In a largely unread report on the future of the Arts Council and indeed the Arts in England (chief recommendation: keep the Arts Council!), Margaret Hodge, now in the Lords, has one dynamite proposal tucked away among the worthy ones. It’s to charge overseas tourists to enter national museums and galleries. Obviously, this country is a civilised outlier in allowing free access to museums and galleries generally, but in the days when this was established, there was no concept of an era of global tourism in which busloads of Chinese tourists could, by themselves, make the queue for the British Museum unfeasibly, indefensibly long. At least if home visitors have to queue behind the tourists, they should be consoled by the thought that the overseas visitors are paying.
And make no mistake, free entry to museums for everyone is a wonderful privilege, whereby access to the most beautiful works of art and civilisation in the ownership of the state is entirely cost-free. George Bernard Shaw declared that he acquired his education through visits to the National Galleries of London and Dublin, and he’s not alone. You can learn more about the history of humanity, and European civilisation in particular, through visits to half a dozen museums and galleries than from most of the arts National Curriculum.
Tourism is, we are told, valuable for the London economy (see our business editor, Jonathan Prynn, on this) and thus the economy generally and free entrance to museums is part of the package that makes London so attractive. Actually I think that London is a sight too attractive to visitors; I should, myself, be delighted to see it slip down the league table of global tourist destinations (at present it lags behind only Paris), if only to have more museum space for us. Naturally, we should make visitors from abroad welcome – for most of us will ourselves be visitors elsewhere at some point – but there comes a point when the interests of the locals should be prioritised over the needs of hoteliers and Airbnb operatives. And that point has come.
It’s not too much to ask visitors from abroad to pay for entrance, depending on its importance. So, if the Louvre charges 22 euro for visitors from the European Economic Area (the EEA) and 32 euros for those outside, with admission free for under-18s, there is no reason why the British Museum and National Gallery shouldn’t charge visitors a tenner.
You can define “overseas” any way you like. I’d make Irish visitors free for historic reasons, and the Government may want to include the entire EEA as local for its own ideological reasons. Whatever – and we could have great fun deciding who’s in and who’s not - the great thing is that the two most populous groups, Chinese and Americans, should pay. It may not be a deterrent to visits (indeed, most are surprised to find they don’t have to pay) but it will be a compensation for the rest of us for the sheer weight of numbers which are making visits to the most popular institutions an ordeal.
There is a case for charging only for the destination attractions, and not those looking to increase visitors
And we shouldn’t imagine that the imposition of a fee is going to put visitors off. The Prado in Madrid charges around 18 euros for admission, but a friend who hadn’t booked ahead and who lives just outside the city had to wait an hour and forty minutes to get in to see me there, behind the Chinese tourists who had booked but still had to go through security. That’s insane but a casual visitor to the British Museum wouldn’t be far behind. I went with a press group to the Prado (we were whisked through, thank you) and the people there were keen to point out that actually, they’re not looking actively to increase visitor numbers. Indeed, there is a case for limiting charges to the blockbuster institutions which are a destination for every visitor, rather than those which would really rather like to increase visitors.
And it wouldn’t just be Britain which discriminates in charges between locals/nationals and others; visiting the Capitoline in Rome, I noted that there was a special discount rate for city residents. What Londoners want, however, is retaining free access.
The odd feature of Baroness Hodge’s recommendation is that it premises the imposition of costs on the introduction of digital ID cards, which as you’ll have noted, haven’t yet be introduced.
“Should the recently announced introduction of ID cards achieve universal coverage, it would present a valuable opportunity to revisit the policy of free entry for international visitors to national museums and galleries. The ID card system would provide an efficient mechanism for maintaining free admission for UK citizens and all children, whilst allowing for a charging model for international tourists. Adopting this approach would align the UK with other countries, such as New Zealand and Singapore, that charge an entry fee to international visitors whilst retaining free entry for citizens and residents.”
Well, there are other ways of proving residence, including the provision of a utility or council tax bill or passport. Or the locals could simply be issued with culture passes to give free access. Of course, it would be a pain; it would, however, be a means of raising much needed revenue for museums which can’t cover all their enormous costs from cafes and decorated tote bags.
Institutions could, of course, modify a charge whatever way they like. So, both the Prado and the Louvre have specific days when access is free (see the bunfight that entails); British ones could do the same, and obviously, access could be enormously reduced or free for specific groups, chiefly the young and the old.
Tourism in London is rather a one way affair right now, with locals having to weather all the inconvenience of the influx without many of the benefits; well, an admission charge on cultural institutions would be a way of righting that balance just a little. The great thing is that we should continue to be able to see the best art and culture in the world for nothing. And, perhaps, if others had to pay, it would make us count our privilege that bit more.
