Online Safety

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Chair of the Select Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

I also warmly welcome this announcement. The sheer number of young people whose lives have been impacted by this issue is a damning indictment of a collective failure to keep children safe. Let us not forget that major tech companies have the capability to implement device-level controls but have chosen not to do so. As far as I am concerned, it is simply unforgivable that those companies innovate quickly on new products, yet so slowly on children’s safety. Given Ofcom’s sluggish implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023, can the Secretary of State explain to me how compliance with this policy will be monitored, and what sanctions will be available to address non-compliance?

Sporting Events Bill [Lords]

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston) in welcoming our hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) to her role—I know that she will be excellent. I also want to pay tribute to him as her predecessor. He was an exceptional Minister and shadow Secretary of State. He has always been an exceptional champion for the sectors that DCMS represents, and I know that he will be a formidable and quite terrifying Back Bencher as well, so it was a pleasure to hear from him.

At the risk of universal agreement breaking out from all corners of the room, I too widely support the Bill. Sport is one of our country’s greatest strengths and most successful worldwide exports. Major sporting occasions represent such a huge source of national pride and inspiration, as the Secretary of State said. They are a massive driver of tourism, investment and jobs, and when they are done correctly, their legacy can have tentacles that go on forever. We are world class at delivering them.

We know that British athletes and sportsmen are representing us on the world stage with the most phenomenal success. I was exceptionally proud of the UK deaf athletes who claimed 12 medals, including five gold, at the Tokyo 2025 Deaflympics, despite the fact that they received no public funding. They are elite athletes who make our country very proud. I say this as a gentle reminder to the Minister, given that sports is the theme today, to look again at their eligibility for UK Sport funding.

Our strength is reflected not only in our participation and elite performance, but in our ability to host and showcase some of the world’s most significant sporting events. This small island gave the world some of our best-loved sports—from football to cricket, lawn tennis to boxing, rugby to snooker. We may not always lead the world as we did in those halcyon days of the 1700s, when the small village of Hambledon in Hampshire, known as the cradle of cricket, took on the rest of the world and won, but iconic British fixtures, from the premier league to Wimbledon, the British grand prix to the grand national, are globally synonymous with their sports. They bring people to our shores, generate economic growth, inspire participation and project the United Kingdom’s reputation around the world.

That reputation is under pressure. The gap in soft power between the UK and our competitor nations is closing. Brand Finance has said that the UK has recorded a “sharper-than-average” drop in soft power, and the British Council says that the lead that western nations, including the UK, hold over our competitors is “narrowing”. That is why—I gently say to the Front Bench—it is disappointing that the Government’s action on soft power has failed to keep pace with their rhetoric. I really welcomed the creation of the UK Soft Power Council, but it cannot even claim to be a talking shop when it has met only four times in the last 18 months and the Culture Secretary, whom I admire enormously and who chairs it, has attended only twice. It needs to put together a coherent strategy, and if it did, major events would play a significant role.

Our DCMS Committee will shortly report back on our recent inquiry into major events. The UK’s events sector is an engine for so much growth, but it has received limited attention from the Government until now. They could be doing so much more to unleash its potential and ease some of its constraints, so this Bill is a good place to start to redress that balance. In particular, given that when done well the ratio of investment to return on these kinds of things is so high, it makes sense for the Government to do all they can to attract opportunities to hold all kinds of major events, particularly sporting events.

The Sport and Recreation Alliance told our Committee, as part of our inquiry:

“Dedicated major events legislation would strengthen the UK’s global position as a key destination for major sporting events”,

so I really support the principle of the Bill. Bespoke legislation for individual events creates uncertainty and is unwieldly and impractical. The framework introduced by this new legislation is welcomed by everybody—organisers, rights holders, sponsors and hosts.

Our noble colleagues in the other place made such important improvements by widening the legislation to include other substantial annual events. To be honest, that is something our Committee would have introduced, had it not already been done—I suppose we should not be at all surprised that amendments proposed by the Paralympic medallist Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson have won that race. As she said, legislation in this area does not come along often, so we must take advantage of the opportunity.

When Parliament has the chance to establish the framework, we should ensure that it is robust enough to support not only the next tournament but the ecosystem that exists all year. The benefits of the Bill in its amended form—creating offences on ticket touting, ambush marketing, and unauthorised trading and association—will be felt not just by the one-off totemic events, but by the stalwarts. That is why I am so grateful to the Secretary of State for her signal today that the Government do not intend to remove the amendments made in the House of Lords.

Throughout our Committee’s inquiry, the evidence we received underlined a few wider concerns. The major events sector does not always feel recognised as a strategic national asset. Particularly organisers outside the world of sport often feel excluded from national planning and policymaking. The flower shows, cultural festivals, music festivals and military tattoos attract tourists, create jobs and bring people together, yet many witnesses told us that they do not feel recognised in the same way as their sporting counterparts. Across the board, the events sector is asking for better co-ordination and the removal of barriers that prevent it from reaching its economic potential. Witness after witness called for better cross-Government working, clearer points of contact, streamlined approvals and a more coherent long-term strategy.

I appreciate that the Bill aims to make the United Kingdom more competitive in winning bids to host international sporting events, but it does not do much to alleviate the concerns that we have heard from other event organisers across the country about things such as the weight of bureaucracy, the cost of policing and the integration of events with transport plans, to name just a few. During the passage of the Bill in the other place, I was grateful to hear that the Government have promised a major events strategy, which we welcome. We hope that the Government will lean heavily on the conclusions and recommendations in our Committee’s report when it is published.

I want to say one final thing about the contribution of business events. They really should not be forgotten. Conferences, exhibitions and trade fairs generate huge economic value for the UK and bring in massive inward investment. More than a million conferences and business meetings take place in the UK every year, generating £33.6 billion for the UK economy. Given its firepower, it is almost laughable that there is not an industrial strategy for the sector alone. The business events sector means business. We will shortly be releasing a stand-alone report on the topic, which I hope the Government are minded to take note of.

In conclusion, this Bill is a welcome step. It has the potential to strengthen the UK’s ability to compete for and host major sporting events. It provides a more consistent framework and reflects the importance of sport to our economies, communities and international standing, but it needs to be the starting point of the conversation. For those reasons, I support the Bill’s objectives, welcome the improvements made in the other place and encourage the Government to see it as the beginning of a wider and more ambitious vision for the future.

Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

I know that the Minister cares deeply about increasing sporting participation, so she must be as disappointed as I am that the Government’s rhetoric just does not match the facts. School sport funding has been cut; business rates rises mean that clubs and facilities are raising their participation fees, some by as much as 85%, making them less accessible for the poorest; local authorities are shutting their facilities; and the UK ranks near the bottom of EU expenditure on sport and physical activity. The Government say that this is important, but how can we believe them when existing facilities are shutting faster than they can invest in new ones?

[Stephanie Peacock]

I am grateful to the Chair of the Select Committee for all the work that her Committee does and for its report in the last year on this very issue. On school sport, £1 billion will go in over the next few years. There has been a change: it is revenue, it is capital and it is primary and secondary. However, we have to acknowledge that under the current system, not enough young people are getting active. We are investing £400 million into community facilities, but as our new Prime Minister has said, we absolutely want to go further and do more on sport.

Culture, Media And Sport

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

I thank the Backbench Business Committee. I am conscious of time, so I will focus my remarks on the Select Committee’s “Game On” report, which looked at community and school sport, and the Government response published last week.

The evidence was unequivocal: an active nation underpins everything else—our health, our prosperity, our social cohesion. It is not a peripheral issue, but a strategic priority, yet it has too often been treated by Governments as a discretionary choice. We are at a critical juncture as the UK continues to invest significantly less in sport and physical activity than many of our European neighbours, despite the proven economic and social returns. Our Committee therefore called for a decisive generational shift, with a cross-Government movement for health strategy that recognises that physical activity is not simply a sport, but a central pillar of policy across health, education, planning and economic growth.

The Government response acknowledged much of this analysis, but when we look more closely, we recognise a theme that has gripped this Government from day one: plenty of words, but no action to back them up, or as some might say, “all mouth and no trousers”. Nowhere is that clearer than on funding. We recommended increasing the share of Government expenditure on sport and recreation over time, in recognition of the very clear evidence that investment in activity delivers long-term savings, reduces illness, supports people into work, prevents chronic conditions and strengthens local economies.

Following publication of the Committee’s report, the Government announced over £1 billion for school sport. It looked like a statement of the kind of ambition we would like to see across the sector, and we nearly patted ourselves on the back for influencing this remarkable investment. However, given a closer look, this glossy announcement is no gift at all. It is a cynical cut disguised as new funding. Yesterday, Schools Week published an article with the finding that 65% of schools in the north-east are expecting to make cuts to their coaching staff as a result. One reason for this cut is the reduction in the contribution from the Department of Health and Social Care and the replacement of the PE and sport premium with money that must now go to secondary schools as well as primary schools. I have a feeling that the Minister will attempt to say that schools are receiving more money for PE and sport when she responds to this debate, but that is simply not the case. It is smoke and mirrors.

We were pleased with the £400 million of grassroots funding, which we called for in our report, but we need a concerted effort to ensure that the funding achieves what it sets out to do. We also called for an audit of sport and physical activity facilities to make sure we are not losing them. This danger is real, especially as the Government have still not ruled out removing Sport England as a statutory consultee. Are the Government tracking the number of sports pitches and facilities, or do they have any plans to do so?

Another pillar of our recommendations was clarity—clarity of leadership, accountability and deliverability—because without a coherent national plan, even significant investment risks being fragmented and under-realised. That is why we called for a cross-Government strategy, backed by clear objectives, defined responsibilities and mechanisms to measure progress. The Government have told us that a national plan for physical activity is in development, but there is no firm deadline, no detailed governance model and no clear indication of how the Department will be held accountable—all words, no action. On issue after issue, the Government have agreed in principle to a number of our recommendations, but have declined to act decisively, as with the recommendation of a statutory duty on local authorities to provide sporting and leisure facilities and the recommendation on action to remove unnecessary “No ball games” signs. There are warm words, but zero grip.

In schools, where the case for action is perhaps clearest of all, we see the same pattern: the Government accept that provision is inconsistent and acknowledge the importance of high-quality PE and regular activity, but when presented with the opportunity to set out clear national expectations, they step back. There is no requirement for children to achieve 60 minutes of activity every day, only encouragement; there is no firm mandate guaranteeing two hours of PE each week, only an expectation that schools might protect time; and physical education itself will remain outside the core curriculum subjects, despite its central importance to children’s development. A truly transformative approach would embed movement throughout the school, throughout the curriculum, throughout the environment and throughout our culture, ensuring that all children, regardless of their background, have the opportunity to live active lives, because active children become active adults.

Outside school, the Secretary of State has made her national youth strategy the poster child of her tenure. She came to Parliament to tell us she was giving young people

“somewhere to go, something to do and someone who cares.”—[Official Report, 18 June 2026; Vol. 787, c. 971.]

The strategy is backed by £500 million, which again sounds like a hugely significant investment to me, but when we look at the detail, we see it is not the investment we think. It is the amalgamation of the scrapped youth investment fund and the scrapped National Citizen Service. Less money is going into the system. Although the National Citizen Service no doubt had its flaws, it was the most successful youth programme of the past few decades—over 1 million young people took part.

Funding streams used to be clear, but now there is a convoluted pick and mix of over nine different programmes. It is more difficult for civil society to navigate a fragmented selection of funding pots. Meanwhile, the speed of the closure of the National Citizen Service meant that some of the incredibly skilled and dedicated youth workers, on whom we rely and on whom the Government will rely when they finally decide what they are going to do for young people, have left the workforce. How many have left the sector due to delays and uncertainty in the delivery of the national youth strategy? Does the Minister know? Perhaps she can tell me.

Volunteering is an essential foundation of community sport. The Government recognise its importance, but they once again stop short of setting out a comprehensive national policy to support, incentivise and sustain the workforce—there is nothing there. The valued volunteer workforce is needed more than ever before, but it is under incredible pressure. People are dropping out due to the time priorities of coping with cost of living demands.

There is one further example that speaks volumes about the Government’s approach: the question of women’s football broadcasting. The Select Committee recommended an intervention to explore whether the 3 pm Saturday blackout could be adapted to support the women’s game. It would give a consistent time for showcasing the women’s game and inspire girls to get active. The Government’s response points to the technical complexities of UEFA article 48 and argues that any change would risk opening up the slot more widely, thereby undermining its current purpose—the response is, “It’s all too difficult. We just can’t be bothered.” Where is the ambition to work proactively with UEFA and the Football Association to pursue a targeted exemption for women’s football? While the 3 pm blackout continues, women’s football is shackled and with it the opportunity for more women and girls to see themselves participating in sport.

An active population is a healthier, more productive and more connected population. Increasing participation in sport and physical activity is one of the most powerful and cost-effective levers of Government. It delivers returns across multiple policy areas simultaneously, easing pressure on public services and improving quality of life. The question is not whether the Government recognise those investments—they plainly do. The question is whether they are prepared to act with any urgency or with the ambition that the evidence demands. Without ambition, we will continue to fall short of what is possible.

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee has set out a road map. It is quite easy for the Secretary of State, the Minister and the Department to follow it. What we need now is for the Government not simply to endorse this sense of direction, but to actually match their words with decisive action.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephanie Peacock]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right, and I would be delighted to meet him. I was on a visit near his constituency recently. Leisure is a real challenge; I really want to do more on it. Of course, it is a responsibility of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, but we are absolutely aware how important this issue is for physical activity. That is why we are investing £400 million in sports facilities. That is alongside the £250 million of Exchequer and lottery funding for grassroots sports annually.

This financial year, we are delivering £85 million via the multi-sports grassroots facilities programme. It will build and upgrade vital pitches, changing rooms and clubhouses. Fifty per cent of the investment will be prioritised for the 30% most deprived areas in the UK, and at least 40% of projects will offer multi-sport access, benefiting rugby, cricket and basketball, alongside football. We have innovative projects, as the hon. Member for Droitwich and Evesham said, which I am happy to write to him about.

The projects will prioritise women and girls’ provision, doubling access, and I am committed to promoting women’s sport and tackling some of the challenges that it faces. That is why I established the women’s sports taskforce, and we had our most recent meeting in Southampton to coincide with the T20 world cup. We are working with local leaders, in a place-based approach, to deliver funding beyond this year, so that areas can have a greater say on the facilities that they need. I have seen this the length and breadth of the country.

This Government believe in the power of sport, not as a luxury, but as an essential driver of national health, wellbeing and economic productivity. It helps tackle so many issues, such as mental and physical health and loneliness. I think about Jed in Wombwell Main in my constituency, who took up walking football after his wife sadly passed away. That is the power of sport in this country.

I turn to school sport. Over £1 billion will be invested in school sport over the next three years. We are launching the new physical education and school sport partnership network. It intentionally replaces the old PE and sport premium, putting an end to the one-size-fits-all model that failed too many children for too long, while meeting the clear asks of leading voices in sports education.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage]

The hon. Member is an excellent Minister, but can she please just answer this question? When we add it all up, does this equate to an increase or a cut in the total amount of school spending?

[Stephanie Peacock]

One billion pounds is going in over the next three years. Of course, that is capital and revenue, and it covers all schools. I do appreciate that there are some concerns. I will come on to address them, and I would be happy to meet the hon. Lady and, indeed, other Members.

I understand those concerns regarding the decision to replace the existing premium. However, despite sustained investment through the PE and sport premium for over a decade, fewer than half of children are getting the chief medical officer’s recommended 60 active minutes a day. Persistent inequalities remain for girls and people from disadvantaged backgrounds. It simply is not good enough, and we are determined to close the gaps in participation that this causes. That is why over £1 billion in funding for PE and school sport has been committed to over the next three years. This includes £580 million for a new PE and school sport partnership network, to replace the PE and sport premium, alongside investment for improvements to school sport facilities and transitional support for primary schools.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephanie Peacock]

A billion pounds is going in over the next three years. I have acknowledged that it is for secondary and primary. The current system simply is not working—kids are not getting as active. I know as a former teacher how important it is for kids to be active. We are reinventing the model, and we make no apologies for doing so. In the interests of time, I am very happy to meet Members to discuss that further.

I am being encouraged by the Chair to hurry up, so I will perhaps put some of my responses in writing. Of course, we have responded formally to the “Game On” report, but I will make a couple of points on that. I have talked about school sport. On the point about “no ball games” signs, we are fully supportive of the principle of removing them. I am due to meet my counterpart at MHCLG. This is in the gift of local authorities, but we want to do everything we can to address this issue.

I understand the arguments about the 3 pm slot. On the point that the Chair of the Select Committee made, the Government’s response did refer to the technical issues with such a change—that is true—and Karen Carney’s review did not recommend it for those reasons. Our football taskforce has led to direct improvements, such as insurance products for female athletes.

In the 30 seconds I have to wind up, I would like to briefly mention youth. We have the most connected but the most isolated generation of young people, and that is why we have announced our national youth strategy, with £500 million of funding. It is incredibly important that this issue be tackled across Government. I will conclude there, but I will ensure that I write to Members to follow up on the points I was not able to cover.

Question deferred (Standing Order No. 54).

[Dame Caroline Dinenage]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think the Minister may have inadvertently misled the House a moment ago when she said that the quantum of school sports funding exceeded what it previously was. There have been cuts to school sports funding, and I would like to give her the opportunity to correct the record.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

The hon. Lady will know that that is not a point of order for the Chair. I am sure that if the Minister wishes to correct the record, she will.

Media Green Paper

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Select Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

The Secretary of State knows as well as I do that the media landscape is changing so quickly that no sooner was the ink dry on the Media Act 2024 than it was almost obsolete. We know that for the first time YouTube has overtaken the BBC in audience reach, which is why the Green Paper is really welcome, but I wonder whether it is a first step towards a new and more extensive media Bill that reflects the nation’s viewing habits and reaches a definitive definition of television. The Green Paper talks about new television when talking about video-sharing platforms, YouTube and so on. We need a new definition of television to reflect technological change. Finally, the consultation refers to media literacy, but surely if we are really planning to future-proof that, we should be talking about AI literacy too—and not just for children.

[Lisa Nandy]

On legislation, we will of course keep that option open and will not hesitate to legislate should we need to do so. We deliberately drew the parameters and contours of the Green Paper very broadly so that we could have that very open discussion and work together to ensure that we then take the action we need to take.

On a slightly more reflective note, the point that the hon. Lady makes about the ink not being dry before the landscape had changed is particularly true in the online space. Rather than thinking about a piece of legislation, the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and I have been reflecting on the probable need to legislate quite frequently to keep pace with change.

When it comes to media literacy, I agree with the hon. Lady about AI. I think there are two parts to the issue: first, ensuring that we have the right regulation so that people can trust what they see and that we do nothing in the AI space that prevents good-quality journalism from being able to thrive; and secondly, equipping and empowering the people of this country with the skills and ability to navigate AI.

Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Thursday 18th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

The Secretary of State will know that the music and dance scheme supports so many talented young performers from lower-income backgrounds to access an arts education. She will also know that such specialist schools and conservatoires are now subject to VAT, because of changes brought in by her Government. In many cases, the bursaries do not even begin to cover the extreme costs, which are made up by family members, parents and everybody clubbing together to try to find the money. The VAT is still there, and it still makes a difference to whether they can afford it. What assessment has the Department made of the number of families paying VAT on the remaining fees, and how many talented young artists are now unable to attend as a result? I think I heard her right in saying that the bursaries will continue in the 2026-27 academic year, but could she please confirm that?

[Lisa Nandy]

I am very happy to confirm that the bursaries will continue in the 2026-27 academic year, and we have been able to increase the amount of funding available, which is a recognition of the cost pressures that families face. I very much agree with the hon. Member that bursaries are absolutely essential, which is why we have protected them even in these difficult financial circumstances. However, she will recognise the difficult circumstances we inherited from the previous Government. We have done our best to protect such things, and in the case of music and dance, we have been able to uplift the funding available.

Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

Many of our Commonwealth hopefuls started their careers in community events like parkruns and local sports clubs, and yet the sport and recreation sector is in a state of utter confusion because of the Government’s chaotic roll-out of the new rules on medical provision. The Government have said that they do not want small events to be “overregulated”. What does that even mean? There is a wholesale lack of information from the Department of Health and Social Care and the Care Quality Commission about who will be impacted and what it will cost, and there has been no meaningful impact assessment. The Government have warm words about local sport provision, but their actions never stand up to the test. Can this Minister please give us a definitive answer?

Draft Grants to the Churches Conservation Trust Order 2026

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Tuesday 17th March 2026 General Committees

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

It is a great pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Desmond. At the risk of dangerous levels of cross-party agreement breaking out, I echo what the Minister said about the important role that the Churches Conservation Trust plays in protecting some of our nation’s most significant historical churches. This debate is timely because the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, which I chair, is currently undertaking an inquiry into built heritage and how we protect it, examining the effectiveness of current heritage protections, funding structures and the current successes and challenges of organisations tasked with looking after our most important historical assets.

Evidence we received during our inquiry has shown clearly that the Churches Conservation Trust plays an invaluable role in preserving our heritage, but is increasingly struggling to meet the growing challenges placed upon it. Witnesses told us that funding from the Church of England has not kept pace with the rising costs of conservation. What was also particularly concerning was that around 50 to 60 churches, some unused and deteriorating for over two decades, remain in limbo. Additionally, DCMS funding, which forms less than a third of the trust’s income yet provides an essential foundation for its other fundraising events, has effectively been frozen, meaning the trust has continued to take on new churches without any corresponding uplift.

Although the Church of England has now agreed to increase its annual contribution, the combination of frozen DCMS funding and the loss of the listed places of worship grant scheme, which is worth more than £300,000 a year to the trust, means it is no better off in real terms.

The new places of worship renewal fund is welcome, but we still do not know how it will be distributed, and there is understandable concern about eligibility for it and about its overall adequacy, as we have already heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich and Evesham. It is not clear how much the Churches Conservation Trust will receive from the new fund, or whether the new fund will make up for the money that it loses as a result of the old scheme’s being axed. The order before us will help the Churches Conservation Trust to continue carrying out the critical work of conserving and maintaining our shared historical assets, but it is essential that it can access new funding schemes and wider cultural support.

Does the Minister accept that, as the amounts paid to the Churches Conservation Trust are frozen, the money being made available through this instrument amounts to a real-terms cut in funding? When will we get more updates about how the new places of worship renewal fund will operate? Above all, we need certainty and predictability, so will the Minister guarantee that the Churches Conservation Trust will be able to access the new fund and that it will not lose out as a result of the old grant scheme’s being axed? Finally, what assessment have the Government made of the number of churches that will close as a result of the listed places of worship scheme’s ending?

Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Thursday 26th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

We all know that actions speak louder than words. So far we have seen a reduction in the urban cricket domes that were committed to by the last Government, the scrapping of our National Citizen Service without anything to replace it and now, supposedly, an argument over who will be funding school sport. Social mobility depends on participation. Research by Sky found that girls who play after-school sport in the UK are 50% more likely to get professional roles as adults. What are the Government doing to address this, and can the Minister give us grassroots examples in our urban communities of where things are improving rather than getting worse?

[Stephanie Peacock]

I am grateful to the Chair of the Select Committee for all her work; it was a pleasure to meet her again yesterday. I do not recognise her representation of cricket domes. The previous Government simply did not fund them, but this Government has, announcing two new ones, alongside the £400 million of grassroots sports funding that the Secretary of State has referred to. On the National Citizen Service, we announced our national youth strategy, which was the first in over 10 years.

Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Dinenage Excerpts

Thursday 15th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ian Murray]

This is one of the most serious issues we have to deal with in this space. As a joint Minister in DSIT and the DCMS, I know this is something we are looking at, and we are very aware of all the concerns raised by creatives. We want to support rights holders in licensing their work in the digital age and to allow AI developers to benefit from access to creative material. In the UK, that will require a landing zone for both industries, and engagement, such as technical working groups, will be key in finding a solution that works for both sides. We will continue to engage with stakeholders in both sectors to further develop that approach, and that is the commitment from both Secretaries of State.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

When it comes to AI, as with so many other things, this Government are all smoke and mirrors. In response to the Grok AI outrage this week, the Secretary of State for Science and Tech announced with a flourish that she would be banning intimate image abuse with immediate effect. In reality, this meant triggering legislation that had to be forced through by Baroness Owen of Alderley Edge against the Government’s will and that received Royal Assent last summer. Imagine how many women could have had their trauma prevented if the Government had just got a grip. Every day, our creative industries are having their work scraped. Intellectual property is being stolen every day, and still the Government sit on their hands, promising the world and delivering nothing. When will we see the AI Bill promised in the last King’s Speech, and when is that legislation likely to be brought forward?

[Ian Murray]

As I said in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan), there will be an update to Parliament on 18 March, as provided for by the Data (Use and Access) Act. This is an incredibly serious issue, but what we really need to do is make sure that the Online Safety Act 2023 is completely implemented. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology made it very clear from the Dispatch Box this week that the Government will have an absolutely no-tolerance approach to what has been happening with AI and Grok. Ofcom must do its job. It must do it quickly, it must do it soon, and it must take the greatest possible action it can against the perpetrators of the disgusting and abhorrent ways in which AI is operating on some platforms.