The National Trust: A Brum Conspiracy.

The National Trust may have utter contempt for its members, Brummies, and the public at large but Crow Multimedia intends to expose its antics and to make sure that accountable bodies it is conniving with act in a democratically open and transparent way.

Station Street in bankrupt Birmingham is a hideous urban route immediately adjacent to a major transport hub - New Street Station. Back in the day it led to a lung-busting indoor bus station. It houses the Old Rep theatre (Grade II Listed) which some might describe as "grotty". Next door is the defunct Electric Cinema. Although much is made of it being the oldest UK cinema it was substantially modified in the 1930's and has been recently rejected for listing. For a considerable time it operated as a "mucky" cinema. On the corner is the long defunct Crown Pub (Grade II listed). The claim to fame is that Black Sabbath's first gig was there and a few other "big names" also played there. So what? But the pub was an absolute sh*thole mostly remembered by folk who actually used it for the women coming in between "acts" at the local strip club in dressing gowns and slippers. No-one at all mourned its closure - until recently.

But Station Street is still an important transport route and so it is firmly in the crosshairs of Birmingham's "left" (many of whom are economically inactive - EI - and contribute little of nothing to the City's economy - indeed they are usually taking money from Brum workers). These people are determined to wage war on motorists and to ban cars, vans and lorries from, preferably, the whole West Midlands Conurbation. Once again Labour is looking to interfere with access to the critical tunnels joining the north and south of the city.

A campaign is being waged by the "left" to "Save" Station Street from redevelopment. Of course, any developer will have to deal with the listed building status of the Old Rep and The Crown during any planning application but these zealots have an alternative plan and, amazingly, they have managed to get The National Trust on board.

The "left" has a particular way of doing things which usually involves participants acting anonymously. The main Save Station Street account on X is run by an obsessive who is either a very high functioning individual capable of putting endless, repetitive, posts up whilst doing the day job or else s/he is EI with plenty of leisure time. The individual has declined to disclose his/her identity despite purporting to be a mouthpiece for the "project".

We have been watching the account and, curiously, its output is remarkably similar in content and style with that of one Simon Dixon, an "unofficial" mouthpiece for the local Labour Party. Dixon used to work for Birmingham University and during his time at the learned institution he claimed that motorists are comparable to serial killers. He is certainly backing the "campaign". He has been very upset that his useless pal, Cllr David Barker (another anti-car fanatic), has been deselected by Labour, Compare and contrast his own output on this, almost simultaneously published with that of "Save Station Street":

Whoever is orchestrating this campaign should at least have the cojones to identify themselves.

"Old Station Street" claims to be a non-governmental organisation and a non-profit but is not only anonymous it has no publicly available constitution, holds no meetings etc. In short, is it perpetrating a massive con on Birmingham?

This blog is running an occasional series called "The Thurd Sector", exposing the corruption and self-enrichment prevalent in charities and so-called non-profits. We have pointed out that the "left" overwhelmingly controls this sector. Until recently this could not be said of the National Trust - the archetypal "establishment" organisation. No one would accuse James Lees Milne of being a pinko! But the Trust is changing and struggling to be "relevant" (as if saving huge tracts of countryside and hundreds of historic properties isn't quite enough). It has managed to p*ss off many of its dedicated volunteers with its heavy-handed attitude and, of course, in the woke "lanyard" affair.

Take a look at our email to the Trust about their scandalous involvement in Station Street's future, and its mealy-mouthed reply from someone who also wishes to remain anonymous and simply described as a "National Trust Spokesperson":

"THIS IS NOT A PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION - PRESS ENQUIRY

I am writing in my capacity as an independent journalist but have to say that as a fee-paying member of the NT I am concerned about the NT's involvement in this matter to date.

You are not, as I understand it, susceptible to the Freedom of Information Act, but I hope that you will make full and frank disclosure here.

To declare an interest, both my wife and I live in Birmingham and operate small businesses here. We are aware of the intense political lobbying to close roads in this city and otherwise "ban" vehicles. The report you have commissioned - but choose to keep secret from members, Brummies and the public at large - proposes the pedestrianisation of a street right next to New Street Station - a major regional transport hub. (Despite all the NT's constant greenwashing many of your properties are mostly reached primarily by car.)

1   How did the Trust become involved in this matter at all? Did you dream up a plan to close a city street yourselves or did someone approach you? Who was that someone, if applicable?

2   Why did the Trust decide to spend members' fees on this "project"? Who made that decision? Given the Trust's disastrous stewardship of The Roundhouse [in Birmingham], would it not be better to use members' funds to rectify that fiasco instead of kite-flying?

3   Who at the NT chose xxxxx Architects to prepare the secret "report"? Was this put out to tender? If not, how was the decision to use that company arrived at? (xxxxxxxxx).

4   How much of members' money (including my own) have you spent on this to date?

5   As I understand it you have only disclosed the "report" to WMCA, BCC, Network Rail (and, possibly, Flatpack). Yet images etc have been leaked to the media and feature on the xxxxxxxx Architects website is a deliberate attempt to sway public opinion in favour of the scheme. There is now a claque of left-wing and anti-motoring pressure groups lobbying for the scheme whilst all opposition factions are kept in the dark. Why did you decide to do this? Do you think the secrecy shows contempt for NT members when you use their money for a report and then conceal it from them? Do you think blatant political lobbying in this case is compatible with the Trust's charitable aims?

6   Unlike some of the claque who have never visited some of the buildings they are now campaigning to save, I have known them all over many years (save for the Electric when it was a "dirty" cinema - possibly one of its busiest periods). I appreciate that the Crown is listed but it was a truly awful pub and was no sad loss when it closed over a decade ago. (Incidentally, there are some now who are constantly lobbying for it to be reopened as a pub totally ignoring that a giant and very busy Wetherspoons has opened directly across the road. In the last fortnight FOUR well known Brum pubs have gone bust. Reopening as a pub is unrealistic and unviable.) The Old Rep is an undistinguished building and the pro-lobby you are encouraging can only come up with the fact that it was "the first" as a reason to save it. So what? As to The Electric I understand that it was substantially remodelled in the 1930's and so has lost any particular cachet? It was recently found to be unworthy of listing status. The question is, therefore, is the current Station Street actually worth "saving" subject to the one [actually two] building[s] that is [are] listed (and that issue can be dealt with in any new development plans in the usual way? Once again, wouldn't the Trust resources be better applied to rectifying The Roandhouse shambles?

7   In commissioning the "report" did the Trust consider economic matters - particularly noting that the area is a major transport hub? If not, why not?"

And here is the response:

"One of the National Trust's key aims in its work in and around towns and cities is to address unequal access to nature, beauty and history. To achieve this, we are increasingly working beyond our places and seeking to develop new and effective partnerships. The team in Birmingham wants to be a key contributor thinking about what the city needs today from its green spaces and nature, its culture, places and stories and what is needed to bring about positive change. 

The work commissioned with [Architects] is intended as a conversation starter for discussions with stakeholders in Birmingham around the cultural heritage importance of Station Street as a whole in terms of its significance to theatre, cinema and music and the wider cultural heritage of the city.

The architects were selected, on merit, following a tender process in line with the National Trust’s procurement rules. The commission was funded by our regional Urban Places budget, which is allocated from the Trust’s central funds and generated through a mix of income streams."

Note:

1.   The Trust won't say how it got involved in this;

2.   It won't say how much it has spent;

3.    It is not releasing the secret report (clearly, ordinary Brummies don't count as "Stakeholders") and won't say who has made the decision to show such contempt to members and the public at large, or why;

4.   It makes no comment on wider economic issues.

We referred to the fact that the Trust fairly recently re-opened The Roundhouse on the canal network (with the Canal & River Trust) and has completely f***** that up already. We say that until it can sort out its own properties in Brum it should butt out of interfering further in our city.

We will consider going to the Trust AGM to flush out how much members' money the Trust has blown on this report. In the meantime, other so-called stakeholders ARE susceptible to the Freedom of Information Act and so we have made the following FOIA request to bankrupt Birmingham City Council, West Midlands Combined Authority and Network Rail:

"The National Trust has produced a secret report suggesting the pedestrianisation of Station Street in consultation with BCC and others. The public is being deliberately excluded from this discussion.

Please disclose all records (as defined below) passing between BCC, WMCA, Network Rail, Flatpack (a "charity"), [X]Architects and the National Trust and inter se, regarding the future development of Station Street generally and specifically in respect of the potential road closure.

For the purpose of this Request “records” include correspondence by electronic or other means, reports, telephone attendance notes, copies or screenshots of messages sent via WhatsApp, Telegram, Text or other similar means, and all other documents of whatsoever nature arising in respect of this “project”."

The Trust was famously conservative in its financial affairs. It would only accept properties subject to endowments to fund the upkeep of the property. This is contrary to the "political" model where local authorities had no funding for historic and other properties but simply shafted the taxpayer for the running costs. In an age of austerity that extravagance is now rare, but this particular scheme has all the hallmarks of the taxpayer being screwed-over yet again.

But soft. what's this? The profligate National Trust has just announced it is booting out 550 employees due to "sustained costs pressures". It plans to make savings of £26m. A union claims that "management decisions" are partly to blame for the Trust's financial woes - which seems hardly surprising noting the above!

iancrowmultimedia @gmail.com

Crow Multimedia