National Trust boss vows to keep speaking out despite concern of politicisation at charity

Hayley Dixon | Telegraph | 5 November 2022

This article was first published in the Telegraph on 5 November 2022.

The boss of the National Trust has vowed to continue challenging the Government amid a row over politicisation at the charity.

During a heated Annual General Meeting, Hilary McGrady alluded to criticism of the charity after it called growth plans announced by Liz Truss an “attack on nature”.

The director general said that she was aware that not all members agreed with its stance but that the arguments were at the “front and centre” of the organisation's purpose and it would continue to challenge policy.

At the meeting in Bath, the Trust faced anger over its support for a new road at Stonehenge, its participation in Gay Pride events, its democratic processes, its dealing with complaints and the way in which it responded to members' questions.

Despite criticism, the charity defeated its opponents. In an unusual move, it had opposed every single one of the resolutions proposed by its members and each vote went in the board's favour.

Campaign group Restore Trust had argued that the chairman René Olivieri should not be able to use discretionary proxy votes handed to him to vote down resolutions that the board opposed.

But they lost that proposal by 20,000 votes, with the chairman casting 1,828 discretionary votes against them.

The number of discretionary votes was drastically reduced this year after the charity introduced a “quick vote” system which allowed members to press a button to automatically vote online in favour of the Trustees recommendations.

These votes were not identified in the final tally, and campaigners argue that the process is undemocratic as members could be handing their vote to the trustees without knowing what they are voting for.

Other resolutions that were voted against were that the membership “deplored” the“divisive and unacceptable use of members' funds” on participating in “woke vanity projects” like Gay pride.

Ms McGrady acknowledged during her opening speech that there were things that the Trust did that not all members agreed with, including a campaign against the Government's growth plans

The intervention, which included a full-page advert in the national press, led to accusations from Whitehall that the charity was “playing politics”.

Ms McGrady told the meeting at the Bath Assembly Rooms: “Sometimes we need to speak out publicly. That’s why we voiced our concerns about recent proposals affecting nature, heritage and the planning system.

“I know not all members will agree, I don’t attempt to represent everyone. This is, however, front and centre of what our purpose is about. We will continue to work with the Government to get to the right solutions."

But the Trust’s leadership was accused of not listening to the membership on a number of issues.

Zewditu Gebreyohanes, director of campaign group Restore Trust, accused the management of “disingenuous obfuscation” because they were not answering questions directly.

Zewditu Gebreyohanes asks her question at the meeting CREDIT: Lee Thomas

She repeated questions from members about what information had come to light to mean the Trust had abandoned plans to largely restore Clandon Park which was devastated by a fire in 2015.

Andy Beer, Director of Operations and Consultancy at the Trust, said that over time, and with more information, “in simple terms we think we have come up with a better plan”.

The charity confirmed that it had received a £68 million insurance payout and, although the terms of the agreement meant that there were no restrictions on how it spent the money, it was dedicated to using it all at Clandon.

Kent Rawlinson, Clandon’s project director, said it was “simply not possible to meaningfully restore the interior” but instead it could tell the “remarkable story” of the construction and would be “a bit like visiting an 18th-century building site”.

Despite anger in the room, Mr Olivieri ended the meeting on a conciliatory note, asking for suggestions from members and promising to “do my best to be open to new ideas on how we are doing things”.