Envelope Facebook-f
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

Frequently asked questions

On proposed changes to the Malvern Hills Acts

The Trust is governed by the Malvern Hills Acts 1984 – 1995 and by other legislation referred to in those Acts, some dating back to 1847. As a charity governed by statute, the only way the Trust can modernise its governing Acts is by Private Act of Parliament.

The Trust ran 2 public consultations on its proposed governance changes in 2019 and 2024. After careful consideration of the responses received both from the public and from stakeholder organisations, the Malvern Hills Bill was lodged in Parliament in November 2024. The Bill is currently passing through the House of Lords. It had its first reading on 22 January 2025 and its second reading on 4 June 2025. The next stage is the Committee stage which is likely to start in early 2026.

Below are some frequently asked questions about the proposals and we’ve provided some simple facts in ‘myth-busters’.

1. Why are you proposing to make changes to the Malvern Hills Acts? Is the organisation fit for the future?

The day-to-day work of the charity is being hampered by the outdated Malvern Hills Acts – the governing documents of the organisation. The Trust needs to fundamentally revise its governing Acts in order to be able to operate effectively in the 21st century.

The Acts are very out of date and it is becoming increasingly difficult to administer the Trust and to care for the Hills and Commons in an effective and efficient way.  Considerable staff time is being spent interpreting the Acts, resulting in inefficient decision-making and the charity’s funds being expended on legal advice when the Acts are unclear.

The Trust’s governing Acts date back to the Commissioners Clauses Act of 1847, and the 1884 Malvern Hills Act which were written in a time very different to today.

Some of the key reasons for the proposed changes are:

  • The Acts refer to many statutory provisions which are no longer in force 
  • The Victorian language is difficult to interpret
  • Because there are five Acts, it can be challenging to find all the relevant provisions on a particular topic and sometimes there are contradictions between them
  • The Trust needs to be able to deal with practical situations which were not envisaged when the Acts were passed
  • Some of the language used in the Acts has no clear meaning (for example “natural aspect”)
  • Some sections of the Acts no longer serve any purpose
  • The Trust needs a number of additional powers to enable it to operate more effectively
  • The Trust cannot comply with the current recommendations for good governance of charities.  For example, the Board of 29, which exceeds the number of staff, is too big for effective decision making and there is no way of ensuring its members have the necessary skills, experience and knowledge (see Charity Governance Code)

The Trust proposes to update and re-enact the provisions from the Malvern Hills Acts 1884 – 1995 which remain relevant within a single Act to make them easier to follow and understand.

The Government proposals to radically change Local Government and make Worcestershire a unitary authority make it even more important that the Trust’s legislation is updated.

The Trust is quite unusual in that it is a charity governed by statute.  The organisation was established through an Act of Parliament in 1884 and the only way it can change its governing Acts is through this Parliamentary process.  This is not unprecedented as since the first Act in 1884 there have been four subsequent Acts in 1909, 1924, 1930 and 1995.

The Trust has explored all avenues and making the changes by Private Bill is the only option available. An application was made to the Charity Commission for consent under section 74 Charities Act and permission was granted.

Private Bills are subject to full Parliamentary scrutiny but only change the law as it applies to a specific organisation or location, as distinct from public bills which apply generally. They should not be confused with a ‘Private Members Bill’ which is usually a public bill introduced by an MP who is not a government minister.

The Trust’s objects (expressed as ‘duties’ in the Acts) have always been entirely charitable. In 1984, the Trust formally registered with the Charity Commission (charity number 515804) when it became compulsory for all charities to do so.

There is no general definition of “public body” for all legal purposes. Twice questions have been asked in the Lords, whether the Trust is considered by the Government to be a public body and twice the response has been that it is not.

The Trust is a charity governed by statute.

The Acts do not refer to the Trust as a ‘public body’ or ‘public authority’ but, like some other charities, the Trust does exercise certain ‘public functions’.

No, the essential objects of the charity – to look after the land and keep it open, unenclosed and unbuilt on for the recreation of the public – will remain the same but they will be expressed in more modern language.

For example, the reference to “natural aspect” in the 1924 Act is not defined. There has been limited discussion in case law but this has not provided a clear definition. It is vital that this essential objective is properly articulated so that it is clear that it applies to protecting all aspects of the natural landscape including biodiversity, geology, archaeological, features etc.

As a body governed by statute, the Trust can only do the things that are specified in the Acts. This makes future-proofing the Trust impossible as, in the same way as the Victorians could not anticipate the technological advancements that are now part of our everyday lives, for example the motor car or drones. The Trust cannot anticipate every new development that may impact it. Without the general power, even minor changes will require the Trust to seek a new power from Parliament, which is expensive, time consuming and inefficient.

The Trust listened to the comments from the public, and the general power is drafted to curtail its use and to prevent the Trust using it to get round things that are specified in the Act. For example, the general power could not be used to sell land in circumstances not specified in the Act.

It is common for charities to have a general power to enable them to deal with such eventualities. Other charities with a general power include the National Trust.

The general power would only be used to further the charity’s work in the pursuance of its charitable objectives.

If trustees acted in breach of this obligation they would be acting outside their remit and could be personally liable for the consequences.

Any complaint about abuse of the general power could be referred to the Trust’s regulatory body, The Charity Commission.

There are no changes to the Trust’s existing powers. With very limited exceptions the Trust cannot sell land it owns over which the public have access.

The Trust can sell land which is used as offices or working & storage space for example our offices at Manor House. This also will not change.

There will be no change. The powers to grant easements are laid out in the 1930 Malvern Hills Act as updated by the 1995 Malvern Hills Act.

The bodies which decide whether planning permission is granted for any new building or development are Malvern Hills District Council and Herefordshire Council. Malvern Hills Trust cannot make decisions relating to planning matters.

No, we will not change Levy paying areas.

The general power could not be used to increase the levy.

Yes, existing Commoners rights are protected by separate legislation and will not be affected.

This will not change and the public will enjoy a right of access to the land which the Trust manages, on foot and on horseback, as now. Securing the grazed commons will not prevent public access but will ensure that the grazing continues in line with our purposes which help to maintain the open and accessible nature of the Trust’s land.

The Charity Governance Code suggests a board of at least five but no more than twelve trustees.   Research has shown that the optimum number for good decision making is seven, with the efficiency of the body decreasing by 10% with every additional member. The current Acts provide for 29 trustees.  There are more Trustees than employees and this places a considerable administrative burden on the staff.

Those who pay the levy will still elect some of the trustees, and as now, people from the local area will be able to choose to stand for election. 

Although it is proposed that the Board size will be reduced, the proportion of elected Board members will increase from 38% of trustees under the current arrangements to 50% with the proposed governance changes.

Increasing Board diversity is an important benefit of the proposed changes.  The Trust, like other charities, needs to ensure the Board has a diverse range of trustees with the right skills and background to effectively manage the Trust.  For example, in October 2023 the average age of Board members was 71 and only 6 of them were women.  The governance changes will enable a wide range of people to apply to become a trustee and be selected for their relevant skills and background.

Elected trustees are not and have never been representatives of levy payers. Levy payers have the opportunity to vote for the candidates they believe have the skills and experience to enable the Trust to achieve its charitable objectives. Trustees, once elected, must act exclusively in the best interests of the charity – not the interests of those who appointed them – as is the case with all other charity trustees. There is no change to the current position.

No. Those who currently have the right to vote will still be able to do so.

Newly appointed trustees would be selected on the basis of their skills rather than their location. In practice, however, a candidate’s association with the area would be a relevant criterion in the selection process.

No. All meetings at which decisions will be made will remain open to the public unless confidential or legal matters are to be discussed. This is currently the case and there will be no change.

The Charity Commission initially authorised the Trust to spend £306K on legal costs and fees associated with the Parliamentary Process. Unfortunately, partly as a result of the number of separate petitions lodged, the Trust has had to ask the Commission to increase the budget to £451,972. The Trust proposes to spread some of the cost by taking a loan repayable over 25 years.

In addition to the legal costs and disbursements, there will be other costs for example staff time in supporting the process, keeping the public informed and the costs of a public consultation.

The benefits of updating the charity’s governance, particularly financial benefits, may not be immediately obvious. However, enabling the charity to carry out its work more effectively will be a better use of its resources. The ability to diversify the Trust’s income streams will also put the charity in a much more stable and secure financial position for the future and reduce the reliance on levy payers

At the moment, the Trust powers to raise funds are very limited. It needs to be able to diversify its income streams and raise funds in the same way as other charities. For example, one of the proposals under consideration is to set up a supporters organisation. This would help to raise funds and engage members of the public who want to help the Trust but may live outside the levy paying area.

The Private Bill is not being ‘rushed through’. In 2014 the Trust began making plans to update its governing Acts. All meetings where decisions about what changes should be made have been open to the public.

In addition the Trust ran public consultations in 2019 and 2024.

The Acts define to the Trust’s electoral area partly by reference to the Malvern Urban District Council area and additionally the Malvern Urban District Council was given the power to appoint a number of trustees. This council was abolished in1972 and the area became part of Malvern Hills District Council. This change has resulted in trustees being appointed who live in distant parts of the District Council area, for example Tenbury and Little Whitley.

The amendments made to Malvern Hills District Council wards in January 2023 provided a spur to make sure the Trust lodged a Bill as soon as possible because the current council wards which define the voting area no longer conform to the wording in the Acts.

The Government proposes to make Worcestershire a unitary authority within the next 2 or 3 years. If Worcestershire becomes a single council area and further ward boundary changes are made, it will almost certainly make the provisions in the 1924 Act about appointment of trustees unworkable and will mean that trustees could be appointed from as far afield as Stourport, Redditch and Evesham.

Malvern Hills Bill can be found here. Please check the website for updates and if you have specific questions please E-mail info@malvernhills.org.uk