Fiona Reynolds
Director-General
The National Trust
36 Queen Anne’s Gate
London
SW1H 9AS
17 August 2005
Dear Ms Reynolds,
I have been a Life Member of the National Trust for over ten years, and currently have
included a substantial legacy to the Trust in my will. I am writing to express my serious
concern about the resolution proposed at the AGM to seek to actively discourage people from
visiting Trust properties by car.
Many Trust properties are in rural locations where public transport is scarce or non-existent,
and even if it exists it usually only operates to a limited range of destinations and at restricted
times of day. For most potential visitors, public transport is simply not a viable option, and
the choice is between travelling by car and not visiting at all. This particularly applies to the
substantial proportion of elderly visitors, who will regard being able to park near to a
property as an important factor in deciding whether to visit.
Tourism is a buyer’s market, and I am sure you recognise that that you are in competition
with English Heritage and many private sector attractions for the visitor’s pound. If you
impose parking charges or other restrictions, then many visitors will inevitably vote with their
wheels and take their custom elsewhere, with a detrimental effect on the income of the Trust.
In practice, when trips are discretionary, many people are deterred by what may appear
relatively small parking charges.
Most members, including myself, start off by occasionally visiting Trust properties and
realise after a while that joining the Trust may bring them a financial benefit and at the same
time contribute to a worthwhile purpose. The deterrent effect of parking charges would apply
particularly to casual visitors, and would severely restrict the supply of membership seedcorn.
Without easy access to properties by car, the Trust in the post-war era would never have built
up a membership of anywhere near 3 million people.
Transport policy in this country is a subject of intense political controversy, and to adopt a
partisan stance such as this proposal would compromise the Trust’s political impartiality. It
must also be recognised that all forms of powered transport have some environmental impact,
and rural bus services with very low ridership numbers cannot be regarded as intrinsically
preferable to a car carrying a family.
I fully recognise that the Trust has to walk a difficult tightrope between conserving its
properties and making them available for visitors to appreciate and enjoy. However, if there
-1-
are genuine concerns about the impact of visitors on particular properties, then restricting
numbers by means such as the issue of timed tickets or limiting the number of opening days
is surely a better option than discriminating against a particular class of visitor.
While I understand that Membership of the Trust does not bring with it any guarantee of
particular admission rights, if the Trust were to seek to introduce parking charges for
members on a general basis, I and many other members would regard it as a betrayal of the
organisation’s good faith.
If such a move took place, I would certainly have to seriously consider whether it was still
appropriate for me to include the Trust in my will, and would urge other members I know to
do likewise.
It would be a foolish and short-sighted action which I believe would be gravely detrimental to
the long-term interests of the Trust. It is vital for its continued success that the Trust is seen to
be above day-to-day political controversy, and this move would severely undermine that
reputation and make it appear as just another partisan pressure group.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Edwardson
-2-