Is the golden age of free museum admission in the UK coming to an end? | Museums

For a quarter of a century, visitors to the UK’s national museums and galleries have enjoyed universal free admission to see the permanent collections.

The policy, introduced by the New Labor government in 2001, has been widely credited with improving access to culture and dramatically increasing footfall at some of the country’s most famous attractions.

But as funding pressures deepen across the sector, and operating costs increase, a policy once considered untouchable is now under renewed scrutiny.

The tension was highlighted this week, when the National Gallery announced it would make deep cuts in the face of an £8.2 million shortfall next year, which could mean fewer free exhibitions, reduced international borrowing of works of art and higher ticket prices.

The gallery said it would cut spending on “public programs and activities for which, for a number of reasons beyond our control, we can no longer justify their costs.”

The announcement has raised concerns that open access could become more difficult – concerns exacerbated by the Arts Council England’s recent Hodge Review, which recommended charging international tourists fees to access the permanent collections of national institutions.

Alison Cole, director of the think tank’s cultural policy unit, said: “It is shocking to learn that the National Gallery is in such financial difficulties – but the solution should not be to make visits to museums and galleries more prohibited.”

“There is a risk that some form of admission charging could be re-introduced, eroding our historic policy of universal free admission and accelerating all the unintended consequences that flow from it.”

According to Cole, while charging tourists fees or raising ticket prices may seem “tempting”, evidence suggests that free admission can be economically effective. She said: “Free entry encourages more than 25% of visitors to pay for tickets to exhibitions, and many of them spend more in cafes and shops.”

This situation has already been considered by the Treasury, which has reportedly explored ending free entry for foreign visitors as part of its 2025 Budget spending cuts, and has also set out a model for scrapping the policy entirely.

The plans, which could have saved up to £480m from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s annual budget, were eventually dropped after opposition from ministers, including the Culture Secretary, Lisa Nandy.

The Museums Association, which represents more than 1,800 institutions in the UK, has consistently defended free admission, warning that introducing fees could harm tourism and have knock-on effects on retail and hospitality.

Its director, Sharon Hill, said free entry provided a “wide range of cultural, educational and economic benefits”, adding that imposing fees on international visitors could damage the UK’s reputation.

Jenny Waldman, director of the Charitable Arts Fund, said the real problem was chronic underinvestment. “We’re seeing a lot of innovation, from joint touring exhibitions to creative community fundraising,” she said. “But for museums to thrive, they need long-term, sustainable public funding to help cover the annual costs of keeping the doors open and welcoming everyone into our public collections.”

The UK is an outlier among the leading cultural nations in not charging door fees. The French Louvre charges £28 for admission, the Spanish Prado £13, the US Museum of Modern Art £22, and the Vatican Museums £17.

Against this backdrop, a growing number of senior museum figures – some of whom once supported free admission – have begun to argue that the policy may no longer be fit for purpose.

Among them is Nick Merriman, former head of Horniman Museum and Gardens and English Heritage, who told the Daily Telegraph last week that although free admission had increased visitor numbers, it had done little to diversify audiences. “You’re just pushing more middle-class people out,” he said. “In principle, why don’t we charge a fee? Most people, for national museums, are willing to pay.”

Roy Clare, former head of the Royal Museums Greenwich, called for a “more sophisticated approach”, arguing that free access does not require a “24/7 or 365” app.

Mark Jones, former director of the Victoria and Albert Museum, and interim director of the British Museum from 2023-24, described universal free admission as “regressive and unfair”. Taxpayers with modest incomes subsidize the arrival of tourists who can pay, while charging fees can also help relieve overcrowding, he said.

In an article for the Art newspaper, art critic and historian Ben Lewis said it was time to “get rid of the gold-plated, diamond-encrusted sacred cow of the British art world” and introduce an entry fee.

The debate is unfolding against a stark financial backdrop. Between 2010 and 2023, core funding for arts and cultural organizations in the UK will fall by 18%. In its latest survey, the Museum Association found that 61% of respondents were planning to reduce service in 2024-2025.

At the Tate, staff staged a seven-day strike last year in response to repeated restructuring, layoffs and below-inflation pay rises, with some workers reporting having to use food banks.

Noel McLean, of the Prospect union, which represents workers at the National Gallery, the National Portrait Gallery and the Tate, said workers were “bearing the brunt” of the crisis. “If nothing is done, drastic action may follow,” he warned. “There are already concerns that freedom of access may be at risk – yet it is vital for social, economic and educational purposes.”

While national museums remain free for now, many regional and independent institutions have already begun charging fees for places where entry was previously free, including Kettle’s Yard in Cambridge. Oxford City Council also voted to introduce a standard fee of £4 to visit the Oxford Museum.