Among bodies asking for my vote is the National Trust.
Despite its name, this is an entirely non-governmental British charitable body which acquires and most laudably protects significant buildings and threatened countryside (I think there is an American affiliate, perhaps called the Royal Oak Foundation). The room-stewards in its properties are all unpaid volunteers.
Some time ago, the NT was in the news. As I remember the reports, in one property the volunteers had been asked to wear the 'Rainbow' diversity insignia. Some, who refused, were (if my memory is not deceiving me) told that they would be allocated to roles where they would not come into contact with members of the public.
I, and all other members, have now been sent our voting papers for the Members' Annual General Meeting in October.
One Members' Resolution "calls on the Trust never to require its volunteers to wear badges, symbols or other items that reflect a political or social viewpoint".
The "Board of Trustees' Position" asserts that "The purpose of this resolution is not clear".
Well, it seemed abundantly clear to me.
Offering context, the Board says that "we do not ask volunteers to wear badges or symbols, or other items that reflect a political viewpoint".
As between the text I have printed in red and the one I have printed in blue, do readers happen to notice any interesting differences?
I hope I am not the only person to notice this detail in the bumf which I and other members have received.
This happening all over the place are gaining and influencing a small minority of their like minded fellow travellers in other fellowships, It can only be stopped, this ignoring of the rules for membership by voting them out. We must get off our b.o.t.toms and kick them out.
Send for Lynne Truss (of Eats, Shoots and Leaves) to sort this out. The Trust's response can have quite a different meaning with their repositioning of the comma and the conjunction. Whichever NT official wrote this is probably in blissful ignorance of the implications of what he has done.
We left the National Trust some years ago, and instead joined the National Trust for Scotland, which probably needs the income more. So far, it does not have the unpleasant social/political objectives of the National Trust. Membership of either gives full reciprocal rights to park and visit the other's properties, so there is no loss of access. Best of all, it is a little less expensive.
Please see restoretrust.org.uk - they have great advice for NT members voting at the AGM.
I cannot believe, will not believe these infiltrators do not know more yet, do not understand what they are up to!
The National Trust is a non-governmental body, but its semi-official status in this country is demonstrated by the fact that its constitutional arrangements are governed by Act of Parliament (rather than, as for most charities, by a trust deed, or articles of association, or maybe a clause in someone's will creating a charitable trust).
Post a Comment