(not satire – it’s the state of democracy in the UK today)
According to just about all the UK press, National Trust members voted to reject a ban on culling badgers on its land at its AGM last Saturday.
Here are a few examples of articles which clearly state that:
National Trust members reject badger cull ban call
National Trust members vote against badger cull ban
National Trust annual meeting votes against ban on badger culls
National Trust rejects motion to outlaw cull
National Trust votes against badger vaccination
Only one problem with all of those stories.
They’re not true.
National Trust members didn’t vote against a ban – they voted for it.
There were 7,807 votes in favour of the resolution and 6,583 against it.
So what happened?
National Trust chairman Simon Jenkins overruled the members’ vote by using a discretionary block of 2,111 proxy votes.
These are members who voted neither for nor against the resolution.
Jenkins decided to use the block of proxy votes to vote down the ban on culling badgers on National Trust land – ignoring the clear wishes and democratic will of National trust members.
Why would Jenkins do that?
Could it be because he rather likes the idea of hunting defenceless animals?
.
Here’s a petition demanding the dismissal of Jenkins:
.
You can also tell Jenkins what you think of his shenanigans on Twitter – @simonjenkins4
.
Related articles by Tom Pride:
Osborne claims public sector net borrowing targets missed as a result of badgers moving them
Bastard badgers: Sun investigators reveal up to 100% born out of wedlock
So most farmers support the badger cull? Erm, no actually, they don’t.
Coalition split after Tory minister says UK ‘peppered’ with too many wind-powered Lib Dem MPs
Peasants free to breed in peace as minister drops plans to shoot them
Wildlife and farming disaster warning as incompetence spreads across England
England’s human wildlife faces tragedy as worst moral drought in 30 years hits habitats
Old Codger Cull Given The Go Ahead In Two Areas Of England
Severe conditions alert for UK as cold front of austerity paralyses the country
.
Please feel free to comment – you don’t need to register and I’m extremely minimal with the moderating.
.
If you click on any of these buttons below, you can share this article with other people. Thanks:
Pride's Purge 
Pingback: The press is lying. National Trust members DIDN’T vote against a ban on culling badgers | Translation Scrapbook
Pingback: The press is lying. National Trust members DIDN...
Reblogged this on thepositivevoice.
LikeLike
well thats me decided now. was contemplating joining the national trust this next year as opposed to the English Heritage as ive done most of the venues in the regions i can get to that EH have. but nope. not now. other things were also being weighed up ill admit like my inability to climb stairs thus being relegated to only seeing ground floor of any NT houses etc and gardens (again only if plenty of seating dotted around) but this has put the lid on any more debate on the matter.ill find something else to do. im sure there’s lots if i look around on the net.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Vox Political.
LikeLike
You know, I was wondering about that. I’ve been an NT member for years, and I don’t actually recall being asked about the issue.
LikeLike
Perhaps someone should badger Simon Jenkins.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on HUMAN RIGHTS & THE SIEGE OF BRITAIN POLITICAL JOURNAL.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on HUMAN RIGHTS & THE SIEGE OF BRITAIN POLITICAL JOURNAL.
LikeLike
Pingback: Latest survey – 80% of rural Britain against fox hunting | Pride's Purge
National Distrust was formed because NT do nothing about illegal fox hunting on their land. If you could join or give us a shout out that would be great.
https://www.facebook.com/nationaldistrust?ref=hl
This is our petition https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-national-trust-the-national-trust-stop-supporting-illegal-hunting-on-national-trust-land-2#share
LikeLike
This post isn’t quite accutrate – the motion was about more than banning badger culling, as indeed was the Trust’s reasons for not supporting the motion – it called for vaccination of all badgers on Trust land which the Trust felt was financially prohibitive.
It is also true to say that the 2,111 people who gave their proxy votes to the Chair could have reasonably expected he would use them to support the status quo. The Trust published its opposition in advance and those 2,111 people could have voted for the motion if they disagreed with that response.
LikeLike
James Holden’s reply is spot on – I too was very frustrated by the outcome of the vote, but it really is a misrepresentation to say that it was undemocratic. If you allow the Chair to act as your proxy, you accept that he will vote as he sees fit. I’m a member of the Trust, and I voted for the motion, so I’m not about to defend the organisation’s stance on this issue. But leaving won’t help either – if you leave the organisation, you can’t vote at all.
LikeLike