The National Gallery in London spent £250,000 on a Citizens' Assembly — a panel of 50 ordinary members of the public, many of whom had never set foot inside the gallery — to help shape its future, and Conservative politicians are calling it "barking mad."

The assembly, part of a project called NG Citizens, invited 15,000 households across the UK to participate through a civic lottery, a sortition method that selects participants at random rather than by election or application. The 50 who were chosen are aged 16 and over and come from across the country. The gallery's stated aim was to gather public opinion on artwork preferences and raise priorities to inform its future direction, according to Participedia.

The Telegraph reported on 4 August 2026 that the £250,000 assembly was made up in part of people who have never visited the gallery (The Telegraph). The same day, The Times reported that the project was branded "barking mad" and criticised by an art conservation group (The Times).

By 7 August, the backlash had drawn in Conservative politicians, who questioned why a publicly funded institution was spending a quarter of a million pounds on a public consultation exercise, as reported by ARTnews.

The National Gallery describes NG Citizens on its own website as a "sector-leading, nationwide Citizens' Assembly focusing on the future of the Gallery." The gallery's press materials, undated, confirm that invitations went to 15,000 households and that participants were selected by civic lottery, with no prior gallery visits required.

That last detail — that some participants had never been through the doors — is what drew the sharpest criticism. Critics argued that people unfamiliar with the collection are poorly placed to advise on its future. The gallery's counter, implicit in the project design, is that hearing from people outside the existing audience is precisely the point.

The assembly held its first session on 15 November 2025, according to the gallery's own session report. The cost of the project — £250,000 — covers recruitment, facilitation, and the running of the assembly sessions.

What makes this stand out is the collision between two ideas of how a museum should be run. On one side: the argument that public institutions should consult the public directly, including people who do not currently use them. On the other: the view that curatorial expertise and existing audiences should guide collection decisions, and that spending public money on people who have never visited is waste dressed up as engagement.

The gallery has not said whether the assembly's recommendations will be binding or advisory. What it will do with the assembly's conclusions — and whether future sessions are planned — has not been detailed in public statements.