Dear Editor,

I would describe myself as a passive member of NT who is interested merely in visiting the many beautiful properties within the organisation's portfolio.

However, having received the literature in respect of the forthcoming AGM, I am horrified at what I perceive as a totally warped presentation by those currently charged with the organisation's ongoing welfare.

The very fact that the recommendations on voting for members resolutions are all "against" is what first alerted me to the fact that the literature may be unbalanced. This persuaded me to read the nominees' details carefully and it quickly became apparent that the voting instruction return is cleverly constructed in a way to allow voters to take the easy option of voting for the organisation's recommended nominees.

Again on close scrutiny of the candidates it is abundantly clear that there is an agenda of pursuing a certain course of direction which is probably totally at odds with what the majority of members actually want.

Once mistrust is allowed to be fostered in simple souls such as myself, it begs the far larger question of whether there should be a total clear-out of those currently calling the shots, as it were?

Sincerely,

David Thompson
Newcastle upon Tyne