Members' Resolutions

Use your voice as a member and vote on these resolutions.

Members’ resolution for walking and cycling access to properties

This resolution requests that National Trust review walking and cycling routes to pay-for-entry properties from nearby urban areas, and if safe and direct walking and cycling routes do not exist, to plan to create these. Potential means of achieving this could include creating additional property entrances adjacent to existing footways and cycleways, and working with Highways Authorities and other landowners to create new footways and cycleways.

Supporting statement

This resolution supports the National Trust’s strategy to ‘welcome everyone, for ever’, by facilitating access by people who would not otherwise visit their local property, in particular those who enjoy walks or cycles from home and could incorporate properties into their routes, and those without access to a car. Other benefits would be increased resilience of visitor numbers to factors outside the control of National Trust – such as rapid increases in car fuel prices – and reduced climate impact by enabling low-carbon transport options.

The inspiration for this resolution is the unsatisfactory walking and cycling access to the proposers’ local pay-for entry property, but access is similarly unsatisfactory at other properties. The property in question is about one mile along a popular bridleway from the city boundary, but the property gates at this point are not for public access, and it is a further two miles to a public entrance. The shorter alternative is to use the main road to the vehicle entrance, but this is a busy road with no pavement for the last half mile, and no cycle lane. If access were easier the proposers would certainly visit this property more frequently, and are sure that other local residents would too.

Resolution proposed by:

Brian Bennett, David Bennett, Kathleen Wright, Rachel Reid, Annie Siddall

The Board of Trustees’ response is shown on the following page

entrance, but this is a busy road with no pavement for the last half mile, and no cycle lane. If access were easier the proposers would certainly visit this property more frequently, and are sure that other local residents would too.

Resolution proposed by: Brian Bennett, David Bennett, Kathleen Wright, Rachel Reid, Annie Siddall

The Board of Trustees’ response is shown on the following page.

Board of Trustees’ response

The National Trust welcomes this resolution to improve how people can visit us by means other than car travel.

How visitors travel to our places is important for several reasons. For the National Trust, green travel helps us to achieve a number of our strategic priorities, which are to mitigate our impact on climate, reduce pressure on nature and to welcome everyone. For our visitors, we know that many enjoy the opportunity to come to our places by bike, public transport or on foot. More than a quarter of places in our care (26%) are within a mile of the National Cycle Network and over half (52%) are within four miles of a train station.

This resolution also supports our commitment to create green corridors that provide access from cities and towns out to the countryside. We know that knitting together green space, woodlands, towpaths and parks is essential to

supporting people in urban areas to get to large, nature-rich green space. The green corridor we have created along the River Avon to the east of Bath, passing through Bathampton Meadows and linking the city centre to surrounding countryside, is one example. We are working on developing 20 such green corridors around
the country.

Creating these routes is complex and sometimes frustrating - a lot lies outside of the Trust's direct control. To increase access by bicycle, rail and foot we need to work with multiple partners including local highways authorities and organisations such as Active Travel England and Sustrans. The support of members advocating for more and better-connected active travel routes is very helpful.

Work we are already doing around green travel could be enhanced through the passing of
this resolution.

We recommend that members vote for the resolution.

Context

Paused during the pandemic, we have now resumed our work on sustainable travel which includes assessing possible incentives, providing clear information for non-car travel and offering a great visitor welcome and facilities for those arriving on foot or by bike.

As a result of reviewing our visitor experience process, properties are now asked to consider green travel in their planning. We have established a new Cyclists Welcome programme and appointed a project manager (part funded by Sport England) to implement this. We will use this programme to understand how cyclists’ access can be improved through new and better designed property
entrance points.

The work of both the Cyclists Welcome programme and our Green Travel Group will identify additional opportunities to prioritise our investment for those arriving by non-car means.

Work developing routes between properties that are close to large urban populations and/or existing National Cycle Networks is also underway. At Anglesey Abbey on the edge of Cambridge we have worked with the local authority to install a dedicated cycle path that links the city with the property. We’re looking at similar projects at Dunham Massey (Manchester), Killerton (Exeter), Osterley (London) and Tyntesfield (Bristol).

Members’ resolution for the removal of quick vote

The quick vote should be removed from the AGM voting papers.

Supporting statement

The National Trust is a membership organisation: its members are essential to the Trust delivering its mission and preserving our heritage throughout the country. Members make their contribution to the governance of the Trust by voting at the AGM. Last year, a ‘quick vote’ was introduced on the AGM voting papers. This encourages voters to tick a box to vote in line with all the recommendations of the Trustees and of the Nominations Committee. Subsequently, every single members’ resolution was defeated and only candidates supported by the Nominations Committee were elected to the Council. By placing a quick vote on the voting papers, the Trust’s management invites members to take the simplified route of following its own preferences. This brings a risk that the meeting becomes little more than a rubber-stamping exercise for what the management wants. Note that there is a quick vote for those who agree with the management but no quick vote for those who do not. Even members who are generally satisfied with the Trust’s

management should be concerned about how this might influence future voting outcomes.

The presentation of a ballot paper matters. While many individual members no doubt make an informed decision to use the quick vote, a simplified option will have an effect across a large number of votes. Ticking one box is presented as the alternative to members reading and digesting a number of statements and choosing individually the five candidates who will best represent them, or making a decision on each resolution. It is well known from voting theory that placing simplified options on a ballot impacts the outcome. This is why, for example, there is no quick vote option for
public elections.

The National Trust is not the only membership organisation using the quick vote, but it is not common. Where it has been used, serious concerns have been raised about the risk of side-lining members.

If the National Trust would like to keep voting simple for members, the simplest of all would be to do away with options that need to be navigated. Ask members to place a cross beside the names of their preferred Council candidates and to choose ‘for’, ‘against’ or ‘abstain’ on each members’ resolution. If the National Trust wants to give its members a voice, the quick vote is not the way to do it.

Resolution proposed by:

Cornelia van der Poll, Neil Record, Timothy Schroder, James Offen, Elizabeth Mills

The Board of Trustees’ response is
shown next.

Board of Trustees’ response

The National Trust is advised on electoral practices by Civica Election Services, the UK’s leading provider of voting services. The National Trust introduced a quick vote option last year in response to member feedback and having taken advice from Civica on arrangements at similar large member organisations. We think it important that voting at National Trust AGMs reflects wider industry practice. We also wish to ensure as many members as possible are engaged in the Trust’s governance processes. At last year’s AGM, 34% of Trust members voting on resolutions chose to use the quick vote option, with 42% of voting members choosing to use this option in the Trust’s
Council elections.

Members of the National Trust are always free to vote however they choose at the Trust’s AGM. We are proud to be a democratic organisation and we will always protect and promote our members’ right to have their say.

Finally, we note that the National Trust’s Council has discussed the content of this resolution and is fully supportive of the
Board’s recommendation.

We recommend that members vote against the resolution.

Context

Quick vote was introduced to enhance the voting options available to members. At last year’s AGM about 131,000 members voted in the Trust’s Council elections and 42% chose to use the quick vote option. At the same AGM, about 127,000 members voted on member resolutions with 34% opting to use quick vote. All votes cast by quick vote are counted as specified votes. The feedback from many members has been that they have found this option useful and that they made an informed decision to use it to cast their vote.

Introducing quick vote increases the voting options available to members rather than limiting them. We believe that members should continue to have the full range of recommended voting options that are in line with standard electoral practices.

At the heart of the Trust’s decision to offer a quick vote option is the continuing desire to evolve our democratic processes in a way that makes voting at our AGMs simpler and more

inclusive. Examples of past changes include the move to electronic voting alongside offering postal votes and enabling fully hybrid meetings where members can attend and vote at the AGM online as well as in person. These changes have been well-received by members.

We want to encourage and increase member participation in our governance arrangements at our AGM. Quick vote is one way to help members navigate their way through the various voting choices available to them.

Members are entirely free not to use quick vote for either Council candidate elections or resolutions but given that this option was chosen by over a third of members in last year’s AGM, we do not wish to take it away.

Members’ resolution for the removal of Council election recommendations

Members’ resolution to rescind para 16(4) of The Charities (National Trust) Order 2005, to make elections to the Council
more democratic.

Supporting statement

Under the current procedures and rules for the election of members to the Council, it is highly likely that each and every candidate recommended by the Nominations Committee will be elected and all the other candidates will be unsuccessful.

Para 16(4) requires the Nominations Committee to recommend to members the candidates that they should vote for.

In 2022 there were 26 candidates and an ‘Option 1: Quick vote’ was introduced. This allowed members to vote for all seven candidates recommended by the Nominations Committee. The alternative was to decide which candidates to vote for individually based on their statements or other knowledge.

It should be no surprise that the majority of members choose the ‘Option 1: Quick vote’. The result was that many more votes were cast than had been on previous years and the seven candidates got elected. In fact, the least popular of the recommended candidates received 63,771 votes compared with 46,612 votes received by the most popular of the 19 other candidates. As candidates are very restricted in the ways they can seek votes, it seems remarkable that the unsuccessful eighth placed candidate received this number of votes! It is disingenuous to invite about 5 million National Trust members to vote in the Council elections when the outcome has been so effectively pre-determined before the first vote is cast.

If para 16(4) is rescinded the elections can become fair and democratic.

Resolution proposed by:

Michael Goodhart, Jane Newley, Francesca Crawford, Philippa Goodhart, John Gray

The Board of Trustees’ response is shown on the following page

candidates got elected. In fact, the least popular of the recommended candidates received 63,771 votes compared with 46,612 votes received by the most popular of the 19 other candidates. As candidates are very restricted in the ways they can seek votes, it seems remarkable that the unsuccessful eighth placed candidate received this number of votes! It is disingenuous to invite about 5 million National Trust members to vote in the Council elections when the outcome has been so effectively pre-determined before the first vote is cast.

If para 16(4) is rescinded the elections can become fair and democratic.

Resolution proposed by:

Michael Goodhart, Jane Newley, Francesca Crawford, Philippa Goodhart, John Gray

The Board of Trustees’ response is shown on the following page

Board of Trustees’ response

It is right that the National Trust is held to the highest standards of governance as one of the nation’s largest charities and membership bodies. The use of Nominations Committees is a standard corporate governance mechanism used across the private, public and third sectors. It is in no way unique to the
National Trust.

The National Trust’s Council is responsible for appointing the Board of Trustees and holding it to account, as well as supporting Trustees to carry out their duties. To do this effectively, Council members need to possess a broad mix of knowledge, skills and experience that fully reflect the Trust’s very wide remit. The National Trust relies on the knowledge and skill that is held by Council members.

A Nominations Committee is needed the help ensure that the Council continues to have this diversity of knowledge needed to fulfil its purpose.

It identifies current and future needs of the National Trust and of the Council, based on informed discussions. The Nominations Committee also has access to more detailed information provided by each council candidate that, for reasons of brevity, cannot be included in the election statements. The Nominations Committee includes an external independent member who ensures best practice is followed by the Committee. Members are of course entirely free to consider all Council election candidates and vote for their
preferred candidate.

Finally, we note that the National Trust’s Council has discussed the content of this resolution and is fully supportive of the
Board’s recommendation.

We recommend that members vote against the resolution.

Context

The inclusion of a Nominations Committee recommendation was a key finding in Lord Blakenham’s 2003 Report which led to the Trust’s current Board and Council
governance structure.

Each year, candidates for Council elections are recommended by the Council’s Nominations Committee, for the reasons outlined above. The recommendations made by our democratically elected Council in relation to election candidates are an essential part of the good governance of the National Trust.

This resolution is about whether election candidate recommendations should be made by the National Trust’s Council. It should not be confused with the quick vote resolution, which can be found here.

For information, we have set out the relevant provision of The Charities (National Trust) Order 2005 para 16(4):

The National Trust’s governance arrangements are underpinned by Acts of Parliament and The Charities (National Trust) Order 2005 which describes the Trust’s current governance arrangements. The resolution relates to the rules governing elections to the Trust’s Council. The relevant clauses are:

16. Elected members of Council

(2) The Council shall each year after consulting with a Nominations Committee appointed in accordance with clause 27 draw up criteria to be applied in assessing candidates for election to the Council.

(3) The Council shall publish the criteria referred to in paragraph (2) above in such manner as the Council may from time to time consider appropriate, and shall on request supply a copy of those criteria to any prospective candidate or any member of the Charity.

(4) The Nominations Committee shall publish recommendations to members as to which candidates, in the opinion of the Nominations Committee, best satisfy the criteria for the time being drawn up under paragraph (2) above.

You can find further information about our governance arrangements here.

Members’ resolution for the restoration of Clandon House

That the restoration of Clandon House should include not only conservation and roofing of the firegutted shell but also, as an absolute minimum, the restoration and recreation of the Marble Hall, with the restoration of other important interiors following as funds allow.

Supporting statement

Following the 2015 Clandon fire a succession of senior National Trust officials stated unequivocally that not just the shell of the building but also its interiors would be faithfully restored. After several years of silence, in 2022 the Trust announced a complete volte-face maintaining that apart from the relatively undamaged Speaker’s Parlour, restoration of the interiors would not be ‘meaningful’. Although the scheme now advanced, which entails conserving and roofing the shell, is loftily claimed to have ‘more intellectual coherence and rigour’ than restoration¹, this can certainly be disputed. Moreover, as anyone who visited before the fire will confirm, the austere exterior was always the least appealing part of the building, and the overwhelming interest was provided by the magnificent interiors, especially the Marble Hall. This is explicitly reflected in the Grade I listed building description.

It is stated by the Trust that an insurance payout of £66 million has been made as a result of the fire.

It is also stated that the conservation of the shell will cost up to £20 million. This leaves at least £46 million for any other works. Is the Trust seriously arguing that this is what is needed to conserve a collection of fire-blackened brick walls, which is what the interior now mostly consists of, and if so does this really represent value for money?

The new approach to the Clandon project rules out even the restoration of the Marble Hall, the principal room of the house. Not only was this one of the finest English interiors of its period, but its restoration is entirely feasible both architecturally and technically. Its appearance is completely known from plentiful photographs, and the walls survived the fire, albeit in a somewhat beat-up state. Its restoration would be entirely non-speculative.

The superb ceiling by Giuseppe Artari of course collapsed and its fragments are indeed not reusable. However, once again, the appearance is known in complete detail from photographs (a digital survey is said to have been done shortly before the fire), as has been confirmed by the

Trust’s own ‘Head of Curation and Experience’. It is not true to allege that the technical expertise to recreate it does not exist, because it does. Moreover, as with the fire at Windsor Castle in 1992, this would offer a wonderful opportunity for training up craftsmen in plaster and stucco and they could make their own discreet contributions in the way that stone carvers still do when restoring the stonework of our cathedrals.

The proponents of the current scheme claim that the fire-ravaged interior has a ‘remarkable broken raw beauty’. Beauty is notoriously in the eye of the beholder, but it seems probable that most visitors will see Clandon’s endless blackened brick walls as a melancholy mess. Any lessons as regards original construction that the remains might offer can be seen in a single room, and do not require room after room after room. The Trust’s contention that the interior thus presented will attract thousands of visitors year after year is quite
literally incredible.

1. To quote Andrew Beer at the 2022 AGM.

Resolution proposed by:

Roger White, Cornelia van der Poll, Neil Record, John Boodle, Timothy Schroder

The Board of Trustees’ response is
shown next.

Board of Trustees’ response

The Board of Trustees strongly supports the current plan to conserve and renew Clandon Park, returning it to full public use following the devastation caused by the fire of 2015. Parts of this plan differ from those announced in 2017 following the international design competition, but the overall ambition remains to make Clandon a functional and inspiring building again: a home to important works of art, cultural activity and social events.

We recognise a project such as this will naturally invite different views about the
best approach.

At the heart of the plan for Clandon is the complete exterior conservation and re-roofing of Giacomo Leoni’s elegant early 18th-century house, offering views across the Capability Brown landscape. The interiors – mostly stripped back by fire – will be preserved in their dramatic state to reveal how Clandon and other

country houses were designed and built.

We recommend that members vote against the resolution.

Context

The Trust’s approach has evolved in response to expert assessment. The extent of loss within the house is so great that ‘restoration’, by which we mean using surviving original materials, construction methods and furnishing to preserve the place’s historic integrity, is only possible in one room: the very significant Speakers’ Parlour. Sadly, insufficient historic fabric survives elsewhere and recreating rooms would not be a valuable act of preservation.

We greatly regret the loss of much of the Marble Hall, especially the spectacular ceiling by Giuseppe Artari. However, detailed research has shown that the ceiling’s surviving fire-damaged fragments are impossible to piece together. Furthermore, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to replicate its construction, created by Swiss-Italian craftsmen, using original techniques. A facsimile ceiling, using modern techniques and materials, would not do justice to the lost original.

The Hall – which has retained its marble floor and exceptional carvings by John Michael Rysbrack – is still a powerful space and will remain at the heart of the renewed house.

More than 75,000 visitors have been welcomed at Clandon since the fire. They have been fascinated by stories about the making of the house and about the many designers, builders and craftspeople who worked for the
Onslow family.

We are confident that Clandon will engage current and new generations of country
house lovers.

The Trust believes that training in heritage skills is vital for the future of all historic sites and recently opened a craft skills centre at Coleshill in Oxfordshire to support this work. The restoration of Clandon provides a wealth of opportunities for training in historic brickwork, stonemasonry and plasterwork, helping to keep these skills – as much a part of our shared heritage as the building itself – alive.

The project is funded from the entirety of the Clandon Park insurance settlement, supplemented by a major investment of National Trust funds.

Internally, the architectural intervention will be as light touch as possible, allowing future generations to adopt different approaches to Clandon if desired.

For more detail on the Trust’s plans for Clandon, please click here.