in the highland clearances being Scotland's holocaust. Just wondering how bad a choice he will turn out to be!

Surely NTS shouldn't exist in his opinion - it should just be part of the National Trust

So I presume his first act will be to make himself redundant

The Problem, is that a better more suited applicant for the President of National Trust Scotland has lost the position to someone who has been rewarded for flattering the UK government and spouting loudly his political loyalty to those in power.
The NTS requires specialist historical knowledge. Oliver IS NOT A HISTORIAN. He trained in the technology of archaeology and has a secondary level education in history. The TV series he presented was scripted and offer to various REAL historians who rejected it because it was factually inaccurate and frequently tinged with British nationalist bias. No professional was willing to touch the production. It was then that Oliver was put forward and the falsehood that he was a genuine Historian was given political backing. This has made him persona non grata in academic circles and institutions. Still amongst Unionist politicians he is the go to man when you need some one the newspapers and TV can use as an "historical expert ".
As we see political loyalty is rewarded.
Still sorry for the person who should rightfully have got the job.

Fucking hell!

My fingers itch to cut his shiny hair.

Who was the better applicant?

Was he/she a yes voter? That seems to be the main criteria as far as I can gather.

Seems to prove Neil Oliver was right. The referendum was cancerous to Scotland.

If you ask the man on the street to name the highest profile Scottish person interested in history, they'll say Neil Oliver. He's a well known face and will raise the profile of the NTS.

His personal politics are neither here nor there.

I have seen a few comments that people want to cancel their NTS membership because of this.

Will be the same people boycotting Tunnock's Teacakes because they took the lion rampant off their boxes sold in England, or Highland Spring because their CEO is against another IndyRef.

I am not a fan of his political opinions but I think he probably is qualified to be President of NTS. He may not be a historian but the trust is primarily a conservation charity. He has a high profile, people have heard of him & he has a professional interest in the areas the trust gets involved in.I don't know who the previous incumbent was but it is my understanding that many of the people in these positions in the past have had no qualifications no public profile.

been rewarded for flattering the UK government

An SNP conspiracy theorist I see. How and why exactly would the UK Government influence a charity ?

Quick without looking it up - who is he replacing?

Looking at Lord Lindsay who had what can only be described as a quiet career in politics and it seems if anyone was to get a political reward it would be him.

The NTS requires specialist historical knowledge

But you are being deliberately obtuse about the role of the President of the NTS. It's not a day to day, hands-on, management role. The President will not be getting involved with decisions about which properties to refurbish or purchase. The role of the President is to be the "face" of the organisation, to promote the concept of the NTS in general, raise awareness and be a figurehead. Neil Oliver is not going to be sitting in board meetings trying to decide whether to raise the admission charges at Culzean or debating what should be on the menu in the tea shop at Culloden.

Maybe Sam Heughan could have done it then! 😉

I think it will be a good move to raise the profile of the NTS, but I don't like the man as an individual (& yes I've met him & worked with him). There is no comparison between the profile NTS has and that of its counterpart NT, so perhaps having a high profile president will help

Fixmylife- Another vote for Sam Heughan here....!

If we're not employing historians as figureheads for historical trusts then Sam would definitely draw in more tourism!

I would have thought people would be happy that for the first time the NTS have appointed someone who is not an aristocrat. He's clearly passionate about Scottish history and the preservation of our historical heritage, so seems a good choice to me who will hopefully raise the profile of the NTS.

The past president was also not a historian btw. I'm not sure why the nats seem so fixated on the president having to be a historian since it hasn't seemed to matter in the past.

Oh actually I am sure, it's the only way they can try and justify their bigotry against someone who doesn't share their political beliefs.

Honestly I despair at what Scotland has become.

The cybernats are getting their knickers in a real knot about this. Someone has started a petition on Change - not protesting about qualifications or suitability but just because " he does not have the Scottish people and Scotlands interests at heart."

What a fucking insult to all strong NO voters.

Ahh Poppy, did you not realise that you can't possibly love your country and be a No voter...

Whether you like or dislike Neil Oliver is neither here nor there. This is a freedom of speech issue. He's the first non-aristocratic president of NTS, which has always been entirely separate from the English body, The National Trust. He's clearly a suitable candidate. He writes his own scripts and his own books. His political views - such as they are - are irrelevant. Lord Thurso was a LibDem MP and he is chair of VisitScotland. Magnus Linklater, married to a LibDem peer, was chair of the Scottish Arts Council. We need people of all political persuasions and none to volunteer for civic roles in Scotland. God knows, its hard enough to get people to give up their time without subjecting them to modern day equivalent of the stocks if they take a stance on anissue. The idea of people petitioning as a mob against individuals with whose politics they disagree, is ignoble and sinister.