The National Trust is under attack

Yes. That’s what I said - odd that the NT should present its information in a format that is not in its accounts, particularly when it’s not a good PR look for them. I’m sure I could pull the info from its full accounts by doing a little maths, but I genuinely don’t care enough about the NT to invest the time.

My guess is the fundraising team produced some appeals showing how badly they’d been affected by Covid, and the media team lifted the figures from there without contextualising them properly.

It’s also a little sloppy - but I can see how it happens - not to have that page removed from searches/their website and replaced with up-to-date answers.

Everyone who can should still vote against the Reform Trust candidates!

Siope I do not doubt the validity of your figures, but mine also come from NT sources, so something funny is happening somewhere. I suspect the figures I quote are an amalgam of figures from several places in the accounts.

I have been treasurer of a small charity and the requirements of how charity accounts have to be presented often present a version of our finances that are quite at odds with our operational accounts.

During the 20 years that I lived in Suffolk I was treasurer of a local branch of Save The Children. as a branch we put on a variety of events during the year, the proceeds of which were donated to the charity. I remember two separate events that angered some of our members. The first was when the charity decided that it no longer needed knitted blankets for refugees since there were more practical alternatives. The second was when the charity did not come out against abortion. In both instances some members stopped supporting the charity.

Primrose53

Casdon

Volunteers whose sensibilities are affected leave charity jobs often, that’s their prerogative, and no organisation can change the way it operates to cope with that. There are over 50,000 volunteers in the National Trust, so 200 leaving means a very small percentage were offended.
The truth is that whatever the National Trust does it won’t please everybody - but it’s very successful at pleasing most of the people most of the time in its current form.

It doesn’t mean that at all. As already explained the NT did a rapid U turn to stop more people cancelling their membership. It does NOT mean that only 200 were offended. The 200+ offended were members anyway, not volunteers.

They knew full well that if they carried on insisting volunteers wore Pride badges they would get a mass walkout and then they would be well and truly stuffed as they depend heavily on volunteers.

Apologies for misinterpreting, but I think the point still stands regarding offence taken by members or volunteers of any charities. The charities can’t stop moving forward, whatever they do is risking offending a minority of people, but keeping the majority happy has to be their aim. It’s the prerogative of members, volunteers and staff to leave organisations if they don’t like it, but there’s really no evidence that has happened on a large scale. Good organisations listen, but they don’t compromise their principles.

Monica sorry, I thought my post made the source clear: it’s the National Trust’s audited accounts and annual reports as filed with the Charity Commission. Their most recent filed accounts are 2021-22.

I have a relative who loathes the NT and all it stands for. She sees castles and stately homes as glorifying a past which shouldn't be glorified. She always has felt this, long before the connections with slavery were highlighted.
I have some sympathy with that view but I love the buildings and the surrounds so can appreciate them for their own sake and also think about the workers who built them.

Sameness is a fact. But there again it can be comforting to know that you'll have a pot of tea and a scone in a tasteful tearoom after traipsing around for hours.

Allanbank at Grasmere is a wonderful NT house where you can sit on the seats and listen to live music whilst picking up some knitting to make blankets for cold knees.

NanKate

I agree Primrose how sad about the volunteer who left due to the NT forcing staff to wear the Pride badge. It should have been up to staff to make their own decisions whether they wore the badge or not.

We regularly visit our 3 local NT properties and gardens. What we have noticed is that the range of food in the cafes have decreased and it is only basic food like hot dogs and pasties available at lunch time. We often take our own picnic.

I visited one about 2 days after start of this season.
Agree range of food was bad.
Something like, soup, panini or cake.

Whitewavemark2

I am a long standing member and I think that there can be little doubt that the age profile has got much younger than when i first joined. Young families are much more in evidence now. They are the ones who appreciate the more progressive attitude that the NT has adopted, and are the future of the NT.

Old fogeys like the chap who refused to support the LGBT are a dying breed.

The NT will not survive just attracting people like that.

Many properties are becoming more attractive to younger audiences and families, several of the large houses with parkland are attracting much larger numbers. Why not? even if they have little interest in the historic value of the site, it’s a day out in pleasant surroundings. Very often repeat visits from local residents, very often parents with children, or retired couples just strolling through the ground and having a coffee.

We make good use of our NT cards and also Historic Houses, it’s very often the smaller properties with good guides that are the most interesting. They are both excellent value.

Casdon

Volunteers whose sensibilities are affected leave charity jobs often, that’s their prerogative, and no organisation can change the way it operates to cope with that. There are over 50,000 volunteers in the National Trust, so 200 leaving means a very small percentage were offended.
The truth is that whatever the National Trust does it won’t please everybody - but it’s very successful at pleasing most of the people most of the time in its current form.

It doesn’t mean that at all. As already explained the NT did a rapid U turn to stop more people cancelling their membership. It does NOT mean that only 200 were offended. The 200+ offended were members anyway, not volunteers.

They knew full well that if they carried on insisting volunteers wore Pride badges they would get a mass walkout and then they would be well and truly stuffed as they depend heavily on volunteers.

Volunteers whose sensibilities are affected leave charity jobs often, that’s their prerogative, and no organisation can change the way it operates to cope with that. There are over 50,000 volunteers in the National Trust, so 200 leaving means a very small percentage were offended.
The truth is that whatever the National Trust does it won’t please everybody - but it’s very successful at pleasing most of the people most of the time in its current form.

I agree Primrose how sad about the volunteer who left due to the NT forcing staff to wear the Pride badge. It should have been up to staff to make their own decisions whether they wore the badge or not.

We regularly visit our 3 local NT properties and gardens. What we have noticed is that the range of food in the cafes have decreased and it is only basic food like hot dogs and pasties available at lunch time. We often take our own picnic.

Siope I always give my sourcs - and I give a link to where the figures I quoted came from on National Trust website

I would also point out that the NT income and membership was HIGHER in the COVID year, than last year.

I have no objection to branding per se. There has always been branding on NT sites and it is an intrinsic part of any organisations work, especially that of a charity, but I have just found it overwhelmingly intrusive in recent year and it has come between me and enjoying their properties.

In the past, there was more diversity between sites, the diversity of the lives and times of the people who built and adorned and lived in and ran the houses came through, without value judgements. Again this is not an anti-'wokery' comment. Of course the extent that slavery financed many of these houses, and their families should be known and highlighted, but leave the visitor to make their own moral judgements on what happened.

I have just been reading an archaeological article that investigated the lives - and deaths of pauper apprentices in the cotton industry north of England, Work house children, as young as 7 or 8 wrested from their families and sent hundreds of miles away to work 14 our days in the cotton mills. The straight forward recitation of the facts was overwhelmingly shocking, with out anyone trying to feed me any moral judgements.

The NT isn’t all stately homes and tea rooms. The most interesting place I’ve visited recently was the Holmwood in Surrey. It’s an example of mid century modernist design where you get taken for a tour. Fascinating post war history. No tearooms.

I am a longstanding member of NT and have been reading these posts with interest.

NT aren't particularly well endowed in my part of Scotland with stately homes though much land is owned and can be accessed by anybody, member or not, - which is good.

They run training schemes for volunteers to learn land management and, dry stone walling, hedging skills etc

It's no worse than other similar organisations.

Historic Environment Scotland has closed several of its buildings due to H&S issues with no sign of any work being done.

YMCA/YWCA sold off several properties, which I still miss. Their reasoning at the time was that their ethos of helping poor people out of poverty wasn't being met.

So there's good and bad.

On a personal note, I recently visited a NTS house in Glasgow and had to pay entrance fee because there was no accessable database and i hadn't brought my membership card. It is on my phone but there was no WiFi!

I don't have a problem with gift aiding, but I agree with Rosie51 that the treatment of your grandson and his carer was appalling.

I used to be a member of NT and English Heritage, but my NT membership had lapsed. I was considering restarting it when some years ago we visited Brownsea Island. On arrival on the island we were asked to gift aid our entry fees. My disabled grandson was not to be given any reduction on entry price nor was his dedicated carer. I declined to gift aid, declined the voluntary contribution and would never consider rejoining the NT. As I explained my grandson's condition meant we'd be on the island for 30 minutes max, and that was just to satisfy his older brother's curiosity. No compassion, no understanding equalled no extra money from me. We have never encountered such rigidity from English Heritage which is why, despite not using it for over3 years, I still pay the membership.

I'm a NT member. We visited Sutton Hoo two weeks ago and I was very impressed with what the NT has done since I last visited years ago. Yes, there's a cafe and a shop - both of which are newly built and sell the same kind of thing that every NT property sells.

However, there's a museum with replicas of the artefacts found when the site was first discovered (the originals are in the British Museum). The museum attendant was very knowledgeable. He was a former professional scientist and my partner and he chatted for ages about the composition of the artefacts. We also accompanied a talk, which was very informative and entertaining. There were also designated walking areas for families and people with accessibility issues.

For anybody who hasn't visited Sutton Hoo, there isn't that much to see apart from some mounds on the ground. It all needs putting into context and I thought the NT did that superbly.

Siope I looked through the financial statements too but couldn't find M0nica's figures and so I just checked the report linked in her post. It's long past my bed time and I'm an hour ahead of you. I agree with your assessment about the overall trend.

"I really don't know WTF you are talking about, Freya".
Dear MaizieD, what do you think the use of that type of language brings to your argument?

Oddly, neither of those sums show in their headline accounts, and they don’t have a ‘fundraised income’ headline budget head. I dare say a trawl through the full accounts would find what they’ve included in that, but it’s too late and I’m on my phone so it’d be painful!

Their 2021-22 overall income and donations/legacies look reasonable in comparison to pre-lockdown. Their trading income hasn’t recovered fully (but may have this year). Their membership growth rate was the highest ever, up to 6 million plus members.

Where they have really been hammered is investment income, down 14m a year in comparison to 2019-20. It’ll be seriously interesting to see what difference Truss decimating the economy has made to that.

M0nica You are being a bit disingenuous when you state that fund raising income (for an unspecified year) was £79 million ,compared to £95.2 million in 2019/20. You omitted the fact that the lower figure was raised during 2020/2021 when the country was under lock down for much of the year, mainly when the Trust properties would ordinarily have been ope to the public but were instead closed.

M0nica I suspect that a strong reason why the CEO resigned was the opposition to her plans to change the status of the company by selling off a minority stake.

M0nica

"As i said my own disenchaantment with the NT has little to do with content just the way the NT corporate image and branding is sucking all the interest and originality out of so many of their properties."

I really don't understand your comment above. Are you suggesting that when the NT repaint a room that they use their corporate colours or using the wrong period soft furnishings. From what I remember tea rooms and the shops were in outbuildings and not in the main house.

I remember visiting Fellbrigg Hall in Norfolk which was given to the Trust after the only son and heir was killed during WW2. What I particularly liked about the house was the continuity through decades with different generations adding to the contents, such as the Chinese furniture, including some Chinese Chippendale, and early 20thC water colours. Standen and Monks House were also favourites.

You are very lucky in England to have such a good collection of houses, usually with original furnishings and art works, that you can visit.

I live in the Dordogne, land of 1000 chateaux,many of which are open to the public and most of those do not have much in the way of contents so they are rather soulless places.

According to the NT website More than 5.37 million people (5.95 million in 2019–20) are members of the National Trust

The NT site also says we received £79 million in fundraised income (£95.2 million in 2019–20).. The source for both figures is www.nationaltrust.org.uk/who-we-are/about-us/fascinating-facts-and-figures

This suggests both declining membership and declining funding. The NT are clearly doing something wrong.

As I have made clear, my complaints have nothing to do with whether the NT is woke or not, and I doubt whether many of their members or visitors give a toss one way or another,

It is not unreasonable to compare the NT with John Lewis. When their Chief Executive Officer realised that the comapany was not doing well with her in charge, she had the grace to announce her resignation. In the same situation the NT packed its board with supporters who would keep them in their jobs no matter how badly they performed.

There is not one person listed on the election paper that I would consider voting for.