Jump to content

Recommended Posts

According to the Museums Association, "In 2001, free entry was reintroduced at national museums in England, Scotland and Wales which had previously charged for admission."

http://www.museumsassociation.org/campaigns/free-admission-and-the-lottery


As I have already said, this applies only to National Museums.


Presumably the LONDON Transport Museum doesn't count as a NATIONAL museum - as it is specifically about London.


OK now, Dvn?

"as it is specifically about London"


I suspect National really means state in this sense as The Museum of London is one (which I recently did in three lunchtimes as I work about 200 metres away, and am running out of time to do all the things I've taken for granted).


Well worth a visit especially for the prehistoric and roman collections.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Do you have a link to this? The only one i could find was on the 24th July
    • Yes and I heard the other day that there is a higher conviction rate with trials heard by only a judge, vs juries, which makes sense when you think about it.  Also - call me cynical - I can't help but think that this justice reform story was thrown out to overshadow the Reeves / OBR / Budget story.  But I do agree with scrapping juries for fraud cases. 
    • judges are, by definition, a much narrower strata of society. The temptation to "rattle through" numbers, regardless of right, wrong or justice is fundamentally changed If we trust judges that much, why have we ever bothered with juries in the first place? (that's a rhetorical question btw - there is no sane answer which goes along the lines of "good point, judges only FTW"
    • Ah yes, of course, I'd forgotten that the cases will be heard by judges and not Mags. But how does losing juries mean less work for barristers, though? Surely all the other problems (no courtrooms, loos, witnesses etc etc) that stop cases going to trial, or slow trials down - will still exist? Then they'll still be billing the same? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...