Royal Albert Hall Bill [HL]

The Committee on Unopposed Bills examined the Royal Albert Hall Bill [HL], removed Clause 5 (which would have restricted the Hall’s power to exclude members) and reported the Bill as amended. In place of Clause 5, the promoter offered a strengthened Ticket Income Declaration Policy requiring seat-holder Trustees to publicly declare total ticket income (including income from sales to relevant family members) and to publish annual summaries on the Hall’s website, with reporting deadlines and notices to the Chairman of Ways and Means and the Charity Commission when changes are made.

The Royal Albert Hall Bill [HL] proposes amendments to the Royal Albert Hall Act 1966, changing how the annual contribution charged to seatholders is calculated and creating a stricter process for excluding Members from the Hall. It requires a 75% voting threshold at a general meeting for calendar-year exclusions and allows any extra rent from exclusions to be used to reduce the contributions, with additional byelaw and constitutional provisions to support these changes. The Act would come into force on passage.

This amendment paper proposes two changes to the Royal Albert Hall Bill [HL]: first, in the Preamble, it would substitute '315, holding 1,256 seats' for the current '316 holding 1,268 seats'; second, it would delete Clause 5, which concerns restrictions on powers to exclude members.

The Unopposed Bill Committee considered the Royal Albert Hall Bill, which seeks to amend the Hall’s charter to enable more exclusive performances, remove the cap on seat rates, and raise the approval threshold for the rate, as well as to expand the council’s power to exclude members. It also discusses a Lords‑amended clause on conflicts of interest (clause 5) and a proposed undertaking to improve transparency of trustees’ ticket income and restrict resale to the Hall’s ticket return scheme. After questioning on governance and private rights, the committee signalled that the Bill could proceed subject to strengthening the undertaking at a private session.

This tracked-changes Commons bill proposes amendments to the Royal Albert Hall Act 1966. It changes how the annual contribution per seat is calculated (simplifying the wording by removing a colon and follow-on paragraph) and raises the voting threshold for decisions affecting member exclusion from two-thirds to three-quarters. It also creates a new framework to exclude Members from the hall for a calendar year, with procedural safeguards (3/4 vote, proposal routes via the council or at least 20 Members, byelaws) and limits on how exclusions are administered.

The Royal Albert Hall Bill HL aims to put the hall’s current interim arrangements for exclusive lettings on a statutory footing by removing the cap on the annual Seat Rate and creating a formal mechanism to exclude Members from events, to guard against litigation and secure funding. It originally included a clause restricting how Members may sell tickets (clause 5), but this was withdrawn and an Undertaking to Parliament offering greater transparency on seat income was proposed as an alternative. The Attorney General and Charity Commission have urged broader governance reform and the Lords’ Special Report called the bill a missed opportunity on governance, while the 2014 Owen Review concluded the interim regime is necessary and proportionate to protect the hall’s finances and public benefit.

The Unopposed Bill Committee considered the Royal Albert Hall Bill [HL], which would amend the Hall’s charter to change private-seat rights—removing the cap on the seat-rate and raising the approval threshold (clause 3) and expanding the Hall’s power to exclude seat-holders from performances (clause 4)—with a Lords amendment (clause 5) aimed at restricting exclusions. It also examined governance issues and an undertaking from the promoters to increase transparency of trustees’ income and to route ticket sales through the Hall’s ticket-return scheme, though that undertaking would be strengthened in private. The Committee concluded the Bill could proceed with amendments and planned a private session to strengthen the undertaking, having proven the preamble and noted sectoral concerns about conflict of interest.

The Attorney General says he does not object to the Royal Albert Hall Bill but that it does not go far enough. It fails to address conflicts between the private interests of seat-holding trustees and the charity’s objects and contains no meaningful governance reforms for the Royal Albert Hall, a major UK cultural institution.

The statement explains a Private Bill to regularise seatholders’ forgoing of attendance at events and to reform the Hall’s seat-rate regime, arguing the measure benefits the charity and public interest and should proceed to committee stage for further scrutiny. It notes Clause 3 would remove the six-year cap on seat-rate increases (aligning it with the annual rate) and Clause 4 would formalise the forgoing of attendance, while Clause 5—aimed at restricting seatholder trustees’ ticket sales—is criticised as misconceived and unworkable and the Hall plans to seek a workable amendment or alternative at committee stage. It also sets out the Hall’s governance framework and asserts that Members’ private ticket dealings are distinct from the Hall’s public-interest duties.

This human rights memorandum concerns the Royal Albert Hall Bill [HL], a Private Bill from the Lords. It explains that, under Standing Order 169A, a report on compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights must be presented, and notes a slight delay while the promoters supplied supplementary information on the amended Bill. The Minister concludes that the promoters have conducted a full ECHR compatibility assessment and she sees no reason to dispute their conclusions.