- Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Maggie Throup.)
- 5:29 pm
- I thank Mr Speaker for allowing me to introduce this debate on the National Trust in the year of its 125th anniversary, which is obviously coming to an end.The National Trust is a fantastic British institution and an important part of our offer to international tourists. In many ways, it sets the benchmark for the high standard of our heritage and natural environment. Personally, I have a positive history with the National Trust, having served much of my apprenticeship as a Cornish mason on National Trust sites. It is that relationship, and the fact that I care about the National Trust, that brings me to the House this evening, along with the concern of many of my constituents.I stand here to celebrate 125 years of the National Trust and to petition the Government and the National Trust itself to act to ensure that it does not lose sight of its core principles and charitable aims. It was this House that gave the National Trust its purpose:“The National Trust shall be established for the purpose of promoting the permanent preservation for the benefit of the nation of lands and tenements (including buildings) of beauty or historic interest and as regards lands for the preservation (so far as is practicable) of their natural aspect, features and animal and plant life.”I recognise that responsibility for the National Trust, in all its functions and as it discharges its duties, will span several Government Departments, but I am glad to see a Minister from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport present to respond to this debate.It is time for the Government and/or the Charity Commission to review whether the National Trust is behaving in a way that is consistent with its purpose. I say that because I see increasing evidence of its appearing to reach far beyond what people believe to be its purpose and function, acting at times as a completely unaccountable body that can make impositions on lives and livelihoods without any right to reply or recourse, having no concern for how long it takes to engage, even when individuals and businesses seek proactively to engage and appease National Trust staff.It is right, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I inform you at this stage that I have written to the Charity Commission to set out my concerns and those of many of my constituents. There is reason to be concerned, and I hope to set out this evening a few examples of why concerns exist.Constituents in west Cornwall raise examples such as the trust proposing that landowners carry out activity, including the erection of buildings, on land that neither it nor the owner actually owns; house sales either falling through or prices being dramatically reduced because of obstructive interventions and/or delays by the National Trust; constituents waiting two and a half years for the National Trust to finalise a covenant; businesses being charged levies in return for National Trust consent to developments on privately owned land; and the trust appearing to favour the promotion of holiday accommodation over the maintenance of small but important farms along the Cornish coast; blocking efforts to install renewable energy solar panels on privately owned agriculture buildings; having a disregard for local sensitivities, listed building regulations and basic planning processes; embellishing covenants, leaving owners stating to me that their grandparents, who agreed to covenants in good faith, would be turning in their graves; and refusing to take responsibility for assets that are unsafe for the general public.Only this weekend, I was asked:“Please could you ask the National Trust if it is still their policy to support small family farms? Or given their current financial crisis will they opt for the short term financial gain of holiday accommodation over the long term benefit of local employment and better husbandry of the land?This is particularly important for your constituency where several National Trust tenant farmers have recently given notice to quit, leaving an opportunity for new, younger entrants into farming—an opportunity that the NT appears not to be taking.”Should that be the case, it is completely contrary to the good work that the Government are doing through the Agriculture Act 2020 to support the introduction of fresh blood into farming and support the transition to younger generations.
- Is it not time, however, on the 125th anniversary, to congratulate the National Trust on all the wonderful work that it has done—branching out to protect land and our natural environment as well—and to understand that the National Trust, along with the Government and all of us, is facing very difficult choices and challenges?
- I welcome that intervention, and that is exactly my point—the National Trust is such an important institution, is so celebrated and important to the British way of life, our care and protection of the natural environment, that if we allow some of these things to continue, that good work could be lost—lost in translation, if not lost to the awareness of the public. Yes, this is a difficult time, but I have been an MP for just over five years and many of these issues were there long before I became an MP. I have worked hard, but have failed to address some of those very difficult issues with the National Trust. This is not—I am very clear with the National Trust when it gives me a similar response—about the additional pressures that covid has inflicted on the trust.
- I should declare that I am a member of the National Trust and have been for many years, but I have a very robust relationship with it in my constituency, because I think it is important for some of the issues that the hon. Member is bringing into the Chamber tonight to be debated transparently and openly. Nevertheless, I hope that we can get back to a time when my constituency had a million visitors a year coming to the world heritage site that the National Trust manages. We have seen the benefit of that tourism to my constituency, and to the local farmers and local businesses in the village of Bushmills.
- I want to make it clear that the work that the National Trust has done around west Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly—Cornwall in particular—is hugely important and valued.In April 2020 I set up, with a councillor from Cornwall Council, a tourism recovery group, and the National Trust took part as a representative of many different organisations, all charged with trying to find a safe way to open up tourist attractions for people to return, as they did on 4 July. This is about identifying some of the concerns that constituents have, in order to address them, so that we can return to the core values and be reminded of the fantastic work that the National Trust can deliver through a huge army of fantastic volunteers across the United Kingdom. However, it is of great concern if the National Trust’s approach to increasing yield is to make as much money as it can, rather than to protect and enhance small farms and support the fresh blood introduced into the sector.A constituent whom I have been in correspondence with for some time writes:“We wanted to put solar panels on an agricultural shed on the farm as a way of reducing costs and our carbon footprint. The National Trust objected and prevented us from doing this.The National Trust threatened me with legal action after we placed a temporary or moveable hut in a field for the summer months to sell ice cream from our own dairy cows, which we make on the farm. It is normal farming practice for a farmer to sell his produce in whichever way he deems the most profitable. To contradict themselves, the National Trust have ice cream vendors selling ice cream at multiple…sites all around the country, many of them rural beauty spots.The National Trust reinvent the interpretation of the covenant as it suits them, as our family have found out on many occasions. In short, if it was okay to remove a rock or plough a field when the covenant was granted then it still is now, as the covenant’s wording has not changed, nor will it.”
- 5:47 pm
- I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for St Ives (Derek Thomas) on securing this Adjournment debate and on highlighting issues that touch on his constituency and the wider powers of the National Trust. The trust is celebrating its 125th anniversary, and he is right to note its achievements, as have others, including the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse). Having visited my hon. Friend’s constituency earlier in the year, I know that his part of the world is indeed blessed with beautiful landscapes, fantastic scenery and an amazing coastline. It has more than its fair share of heritage sites, including a world heritage site, so I recognise his interest in the overall heritage agenda and the National Trust in particular.Before turning to the specific matters raised by my hon. Friend, I would like to join him in acknowledging the tremendous work that the National Trust has done over the last 125 years. When it focuses on its core function, which is managing the collection of historic houses, gardens and landscapes for the pleasure and benefit of the public, the work of the National Trust is often unsurpassed, and brings enjoyment to millions of visitors and members. I include myself in that number, as I am a proud National Trust member, and I have spent many weekends visiting attractions in and around my constituency and the country in my capacity as heritage Minister.
- Will the Minister include in his praise the fact that the National Trust is setting itself a progressive agenda, telling a history that might not always be as traditional as some traditionalists would like and a story that is more inclusive and includes Black Lives Matter, as is the case in the excellent exhibition in Dyrham Park?
- Indeed; the National Trust, like many heritage institutions, has a responsibility to explain, but also not to lecture. That is a difficult balance that some organisations are facing at this moment.
- On that point, has not the National Trust become preoccupied by the political polemic and flirted with a number of ideological causes that are far from its core mission of preserving and promoting Britain’s heritage through the houses and land of which it is the custodian?
- rose—
- Order. The hon. Gentleman has been here longer than anybody else. He knows that the Minister has to finish responding to the first intervention before he can take a second.
- It is nice to see even the Father of the House making procedural errors; it gives us all a bit of confidence.As my right hon. Friend the Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) knows, we had a debate about this issue in Westminster Hall not so long ago. I think it would be unfair to characterise the National Trust as being preoccupied by some of the matters that he mentioned. The trust knows that some of the issues that it has talked about are a matter of public debate, and it is very important that it listens to its members, to Members of Parliament and to our constituents’ concerns. When the National Trust focuses on its core role, it does an excellent job, but it is sensitive and aware that it has —unintentionally, perhaps—caused offence to Members and our constituents with some of the comments that it has made recently.
- Madam Deputy Speaker, I am grateful; I was only trying to help the Minister as he replied to our right hon. Friend the Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes). May I put on record that I completely disagree with our right hon. Friend over what the National Trust has done with regard to Black Lives Matter issues and slavery? I congratulate the trust on having an interactive exhibition some years ago showing what it was doing, long before it became fashionable to look to see what the past included. It would be kind to the National Trust for us to recognise that there is a variety of views on the Conservative Benches, and I will speak up for that. I also suggest that the National Trust writes openly to those who have contributed to this debate with its answers to each of the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for St Ives (Derek Thomas), because I am sure that it can deal with them in a way which will make everyone happier.
- The Father of the House is right to say that there is a diversity of opinions on this issue and others. As I said, I have had many conversations with the National Trust. Where it has caused offence—and it recognises that it has caused offence and upset—I genuinely believe that that has been unintentional. It focuses very much on its core role. On my hon. Friend’s other comments about responding to our hon. Friend the Member for St Ives, that will indeed be one of the requests later in my speech.
- I hope the Minister will recognise that the National Trust has actually appointed someone to address the issue of “woke” within the organisation, and that is clearly a recognition within the trust that it has not got the balance right. As has been suggested by the hon. Member for St Ives (Derek Thomas), a lot of work needs to be done, but we congratulate it on the steps that it is taking and look forward to working with it, hand in hand. I am looking forward to seeing how the Minister responds to the calls tonight for an ombudsman-type service to deal with some of these issues, so that we can ensure that the National Trust is the nation’s trust.
- The hon. Gentleman is right to point out that the National Trust endeavours to work with all stakeholders, who hold a variety of opinions, as we do in balancing the opinions of our constituents. I appreciate the comments that he made earlier praising the National Trust, as well as, quite fairly and reasonably, expressing concerns about its practices.