Peer said the Royal Albert Concert Hall

According to a member of the House House, the potential conflict of the Royal Royal Albert Hall's ruling method will enable the rich individuals and companies to increase their chances of gaining huge profits in the seats owned by charity places. Essence

It is expected that this week to avoid a proposal to vote for a conflict between the trustees who have a seat and the private interests of the Rah charitable position. This was supported by the Charity Commission.

Robin Hodgson, who is amending the Royal Albert Hall Bill, said that the trustee plans to “seize more power” and may not sell it on a commercial activity website such as Viagogo. The required seats to create “good income”.

The potential interest conflict is the composition of RAH's trustee council and more and more practices of seat holders-1,268 individuals and corpses of 5,272 seats in the venue-sell tickets at exaggerated prices. From the dance to the pop concert, RAH holds about 400 events each year.

The hall opened in 1871 and was funded by the person who assigned seats from the beginning to exchange for investment. Today, seat holders include companies, charities and individuals. Some of them have family ownership dates back to the 19th century.

The seat holders who do not want to use their seats for concerts or activities may return them to the box office of the lobby to minus the ticket value of 10 %. However, in recent years, some seat holders have sold tickets through higher numbers through third -party websites.

In 2023, at the sale location at a price of up to 6,000 pounds, it provided a ticket for the host of the Ed Sheran concert at a price of up to 6,000 pounds. The face value was 200 pounds, which caused the Star's opposition. At the last night of the dance, a seat with a face value of 100 pounds has been resold at a price of more than 1,000 pounds on commercial websites.

The seat holder has no right to use or sell seats in all concerts and activities. However, the new bill has given the board of directors of 25 boards-19 of them are the people of the seat-other power, which can determine what activities the seat holder can use. This increases the possibility of the most favorable activity that the trustee designated to open the seat holder.

Lord Hodgson wrote a letter to all the colleagues who seemed to support his amendments. He said: “The ownership of the seat has become a potential investment, bringing considerable profits to the holder of the seat … Obviously, they are earning considerable money.”

Most of the seat holders in the board of directors of the board of directors have caused “the basic rules that clearly break the charity trustee: the trustees must not benefit from their decision as a trustee.”

Hodgson proposes that the independent non -seat trustee's group committee must approve the committee's decision on the incident, and the ticket holder's tickets must pass the RAH box office instead of a commercial website.

A letter from Hodgson earlier this month said that Rah “failed to resolve the potential interest conflict so far,” RAH was a significant concern. ” The committee clearly stated that RAH should “solve major issues raised for their governance.”

Hodgson said that RAH is “great national institution and is the place where many of our national cultural calendars are the most iconic activities.” However, “the core purpose of charity law is to benefit from the decision made by the trustee of the charity.”