Why I’d Rather Eat Worms Than Renew My National Trust Membership

One of my favourite National Trust properties is Overbeck’s in Salcombe – the former seaside home of an eccentric inventor with a wondrous subtropical garden. The last time I visited, the nice lady at the entrance asked – as they always do – whether I might consider taking out a family membership.

“Sorry,” I said. “But I’d rather eat worms.”

She probably didn’t want to hear but I told her anyway. For years, like so many parents with younger children in need of distraction, I’d used the National Trust’s myriad glorious properties as the perfect weekend refuge: delicious teas, well-stocked bijou gift shops, historic houses with magnificent grounds to explore and play in. Joining the National Trust clearly made sense – with the added bonus that I’d be doing my bit to preserve the crumbling fabric of England and Wales’s heritage.

Unfortunately, I went on to explain, the National Trust had now been hijacked by left-liberal entryists completely out of touch with this once-splendid organisation’s charitable purpose. No longer, it seems, is the National Trust about preserving the glories of the English country house, connecting us with our past and conserving the 775 miles of coastline it owns.

Rather, it has been turned into yet another progressive activist organisation advancing political causes which are irrelevant to – and often inimical to – its charitable remit.

You could argue that the rot set in when it banned fox hunting on its land. But the moment it really started going downhill was in 2012 with the appointment of its new director-general Dame Helen Ghosh.

Ghosh is a classic beneficiary of the revolving door system whereby time-serving quangocrats with the appropriate politically correct views are shuffled from plum post to plum post regardless of their aptitude for the job.

A career civil servant with no particular expertise in or natural sympathy with heritage issues or the countryside Ghosh is, as Quentin Letts notes in this delightfully catty profile, “more at home in court shoes than gum boots”. She also has a reputation – Letts delicately hints with more generosity than I’m prepared to allow the dreadful woman – for being pretty low-grade and thick.

In other words, she would have been ideal for somewhere grisly and right-on and pointless like the Equality and Human Rights Commission, but could scarcely be more wrong for a charity whose meat and drink is toffs, antique furniture, well-spoken old ladies in tweed twin sets, and oak studded parkland, and whose membership largely comprises small ‘c’ conservatives.

Just how utterly unsuitable for the job she is, Ghosh has revealed in her organisation’s announcement that from now on one of its main priorities will be combating climate change which, it claims, ‘poses the biggest single threat’ to its properties so far.

No, it doesn’t. It simply doesn’t. This is purely an expression of Ghosh’s ignorance and of the misinformation foisted on her by the bien-pensant types in whose company she prefers to spend her time.

And if this were merely a case of a silly woman venturing a foolish opinion, perhaps that would be excusable. Unfortunately, Ghosh’s ignorance and idiocy is being transformed into policy in its vomitously named new strategy document Playing Our Part.

Besides relaxing its objections to wind farms – and if we’re talking about “the biggest single threat” to the British landscape, there’s your badger – the National Trust has announced a “20 per cent reduction by 2020″ of its energy use “with 50 per cent coming from renewable sources on the land we look after.”

Ghosh says:

“We will be meeting our commitment predominately from hydro schemes, and with biomass boilers at a number of our big houses. And we do have the occasional turbine. We do not object in principle to wind turbines in the right place. In sensitive historic environments, wind turbines are not the thing to do, but I think we object to two per cent of all wind turbine applications nationally.”

And almost inevitably, Ghosh agonises that the organisation is too middle-class and wants to make it “more relevant” to its membership.

She wants to move away from country houses and more towards the places like the childhood homes of Paul McCartney and John Lennon (because of course, if it weren’t for the National Trust it would have occurred to no private enterprise to turn them into museums, would it?).

“It’s things like the Beatles’ houses in Liverpool or back to back houses in Birmingham. And our visitors are absolutely loving them.”

Absolutely loving them. There’s a phrase that tells you all you need to know. But just in case it didn’t, here’s an even better one.

The challenge, she says, is to persuade people that they did not need to feel awkward “if they didn’t know who George II was.”

Yeah, that’ll be it, Dame Helen. Until you came along, the National Trust was going to hell in a handcart: four million members, almost of all them inexcusably middle class with an unforgivable predilection towards stately homes, denying social justice to all those disenfranchised ordinary folk who feel so alienated by the mention of any historical figure who isn’t Mary Seacole that the thought of visiting a National Trust property makes them come over like Damien in the Omen when his parents try to take him to church.

And if it’s signs of the End Times we’re looking for, I reckon that for our system to have allowed a creature like Helen Ghosh to get her claws on something as cherishably middle class, civilised and quintessentially English as the National Trust must be pretty near the penultimate one. All it requires now is for the ravens to leave the Tower and then that’ll be it: game over.

Read more at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Wind Farm Fanatics Are Bankrupting Us With Their Hot Air
  2. Climategate investigated by – WTF? – the ‘National Domestic Extremism’ team
  3. I’d rather stick my hand in a bag of amphetamine-injected rattlesnakes than put my trust in tonight’s BBC Panorama documentary on ‘Global Warming’
  4. Scouting keeps us in touch with a bygone age


Greg ‘Hideously White’ Dyke Makes the FA More PC

Do you care as little as I do about the paucity of Asian players at high levels in English football?

I care about this issue even less than I care about what happens to my nose hairs after I’ve trimmed them and sent them down the plughole; even less than I care about the family relations of the slugs in my strawberry patch; even less than I care about what the temperature is going to be in Bogota at 3am next Tuesday.

Why do I care so little that there hardly any Asians – none, really – at high levels in English football? Because it doesn’t matter a damn, is why. No more am I bothered by it than I am by, say, the absence of white women in sumo wrestling, or the domination of Mah Jong by Chinese, or the woeful lack West Indians on the professional darts circuit.

For any number of cultural, historical and social reasons, certain sports just happen to attract particular racial groups. No one is being “discriminated” against. (No one’s stopping white people competing against East Africans in long distance running; or Nigerians from competing against Orientals at ping-pong). It’s simply a question of people making choices, based on tradition and culture and differing physical characteristics, as people are wont to do in a free society. What it definitely is not is any kind of problem.

Unless, of course, you’re former BBC Director General Greg Dyke who took over last year as chairman of the Football Association and appears to be on a holy mission to make it as politically correct as he did the BBC. At the BBC he once infamously complained that the organisation was “hideously white” and set about enforcing quota systems for black and ethnic minorities. Now he is trying to do the same for English football by launching a recruitment drive for Asian talent.

Read more at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Not bowled over
  2. Watching the Climategate scandal explode makes me feel like a proud parent
  3. How the BBC censored my monstrous, hideously offensive ‘Irish joke’
  4. Good news! Sea levels aren’t rising dangerously

Say What You Like about Prince Andrew, at Least He Wasn’t Caught Posing in His Underpants

Dressing to the Left: the undergarments favoured by Mr Bryant

Dressing to the Left: the undergarments favoured by Mr Bryant

Labour MP Chris Bryant claims Prince Andrew is bringing “not just the UK, but the Royal Family, into disrepute.” Perhaps Prince Andrew is. But are we sure that Chris Bryant is the right man to deliver such moral lectures?

Bryant, let us not forget, was the star of an episode so marmalade-droppingly revolting that it made Tony Blair’s infamous description of his night of lurve with Cherie Blair at Balmoral sound like Barbara Cartland. He was Underpants Man: the MP who posed in a pair of grubby Y-fronts for the website Gaydar, where he advertised his desire for a “good long ****”.

Of course, what politicians get up to in their spare time is none of our business. Whether they do it randomly in public toilets (Bryant has campaigned for the reform of laws against cottaging) or with consenting marsupials is absolute fine by me. I believe that the private lives of public figures should remain private. But with one notable exception: on the key issue of hypocrisy.

This was why I felt it was so wrong that (ex-) Formula 1 chief Max Mosley should be exposed in the press for having had  “sado-masochistic” orgies with prostitutes dressed as Nazis. As I wrote at the time:

I have never been able to understand how a sport involving reckless speed, deadly crashes, champagne, stupid amounts of money and pouting dolly bird groupies could in any way have its reputation tarnished by the revelation that the man in charge likes the odd slap and a tickle now and again.

And it’s why I believe it’s so right that Bryant should not be allowed to get away with this disgraceful grandstanding on the subject of the Duke of York. If you’re going to indulge semi-publicly in the kind of sexual antics which large sections of the population find disgusting, you really are treading on very thin ice trying to condemn another public figure for undignified behaviour.

Ann Widdecombe condemning Prince Andrew for his lifestyle? No problem.

Chris Bryant condemning Prince Andrew for his lifestyle? Urrrrrggh!

Related posts:

  1. Shadow cabinet elections: new blood for the Eton Grocer’s cabinet?
  2. Is Prince Charles ill-advised, or merely idiotic?
  3. Why the Prince of Wales’s letters shouldn’t be kept secret
  4. Cameron’s dream comes true: Prince of Darkness officially anoints him ‘Heir to Blair’

One thought on “Say what you like about Prince Andrew, at least he wasn’t caught posing in his underpants”

  1. Velocity says:8th March 2011 at 10:00 pmThe English are (finally) fighting back James, have you noticed?


    Danial Hannan asked “Where’s the Tea Party?” some months ago (before i was banned, unannounced, by the Telegraphs editorial progressives) …well there they damn well are.

    I thought the English had no fight left in them, patently i was wrong on that score. The fight, or revolution, against Big Govt and small govt parasites has begun. Are you ‘in’ for a true free society and free markets or ‘out’ wanting to repeat the same systemic mistake of erecting a ‘small govt’ to replace a Big Govt?

    They’re both tape-worms James, the same system, got it yet???

Comments are closed.