Yes Peter but money flows in from sponsors presumably based on the number of people participating and its directors are paid and it employs staff. If you are a parish councillor volunteering in your spare time that is hard to accept. I'm certainly not going to try to defend the financial behaviour of the national trust, but I'll defend its right to refuse another commercial organisation the free use of its facilities if it wants to.
It's not a commercial organisation in the sense of making profits and distrubuting them to shareholders. The guy who founded parkrun left a lucrative career to run an organisation that could have tanked. I know that the success of his idea caught him by surprise and he inevitably had to employ people or he couldn't have run it properly. I'm not disagreeing that a local authority is free to make decisions about its parks, but parkrun is not profit-making, thus not 'commercial'.
I think it's a shame all this has happened, and there are obviously elements to this that are unsatisfactory, but the ultimate end if a landowner won't back down from charging is that parkrun will move away from that place. That's what happened at Little Stoke and that's what happened here. I wish one or two posters wouldn't turn this into an English v Irish thing - I'm not getting that it is in any sense (and I have some sensitivity to this, having a half-Irish wife).
I must admit I did a double-take at some of the outfits the women were wearing in the triathlon, which appeared to be simply high-cut swimming gear. My first thought was that it looked really uncomfortable to wear, rather than 'phwoar', so I suppose I'm getting old.