The democratic deficit at the heart of the national trust | thearticle

Readers will doubtless be aware of many of the issues afflicting the National Trust, from its increasing politicisation to its neglect of volunteers. For a range of reasons, not least a

creeping apathy towards grand country houses, the National Trust has under its current management been straying from its founding duty: “The permanent preservation for the benefit of the

nation of lands [and tenements] of beauty or historical interest.” As a result, the way in which it is run is increasingly at odds with the wishes and expectations of its members,

volunteers, staff, donors, tenants and the general public. What many may not have realised is the extraordinary fact that those at the top of the National Trust have been resorting to

desperate attempts to silence dissenting voices among the membership and to thwart member-led attempts at reform. Now is a critical time of the year for National Trust members; voting for

this year’s AGM is open until midnight tonight (28 October). We at Restore Trust, the grassroots campaign organisation trying to return this beloved charity to its founding aims and ethos,

are seeking to increase democracy and accountability within the National Trust by encouraging members to vote for our Council candidates and members’ resolutions. When Restore Trust, of

which I recently became the director, was founded last year by a determined group of long-standing National Trust members, the National Trust’s management may not initially have felt

particularly threatened. Restore Trust came on the scene once the gears of the AGM were in motion. We therefore did not have enough time in advance of the AGM to get our important message

out to as many members as we had hoped. This year things are very different. Spurred on by the growing loss of confidence over the National Trust management’s ability to look after some of

the nation’s finest buildings and landscapes, and the increased interest from the media in our cause, National Trust members have been joining our campaign in their droves and there has been

significant momentum behind our movement. That loss of confidence has been justified by the Trust’s recent decision to renege on its seven-year-old promise to restore the fine rooms of

fire-gutted Clandon House in Surrey. Instead, the Trust is spending much of the £66.3 million of insurance money on a new glass roof and on concrete walkways from which visitors can admire

the “evocative spaces created by the fire”. One of our members’ resolutions this year calls for the abolition of the Chairman’s discretionary proxy vote. This is a completely undemocratic

feature of the National Trust’s voting system, as it gifts any votes on members’ resolutions which are not specifically cast by members as “For”, “Against” or “Abstain” to the Chairman, to

cast however he or she pleases. This inevitably leads to an entrenchment of the status quo, with critical resolutions which would otherwise have passed comfortably being defeated by the

Chairman. The National Trust management’s defence, that members are choosing freely to give their votes to the Chairman, is disingenuous; it can hardly be described as an active decision, as

it is not even a stated fourth option on the voting form. If a member is particularly exercised about only one or a few of the resolutions and casts a vote on them, but does not take a view

on others and leaves them blank, those votes should be cast as automatic abstentions. Given that we submitted our members’ resolutions in early June, the National Trust’s management have

had more than sufficient time to consider our call for greater democracy. Yet, instead of trying to engage with the issue and making any attempt to address the conspicuous democratic deficit

at the heart of the National Trust, they have decided to compound the issue and undermine democracy further, with their unexpected introduction of a new “Quick Voting” option. This option

is far less benign than it sounds. The implication, of course, is that one can choose to vote quickly or slowly and, _ceteris paribus_, who would choose the slow option? Ticking this box,

tellingly presented as “Option 1” on the voting forms, automatically approves all the National Trust’s recommendations on Council candidates and members’ resolutions. The claim by the

Trust’s management, who no doubt hope that many members will unthinkingly tick this box, is that they introduced this new voting option “in response to members’ feedback”. Yet, suspiciously,

members were not consulted on this at any stage. The first we heard of it was when the AGM booklet was published online at the beginning of September. In their determination to secure a

favourable outcome at the AGM, the National Trust have gone further and sought to exert influence even more directly. A National Trust Governance Support Coordinator attempted to censor the

candidate statement (a sort of manifesto) of one of our Council candidates, Philip Gibbs – which criticised the lack of integrity in the National Trust’s voting procedures and in particular

the use of the Chairman’s discretionary proxy vote to prevent reform – on the spurious grounds that there is “no evidence” that this takes place. This is patently false. Last year alone two

reformative resolutions, put forward by Restore Trust and calling for a change in attitude towards volunteers and towards specialist curators. These resolutions would have passed

comfortably, but were defeated because the then interim Chair cast over 20,000 discretionary proxy votes against each. The National Trust management’s attitude towards us has been incredibly

dismissive. They are unwilling to engage with any of the issues we raise, and constantly use ad hominem attacks to try and undermine our campaign. The sheer amount of time dedicated by

Celia Richardson, Director of Communications and Audience Insight at the National Trust, to attacking us on social media betrays their fear that we have a good chance of succeeding this

year. No-one from the National Trust appears willing to have a public head-to-head debate with a Restore Trust representative. What does the management have to fear if they truly are, as

they claim, in the right — and supported by the majority of members? It is important that as many National Trust members as possible are made aware of the skulduggery that is going on from

those at the top of the National Trust hierarchy to prevent popular reform to return the charity to its charitable objects. When the National Trust is recommending that members vote against

every single member’s resolution, it is a sign that there is a lack of interest in listening to and addressing members’ concerns. I would petition the new National Trust chairman, René

Olivieri, to take a fairer and more democratic approach by not casting a bloc of discretionary proxy votes against either of our resolutions, particularly the one about abolishing the

chair’s discretionary proxy vote — given the clear conflict of interest. The National Trust management’s constant obfuscation simply proves our point that trust really must be restored in

the National Trust. The time to do that is now. Please vote now and pass on the message to any members you know to vote for us before midnight tonight. A MESSAGE FROM THEARTICLE _We are the

only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing

throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation._