Forum menu
and the grounds return to the commons (as lots of them were before being enclosed/stolen )
Aren't they more or less that now? The NT is a charity with acts of parliament to enable it. Anyone can spend time in and enjoy NT lands/properties.
Should they be 'true' commons? Not sure I want to see kids tearing them up on motorbikes and travellers camping on them myself.
Interesting article in the Guardian about the anti-Woke pushback in the NT:
The Guardian is selling stories on *both* sides of an invented 'woke' squabble.
Good click generation for them but nothing to do with what's actually going on at the AGM on either 'side'.
Unfortunately I clicked, so I'm part of the problem. 😢
The Guardian is like an inverse Daily Mail these days. Full of polarising and 'click-baity' opinion pieces catering to the 'right on' middle-class progressives.
The Guardian is like an inverse Daily Mail these days. Full of polarising and ‘click-baity’ opinion pieces
I fear all media has gone that way. And it's our fault. This thread is only here because of the invented 'woke war' narrative. It's generating clicks. If they'd done a reasoned explanation of the pressures on the NT and the resolutions none of us would have clicked.
The Guardian is like an inverse Daily Mail these days. Full of polarising and ‘click-baity’ opinion pieces catering to the ‘right on’ middle-class progressive
What a load of cobblers
Should they be ‘true’ commons? Not sure I want to see kids tearing them up on motorbikes and travellers camping on them myself.
It's not beyond our whit to manage though is it.. I mean it's clearly a wrong to have so much of the UK essentially "off limits" to everyone, and it shouldn't be a right to do what you please and be an anti-social tosser.
Interesting article in the Guardian about the anti-Woke pushback in the NT:
Whilst you are finding examples dont suppose you have any of the evidence you keep being asked for.
I note the same with that piece. It never bothers to ask are the complaints valid or just some nutters getting upset.
Is it worth upsetting a few old lags in order to build Snodgrass Hall Adventure Playground in a couple of unused acres out back if it attracts young families in droves?
I guess it depends if those unused acres are part of a Capability Brown landscape.
In several areas they are facing the classical beauty spot issue. If they make it capable of handling the crowds then a)it may well attract more and hence back to square 1 and b)the act of building the car parks and other facilities impact the beauty spot.
Some areas will be better suited to it than others eg the one nearest to me would be crap for it. The roads to it are appalling and there isnt much space there.
The different groups wanting different things are always going to put pressure on it. I knew someone who only had membership every other year on the grounds they supported the natural landscape side of things but werent a fan of country houses.
" the natural landscape "
Opens up another can of worms....
Opens up another can of worms….
Well we dont seem to be getting any good examples of the wokeness. Soooo:
Rewilding vs green deserts.
Round one seconds out.
Interesting article in the Guardian about the anti-Woke pushback in the NT:
Couple of things spring to mind: 1. That "article" is in fact an opinion piece. 2. It doesn't say let's hide away some ugly truths or ignore our past lest it offend people "just having a nice day out" it just says frame it better and review what you're going to say before launching it on an unsuspecting audience who are being primed by culture-war hyperbole
The NT place I volunteer at is returning a small part of its land from a green desert back to how it was…. The backlash and sheer idiocy from some is unbelievable
The NT place I volunteer at is returning a small part of its land from a green desert back to how it was…. The backlash and sheer idiocy from some is unbelievable
Years ago, when I lived nearby, I used to love visiting Hampton Court Palace grounds. There was a really wild patch at one end which felt fantastically different from anything around there, and I much preferred it. It's probably not there these days. (And I know HCP isn't NT!)
Rewilding gets my vote, with some bike trails thrown in of course!
Luckily to have both where I am
Should they be ‘true’ commons? Not sure I want to see kids tearing them up on motorbikes and travellers camping on them myself.
...breathes fresh life into the thread 🙂
Hmmm...
Travellers camping on common land, like they used to do for hundreds of years until the 1950's / 60's. I guess that preserving certain traditions and histories is more important than preserving others...
review what you’re going to say before launching it on an unsuspecting audience who are being primed by culture-war hyperbole
It wasnt exactly launched onto the audience though was it? People really had to go looking for it with the intended purpose being it would then inform future decisions.
It is rather telling how the outraged cant actually give examples of it being forced on them.
Travellers camping on common land, like they used to do for hundreds of years until the 1950’s / 60’s. I guess that preserving certain traditions and histories is more important than preserving others…
The new tradition is wandering around a NT property clutching a disposable coffee cup while looking the other way as your dog craps in the undergrowth. Where would the dogwalkers go if the travellers were there?
The Times reports today that Restore Trust didn't ask the candidates they have endorsed before doing so, and some of them are not happy about it.
The new tradition is wandering around a NT property clutching a disposable coffee cup while looking the other way as your dog craps in the undergrowth.
😂 it’s funny because it’s true.
The Times reports today that Restore Trust didn’t ask the candidates they have endorsed before doing so, and some of them are not happy about it.
That adds some important context to the story. Thanks.
didn’t ask the candidates they have endorsed before doing so, and some of them are not happy about it.
Trouble with politics is you don't get to choose who supports you. But I remain sceptical that this isn't a ruse to get sympathy votes for these 'misunderstood candidates'.
It looks like three of the RT supported candidates got elected (although some said they hadn’t asked for the endorsement) but not Stephen Green.
They also voted to continue the ban on trail hunting on NT land by a large majority although that is a non-binding vote.
Min Grimshaw – elected
Sarah Green – re-elected
Caroline Kay – re-elected
Andrew Powles – elected
Sandy Nairne – elected
Guy Trehane – re-elected
The candidates for the governing council that Restore Trust have supported are Michael Goodhart, Stephen Green, Min Grimshaw, David Pearson, Andrew Powles and Guy Trehane.
I can’t find/remember who the one who wasn’t happy about RT endorsement was.
Goodhart was one who was unhappy that he hadn’t been consulted by RT
but not Stephen Green.
That's not a surprising result, but a good one nevertheless, fella seems like a nasty piece of work.
That’s not a surprising result
He came within less than 1000 votes (33564 vs 34402) of the lowest successful candidates score
Bump.
Anyone know who the candidates to avoid are this year?
Anyone know who the candidates to avoid are this year?
Philip Gibbs
Andrew Gimson
violet Manners
Philip Merricks
Jonathan Sumption
From their website to save too many clicks
All the above. Generally, if you get the magazine and the included AGM leaflet, then each candiates 10year plan is enough to weed out the wrong uns.
Although it's very difficult not to like the name Violet Manners...
Yep, she's clearly a character from the Just William books
Yep, she’s clearly a character from the Just William books
More Roald Dahl
By the look of it, just using the quick vote to vote for the five recommended candidates will have the right effect?
(I note also there's a member's resolution about improving walking/cycling access which the NT recommends you vote for)
I’ve been thinking about joining the NT, this sort of disruptive behaviour on the part of RT is something I’m very much against, so it might be an opportunity to air my views. Any prospective candidate who utters the words ‘woke/wokism’ is immediately disqualified.
To save me looking, who should we vote for?
@zippykona As far as I can see using the 'quick vote' option to vote for the NT's recommended candidates is the fastest way to keep out the nutters - this votes for:
- James Dixon
- Inga Grimsey
- Sarah Hollingdale
- Simon Kearey
- Michael Salter-Church
All of whom look OK.
Thanks, will do.
Have done.
None of Restore Trusts candidates were elected, all had about 45-48000 votes but the threshold for being elected was 77000
the resolution to improve cycling and pedestrian access was also passed by a huge majority
That's good to hear.
Perhaps shows a positive swing in favour of fair mind / open mindedness and a general reduction in support for the right wing.
(ok, so that's a sweeping generalisation, but actively moving to deny the past and gender issues seems pretty right wing to me)
poor tufton street.
Perhaps they need a new astroturf organisation to hide behind?
First time I’ve voted. Glad it made a difference. <br />Was the turn out up?