UKC

Before bining the voting papers as normal this year any national trust members may want to be aware of this attempted coupe in the upcoming AGM by a rather unpleasant sounding bunch of religious extremists and self proclaimed 'anti woke insurgents'. 

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/01/insurgents-bring-war-wokene...

I want to say "Thanks for posting this" - it's going to have me voting for the first time - but I'm too busy smashing my head in to the wall.

From the article:

Supported by Conservative MPs including the head of the Common Sense Group of backbenchers

Much like the Covid Recovery Group, their name probably needs referring to the advertising standards authority whenever it's used in any marketing materials....  I feel measurably dumber for reading their website / manifesto.

There are other areas I think the NT could have more balance in its presentation, for example a bit more open recognition of the role of arms dealing to funding Cragside.   Not sure how the common sense group would react to this as it's obvious liberal-lefty thinking but they also have a clear hard-on for WW2 analogies and militaristic jingoism given their manifesto.  

Oh yuk. Thanks for posting this, it is a useful heads-up and a reminder not to bin the voting papers!

One of the candidates is a former union leader, whose statement explicitly refers to the need for the NT to acknowledge its colonial past. I voted for her.

Yep, saw this and resolved to vote.Will do it now

There is also an opportunity to vote for a resolution to ban trail hunting on National Trust land as well.

Have nudged my parents who are both members in the direction of reading about the resolution and voting (however they see fit, although both are fairly anti hunting so I'd hazard a guess at which way they'll vote).

Another thank you for raising this. I’ve just ploughed through the 46 candidates’ statements, but helpfully the”Restore Trust” lot list the ones they’re backing on their website:

https://www.restoretrust.org.uk

It’s not always obvious from their statements, apart from one hilarious rant about “woke virtue-signalling “.

Yes, Sally Hunt, who has been fearless in defending university staff over the last few grim years. Also on the list is Geoff Nickolds who chaired Moors for the Future.

Is there an idiots guide to voting, who to definitely not vote for and some sane choices? How do get a vote - annual member, post or online? 

Depends if you regard trail hunting as a cover for actual hunting (with dogs), which is still illegal anywhere.

Just skimmed that website, and it's quite well done, you have to look hard to find the frothing culture wars stuff.

Illegal except if you don't get prosecuted, I've refused to be a member of the NT due to their continued allowance of hunting on their land so this is a welcome motion and if it passes I'll have to consider joining back up again.

(Yes I recognise that by refusing to be a member I now can't vote on it which is annoying but I can at least let people know the motion is there)

I think the use of the twitter# 'empirestikesback' tells you all you need to know.

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/annual-general-meeting

Stikes?

Umm! I'm not so sure about that. Whilst I wholeheartedly support the ban on hunting animals, I think that banning drag/trail hunting is a bit OTT because it replicates a chase for those that want to partake without it being a blood sport, so to ban it would be mean by banning something for the sake of it rather than on moral grounds.

There is a reason though why there are two terms used and why, generally speaking, the anti hunting groups leave the drag hunters alone.

I will admit to a certain amount of cynicism about the use of "quarry scents" by the latter.

Depends how cynically you view the use of the term trail hunting as cover for "oh we were just out trail hunting when a fox appeared out of nowhere and the hounds accidentally ripped it to bits"

Whoops, strikes! I was too busy splutering over my artisanal humous in an indignant rage of woke righteousness etc. to engage the spellchecker. 😉

^This sums my position up much better than I managed.

Thanks I hadn't realised there was a difference, but your response prompted me to Google it. What's the NT's position on drag hunting? I wonder how many other NT members like me, had assumed they were one and the same?

I cant see any reference. It might just be that no drag hunts operate on their land. I would assume though it would be considered fine. After all there have been no meetings recorded where the masters of the drag hunts have been found saying some interesting things and the risk of their hounds going after foxes is a tad lower since they dont use fox scent for the trail markings.

In the interests of convenience and certainty here is the list of 6 anti-woke candidates so you can vote either for or against them as you wish:

Andrew Powles

Min Grimshaw

Michael Goodhart

Guy Trehane

David Pearson

Stephen Green 

On the basis that I didn't have time or energy to read all 46, and that I wanted to avoid this lot, I noticed they were all male, bar one, and voted an exclusively female list. 

Yeah, you needed a spare couple of hours to do it properly. It will be interesting to see the result, because the anti-anti-woke vote could be seriously split, while anti-woke vote will all go to the same 6 people. 

I just voted for one person, on the grounds that whoever else I voted for might take votes away from that candidate.