Charging international tourists an entry fee for London’s museums could be detrimental for the capital’s cultural appeal and subsequent survival, ministers have been told.
By Kumail Jaffer, Local Democracy Reporter
Charging international tourists an entry fee for London’s museums could be detrimental for the capital’s cultural appeal and subsequent survival, ministers have been told.
In March the government confirmed they would look at the possibility of charging international visitors at national museums across the country amid a cultural funding crisis. Universal free admission to the national museums has been in place since 2001 for both domestic and foreign visitors.
However, a funding shortfall caused by higher running costs and underwhelming footfall has prompted a discussion over the long term sustainability over the cultural institutions.
The Mayor of London has urged the government to reject the idea of charging international visitors, saying recently that “free museums and galleries are a fundamental part of London life”. He has also suggested that 80 per cent of tourists come to the capital for its cultural offering, and so it should remain free of charge.
On Wednesday the London Assembly Economy, Culture and Skills Committee heard from museum bosses that, despite the funding crisis, charging entry could actually have an adverse effect on both the cultural sector in London and the city as a whole.
Sir Tristram Hunt, a former Labour Party frontbencher who is now Director of the Victoria & Albert Museum, told Assembly Members that he is “yet to be convinced of the benefits” of any such model.
“It will affect our business model of not charging people at the door but in the cafe, gift shop, exhibitions and membership,” he said.
“That would be scuppered by charging. We are at risk of falling back relative to the US and Europe.”
Jenny Waldman, Director of the Art Fund, suggested that charging for museums will have a “knock on impact” on other London attractions – potentially reducing overall spend.
“Most visitors come to London with a budget to spend on museums and other attractions,” she told Assembly Members. “London is not competitively priced as a tourist destination.
“People primarily come here because of culture – if you stop that [free entry], the impact will likely be more than you get for charging. The knock-on impact of charging risks being greater than the sum of money earned from tourists.”
There were also concerns around the ethics of a commercialised museum model.
Rebecca Pullen, Chief of Staff at Imperial War Museums, said that the institution’s role “was to be there for everyone”, adding: “Anything that impedes that is difficult for us to think about.”
The view was also shared by Rhiannon Goddard of the Association of Independent Museums, who said that charging any visitors goes against the “founding principles” of many national museums.
“The collections belong to all of us – they are not royal collections like the Louvre, they were gifted to the nation, one way or another,” she added.
However, panellists suggested that there was a need to make up the funding gap in some way.
Ms Pullen said the current environment was “very challenging” due to a real-terms reduction in funding grants from the Department for Media, Culture and Sport (DCMS), as well as a fall in visitors from pre-Covid times. The cost of living crisis has also meant that people generally spend less in cafes and gift shops, which provide useful supplementary income for museums.
In addition, running costs have also increased, Ms Waldman said.
“Museums have very high fixed costs to care for their collections and keep their doors open, these have been going up more than income increases,” she said.
“Most of our museums have found a way of increasing their income through commercial and earned income but that has not kept pace with energy costs and National Insurance contributions.”
Independent museums are particularly struggling with rising costs, Ms Goddard noted, adding: “It doesn’t matter how many people come to buy a ticket and a coffee, it doesn’t cover the costs for small museums at the moment.”
Meanwhile, there is more competition for philanthropic funding – but many available grants are for “larger capital projects”, she said, rather than day-to-day funding.
“Although this is incredibly useful, this does not help with long term sustainability,” she said. “There is not the right sort of funding for the gap we are seeing.”
Arran Pedder, Head of Development at the Pitzhanger Manor & Gallery in Ealing, concluded: “The rate of [visitor] growth is not enough to outpace the increasing costs we face.”
In recent months City Hall has called on ministers to fund London’s museums at levels comparable to European counterparts.
In July, Deputy Mayor for Culture Justine Simons told Assembly Members: “The Mayor has invested the most of any Mayor [of London] to date in culture.
“Over £800 million he has invested in culture in his ten years so far, which is a significant amount. What I would say at City Hall is we are looking at where we have the levers, the resources, the convening power.
“We cannot rest on our laurels. The UK is the lowest funder of the arts in Europe at a national level. Times are challenging. We have all got to work together to protect, grow, sustain our creative offer.”
In March, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said: “We will work with the museum sector to explore the potential opportunities that charging international visitors at national museums could bring to support access to arts everywhere, and the timeframes for this.
“The government believes charging international visitors at national museums could provide significant benefits. It could underpin our commitment to ensure art and culture is accessible, representative and shared across the country, and support the long-term financial resilience of these organisations.
“We will work with the museum sector to explore options for charging international visitors that will deliver benefits for the sector and we will provide an update before the end of the year.”
