Telegraph Media Group
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(4 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
I wish to update the House on the sale of the Telegraph Media Group. As I noted in my statement on 24 November, under the terms of the order made in January 2024, transfer of the ownership of the Telegraph Media Group is only permitted with the prior written consent of the Secretary of State. In my statement I said that I expected a submission of a request for my written consent to take no longer than three weeks.
I can confirm that I have received a formal request from the representatives of RB Investco Ltd, the current owners of the call option to purchase Telegraph Media Group Holdings. The request is to allow RB Investco Ltd to derogate from the order to sell its call option to Daily Mail and General Trust. I will now give the request thorough consideration.
My priority remains building a constructive path toward a timely sale, without further delay, that is in the public interest.
As I set out in my previous statement, I will also consider the potential new merger under the public interest and foreign state influence regimes in my quasi-judicial role as set out in the Enterprise Act 2002. I will act independently, review the evidence with which I am presented and follow a process which is scrupulously fair, transparent and impartial.
I will update Parliament at the earliest opportunity.
[HCWS1193]
Arts Council England: Independent Review
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(5 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
Today, the right hon. Baroness Hodge of Barking DBE is publishing her independent review of Arts Council England.
The Government strongly welcome the review and would like to thank Baroness Hodge for her unwavering rigour and dedication over the past 12 months. We also thank the members of Baroness Hodge’s advisory panel, who freely gave their time to share their expertise, and all those who contributed to the review, either by submitting views via the online survey, or through meetings with Baroness Hodge and her team.
This Government are committed to ensuring arts and culture thrive everywhere. Access to arts and culture is not a luxury—it is a necessity. It shapes our communities and enriches our lives. We believe that excellence must be open to everyone, wherever they live and whatever their background. A national Arts Council, connected to the places and people it serves, is essential to making that vision a reality.
The review highlights the strengths of Arts Council England’s work, but it also challenges us to do better. It sets out recommendations to strengthen support for artists, reach communities more effectively and ensure that creativity is accessible to all. The Government will now consider these recommendations, work with Arts Council England to begin the process of ambitious change and respond to the review in the new year.
I will place a copy of the review and a copy of relevant annexes to the review in the Libraries of both Houses.
[HCWS1180]
National Youth Strategy
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(1 week, 4 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
For too long, young people have not been sufficiently part of decisions that affect their current and future lives, not just at a national level but in every part of Government. We are determined to change this, building a future where young people are in the driving seat. Young people are not a problem to be solved but a powerful asset for our nation’s future.
In November last year, we announced the development of a new, ambitious direction for young people to begin that change. Today, we have published “Youth Matters: Your National Youth Strategy”, our cross-Government plan for the next decade to give young people a safe place to go, someone who cares for them and a community they feel a part of. We have two clear ambitions underpinning this plan. By 2035, we want
to have halved the participation gap in enriching activities between disadvantaged young people and their peers; and
half a million more young people to have access to a trusted adult outside of their home.
Over the past year, we have co-produced this strategy with young people from very different places and backgrounds and ran one of the biggest national conversations the Government have had with young people. We heard about the challenges that they face regarding their education, health, safety, relationships, community engagement and many more. Their insights and priorities are captured in our landmark “Youth Matters: State of the Nation” report, published alongside the strategy. We have also worked closely with our Youth Advisory Group and our Expert Advisory Group, and I thank them for all of their help in ensuring we respond to young people’s priorities and to the youth sector’s needs.
Through our strategy, we will give young people the spaces and opportunities they need to connect with their peers, with trusted adults and with their communities. It is the beginning of ambitious reforms in national and local youth policy, with three key shifts in how we will deliver for and with young people over the next decade: from national to local, from fragmented to collaborative, and from excluded to empowered.
The most devastating consequence of local cuts to youth provision over the last decade were the services that were lost, the youth clubs that were shut, and the trusted relationships that were broken and lifelines lost. So our work starts with rebuilding a strong, sustainable youth sector. We will invest £15 million over the next three years in the youth workers, volunteers and other trusted adults who listen to young people and guide them through life. We will also launch a £70 million programme over the next three years to help local areas better support young people and develop a network of up to 50 Young Futures hubs by March 2029. We have already chosen the first eight early adopter locations that will establish a hub to meet the support needs of local young people.
Building on that, we will enable young people to have access to more and better activities which support their wellbeing and their socioemotional skills. As a first step, we will be spending £350 million over the next four years through our better youth spaces programme to refurbish or build up to 250 youth facilities in areas that need one most. We will also create a new richer young lives fund with over £60 million of funding to create more high-quality fun activities and youth work opportunities in areas that need them most.
This strategy is a fully cross-Government plan which outlines our immediate and longer-term choices to help young people get good jobs, keep them safe in our streets and online, support their mental and physical health and many other priorities.
It builds on wider reforms to the education skills system with a target of two-thirds of young people participating in higher-level learning—academic, technical, or an apprenticeship—by age 25. It also builds on recent announcements, such as the publication of the child poverty strategy which will see the largest reduction in child poverty in a single Parliament as well as the investment of £1.5 billion through the Youth Guarantee and the Growth and Skills Levy—creating 50,000 more apprenticeships and foundation apprenticeships for young people over the next three years.
We will engage with partners within and outside the Government to deliver our plan and we call on parents and carers, youth providers, volunteers, teachers, local authorities, health providers, police officers, employers and countless more to work with us.
This publication is just the start. For too long, young people have been an afterthought when it comes to decision making. Yet the success of the nation depends on their success. We have an opportunity to unlock the potential of a generation and this is our promise to them.
[HCWS1152]
Culture, Media and Sport
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Written CorrectionsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sir John Whittingdale
The Secretary of State will be aware that, as the Public Accounts Committee has pointed out, last year the BBC lost more than £1 billion as a result of evasion and households declaring that they no longer need a licence. That figure is going to grow over the course of the next charter, so will she look at finding other ways in which we can close the funding gap?
Lisa Nandy
Yes. As the right hon. Gentleman would imagine, we are looking at a whole range of options around BBC funding to ensure that it is sustainably funded for many years to come. In particular, we are very keen to ensure that people feel a sense of ownership and belonging over the BBC, which is why the point about the nations and regions is so important. Ofcom recently produced a report in which it showed that of the top Scottish producers who fulfil the Scottish quota, for example, only one third are actually based in Scotland among the public sector broadcasters.
[Official Report, 27 November 2025; Vol. 776, c. 503.]
Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, the right hon. Member for Wigan (Lisa Nandy):
Lisa Nandy
… In particular, we are very keen to ensure that people feel a sense of ownership and belonging over the BBC, which is why the point about the nations and regions is so important. Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates recently produced a report, drawing on Ofcom data, which showed that of the top Scottish producers who fulfil the Scottish quota, for example, only one third are actually based in Scotland among the public sector broadcasters.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(3 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
For too long in this country, there has been a divide between access and excellence when it comes to the arts. Our Government believe that everybody deserves access to excellence—everyone, everywhere. We invest around £600 million every year via Arts Council England, and earlier this year, I was delighted to announce the £270 million arts everywhere fund to support exactly that aim.
Steve Witherden
In Wales, expressive arts is a mandatory part of the curriculum, helping to develop pupils’ creative, artistic and performance skills while also improving cognitive development, attainment in maths and English, behaviour and wellbeing. Given that England has seen a 42% decline in expressive arts GCSE entries since 2010, what plans does the Minister have to restore the status of arts and creative education and support a broader, more balanced curriculum?
Lisa Nandy
My hon. Friend is right to lament the decline in the number of pupils across England taking arts subjects, and this Government are determined to turn that around. That is why the Education Secretary and I have worked closely together. My hon. Friend will have seen the announcement she made about a broader, richer curriculum for all pupils, alongside the work I am doing to rebuild a broader, richer set of opportunities outside of the classroom. Under the last Government, enrichment was erased from both our classrooms and our communities. Under this Government, that is going to change.
Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
UK Music’s excellent “This is Music” report found that it has become increasingly difficult for new musical artists to be heard and for careers to be built. Recompense through streaming services is minuscule and artist remuneration a real issue. On the live side, Brexit has made touring the EU almost impossible, and grassroots venues continue to close. Does the Secretary of State recognise that without meaningful action, we risk creating a music industry where only the privileged and rich can afford to build a career?
Lisa Nandy
I very much share that assessment, and we are determined that that is going to change. The hon. Member will be aware of the work that my right hon. Friend the Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts has been doing on the grassroots music levy. That is a voluntary levy. We hope the industry will step up and meet our target of 50% of all ticket sales imposing that levy in order to support grassroots music venues by the end of the year, but we have been really clear with the industry that if that does not happen, we will intervene and use statutory powers if necessary.
On the specific issue of EU touring, the hon. Member will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office is pursuing that as a priority with the European Union, and we are confident that we will be able to build a better deal for not just our music artists but music artists right across Europe.
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
Since its success as European capital of culture in 2008, Liverpool has played a key role in the UK’s creative industries. Does my right hon. Friend agree that success should not only be measured in economic terms, and can she explain how social value and tackling the under-representation of groups should be used as a measure of success by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport?
Lisa Nandy
As, I think, the first black MP ever to represent Liverpool, my hon. Friend’s achievement is absolutely noted in this House. The way in which she has carried that work forward into this House, to ensure that she may be the first, but she certainly will not be the last, and that the voices of all people will be heard, is something that I deeply admire, and I know many other Members feel the same.
My hon. Friend is right to say that the vibrancy of the Liverpool city region has always been built on the most diverse range of music, voices and experiences. That most quintessentially British band, the Beatles, drew on their Irish heritage, Indian influences and the experience of black Americans from the south, and brought that vibrant music scene to Liverpool. I am working with the Mayor of the Liverpool city region and others to make sure that we continue that tradition and that the widest range of voices from across Liverpool are heard as part of that. I would be delighted to meet her to discuss that further.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, as I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for performing arts education and training— I said that as quickly as I could!
The music and dance scheme funds exceptional schools that train the next generation of artists who will go on to lead the industry, both on and off the stage. Those schools nurture talent regardless of wealth, and are the very definition of social mobility, but some are now at risk of closure because the fund is not guaranteed beyond next year. Will the Minister guarantee secure, ringfenced funding so that those vital institutions can continue to increase access to an industry that has been identified as a leading area of growth?
Lisa Nandy
I am very aware of the pressures the hon. Member describes. My Department is currently completing business planning, so we will be able to set out precise allocations going forward. I have also been working closely with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Education Secretary to ensure that Government take a cohesive approach to this issue across the board.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
Richard Baker (Glenrothes and Mid Fife) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
For too long, fans have been exploited by touts seeking to profiteer from the UK’s booming live events industry. Last week, we announced that time is up for ticket touts and that change is coming, by introducing a cap on the price that tickets can be resold for. We estimate that this will save fans over £100 million a year.
Richard Baker
This summer, thousands of music fans in Scotland were dismayed at having to pay hugely inflated prices to see their favourite bands, including Oasis, so my right hon. Friend’s announcement on capping the resale price of tickets will be welcome news for all those fans. Will she consider what further measures can be taken to ensure a fair deal on ticket prices for concert-goers across the UK?
Lisa Nandy
I can update my hon. Friend. Among the measures that we announced recently, we have introduced resale volume limits, which will prevent people from reselling more tickets than they were entitled to buy in the primary sale. Alongside the price cap, the Competition and Markets Authority will be able to fine non-compliant platforms up to 10% of their annual turnover, which could mean multimillion-pound fines for rogue firms if they target UK consumers.
In the case of Oasis, as many in this House will know, one of the great challenges was that many of the fans going into that queue did not know that the surge pricing model was being used, so they did not realise that they would paying vastly inflated prices by the time they got to the front of the queue. The CMA has looked at this and is taking steps to ensure that consumers have the full range of information that they need to prevent that from happening in future.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I am aware of tickets for the Belsonic event at the Boucher Road playing fields in Belfast previously appearing on secondary sites at more than four times their original price within minutes of going on sale, so I welcome the news from the Secretary of State. What progress has been made on perhaps introducing a 5% to 10% cap on the resale of concert tickets?
Lisa Nandy
In terms of the resale of concert tickets, we have taken a decision after a long period of consultation to cap the resale at the original price. The hon. Gentleman mentions some examples, and there are others; just recently, I looked at some Radiohead tickets that were on sale originally for £100 and were being resold on one of these platforms for more than £1,000. That is an absolute rip-off for fans and has gone on in plain sight for far too long, which is why we have announced that tickets will be resold for the original price. Time is up for the ticket touts.
Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
As the House would imagine, I am having daily conversations with the BBC leadership on a number of issues, including charter renewal. I have been clear that we stand by the BBC to secure its role at the heart of national life for decades to come, but the forthcoming charter review will be a vital opportunity for us collectively to shape the BBC’s future and consider how it needs to change in this new era. In particular, for years our nations and regions have been underserved and under-represented by the concentration of power in just one part of the country when it comes to our television industry, and we are determined that the BBC will continue to lead the way on changing that.
Sir John Whittingdale
The Secretary of State will be aware that, as the Public Accounts Committee has pointed out, last year the BBC lost more than £1 billion as a result of evasion and households declaring that they no longer need a licence. That figure is going to grow over the course of the next charter, so will she look at finding other ways in which we can close the funding gap?
Lisa Nandy
Yes. As the right hon. Gentleman would imagine, we are looking at a whole range of options around BBC funding to ensure that it is sustainably funded for many years to come. In particular, we are very keen to ensure that people feel a sense of ownership and belonging over the BBC, which is why the point about the nations and regions is so important. Ofcom recently produced a report in which it showed that of the top Scottish producers who fulfil the Scottish quota, for example, only one third are actually based in Scotland among the public sector broadcasters.[Official Report, 1 December 2025; Vol. 776, c. 7WC.] (Correction) That is a disgrace, and we are determined that it will change.
Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)
The BBC removed a part of Rutger Bregman’s Reith lecture in which he alleged that Donald Trump was the most openly corrupt President in US history, doing so only after legal advice prompted by Mr Trump’s lawsuit against it. The threat of legal action is creating a dangerous precedent for media censure. If the national broadcaster cannot air robust and defensible claims even in a series of lectures designed to spark debate on contemporary issues, what hope is there for any part of our free press effectively to challenge power? We know that the Prime Minister has spoken directly with Mr Trump since the lawsuit was filed, so can the Secretary of State confirm whether the PM raised the issue of the BBC and insisted that Trump drop his ridiculous lawsuit?
Lisa Nandy
I became aware of the particular issue that the hon. Lady raises last night, and I will discuss it with the BBC chairman at our next meeting on Monday. Obviously it is absolutely essential that our broadcasters can broadcast a full range of voices without fear or favour, whether it is pressure from Governments of any political persuasion in the UK or from Governments overseas. This Government will always fiercely defend that.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
As the Secretary of State responsible for the gambling industry, I have obviously been working closely with the Chancellor to ensure that the measures she announced yesterday protect people who gather great joy from an industry that is worth huge amounts to the UK economy and enjoyed by millions. In particular, the measures are to protect bingo halls, dog tracks, racing tracks, pubs and coastal communities. The measures we announced yesterday will start to make a significant dent in the numbers of children living in poverty—a legacy disgracefully left by the last Government—but the hon. Gentleman can be confident that we have made fairer choices to ensure that we protect things that millions of people in this country enjoy.
Charlie Dewhirst
The Chancellor’s announcements in yesterday’s Budget in relation to gambling duty could cost the industry up to 16,000 jobs, largely in the high- tech part of that industry, and move £6 billion of gambling stakes into the black market. I know that the Secretary of State is a very reasonable individual—she would make an excellent future leader of her party—so does she agree that taxing something does not necessarily stop it from happening, and that this will move problem gamblers into a less regulated, illegal space?
Lisa Nandy
The Minister for gambling, my hon. Friend Baroness Twycross, and I have obviously looked at this issue as part of the work we have been doing in the run-up to the Budget, and I am sure she would be happy to discuss it further with the hon. Gentleman. We have sought to limit the economic impact of this decision on the high street and focus the tax rises on parts of the gambling industry that have lower operating costs. For precisely the reasons the hon. Gentleman has outlined, we have also brought forward measures in the Budget to permanently lower business rates for over 750,000 retail and hospitality properties, which we think will help mitigate some of the impact on betting shops. We are aware of the challenges that the hon. Gentleman has raised, but Governments cannot duck choices, and our choice is to lift 450,000 children out of poverty to make a dent in the figure of 4.5 million left by the previous Government.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend and, indeed, the Chancellor on making the decision to tax online gambling in particular. The fact that people effectively have a casino in their pocket destroys lives and families, and it is right that we send that strong signal, as well as make sure money is available to tackle the insidious moral scar of child poverty that was left by the previous Government. Can my right hon. Friend confirm how we will ensure that the way we conduct gambling in this country provides better protection to those families and individuals who end up being exposed to some of the most insidious practices of the gambling industry?
Lisa Nandy
I agree with my hon. Friend that child poverty is a moral scar on the soul of this nation. Where we differ slightly is that for me and our Government, this is not about sending a signal to the gambling industry. It is simply about making the right choices—the fairest choices—in order to reverse some of the damage done by the last Government. Gambling is enjoyed by millions of people in this country without harm, but it does cause significant harm for a minority. We introduced the gambling levy to ensure that we can invest in prevention and support for those affected, and we have allocated an additional £26 million to the Gambling Commission over the next three years, to increase investment, resources and capacity to tackle the illegal market. As the hon. Member for Bridlington and The Wolds (Charlie Dewhirst) has raised and as my hon. Friend has mentioned, the illegal market is where an unregulated industry can cause serious harm, and we are determined to tackle it.
Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
Mr Speaker, this Labour Government are committed to delivering for communities in every part of our United Kingdom. That is why we have launched the town of culture competition, to celebrate the people, heritage and creativity of the towns that enrich our national story. I encourage every town—even Chorley—to apply, and urge Members across the House to keep an eye out for the applications, which will be opening soon.
We have also launched Euro 2028, bringing global audiences and economic opportunity to cities across the UK and Ireland, and we are acting to protect fans everywhere by cracking down on ticket touts. Finally, I congratulate Scotland on qualifying for the world cup for the first time in 28 years.
Lisa Nandy
“Or watch rugby league”, says Mr Speaker. Football is nothing without the fans, and my hon. Friend is right to say that it must be affordable for people across the country. The Premier League has shown enormous leadership through the £30 away cap—that is an excellent example of that principle. This is precisely why this Government wasted no time in passing the Football Governance Act 2025 with the permission of both Houses, which implements minimum engagement standards, including requiring clubs to consult fans on ticket prices.
Lisa Nandy
I think the hon. Gentleman united us all, wishing a happy Lancashire Day, but perhaps that was the beginning and end of the cross-party unity. I am enormously proud that this Government have finally acted on the calls from mayors across the political spectrum—including one Boris Johnson in 2013 when he was the Mayor of London—to implement a visitor levy on short-term overnight accommodation. We have not just done that: we have handed the power to regions themselves to implement it. The shadow Secretary of State talks about the burden on industry. He will know full well that the levy will be paid by visitors, not by the tourism industry. It surely cannot be right that England is the only country in the G7 where a national Government prevent their local authorities and mayors from implementing tourist levies.
Nigel Huddleston
I am afraid I disagree. For a second time, DCMS sectors are left reeling following a Labour Budget that failed to deliver meaningful support on business rates for hospitality and leisure. The Government introduced a new tax on tourism and whacked up taxes on the gambling industry. Instead of being supported, DCMS sectors just got hammered. Who is to blame for this disastrous Budget for DCMS sectors? Is it DCMS Ministers for failing to make the case, or the Treasury for not listening?
Lisa Nandy
I have a lot of time for the hon. Gentleman, but with respect, he is talking absolute nonsense. This Government inherited a situation where there had been no strategy for this country’s young people for nearly two decades, where the arts had been underfunded, where capital projects had not been gripped and where sports were left languishing while demand soared. We have turned that around, with the new covenant with civil society to extend that partnership to every part of the country, a new national youth strategy, and funding for arts everywhere, not just in some parts of the country. I am proud of the Budget, especially as it introduces a visitor levy that will raise millions of pounds in parts of the country that were underserved by the last Conservative Government for far too long.
Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)
Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)
Lisa Nandy
Yes, of course, and in fact we already are. The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and I have convened a series of roundtables, and we are not just talking to big tech companies, but a full range of tech companies, hearing a range of views. For the first time, we are bringing together creators and tech companies. Many of them, as the right hon. Gentleman alludes to, are starting to create their own deals, which we encourage. We do not believe that that negates the need for licensing or the transparency in the legislation that we promised here and in the other place, but I am happy to continue that conversation with them and with him.
Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Lisa Nandy
Obviously I speak regularly to the Energy Secretary, and I am happy to do so, but the hon. Gentleman should know that I share my right hon. Friend’s commitment to turning this country into a clean energy powerhouse and ensuring that the hon. Gentleman’s constituents and mine receive the benefits in the form of lower bills and better energy security.
The point of the visitor levy is that it gives powers to local areas to raise their own funds and decide how they are spent. I would have thought that everybody in this House should be able to support that.
Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)
Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)
The Isle of Wight Youth Trust is set to lose £200,000-worth of funding by the end of the financial year. Early support hubs will lose funding across the country, and up to half the 24 surveyed said that they may close services. Will the Secretary of State speak to cross-departmental colleagues to ensure that bridge funding is put in place, so that no young person loses out?
Lisa Nandy
Our forthcoming national youth strategy will meet our pledge to ensure that there is no reduction in youth funding and that every pound is spent better, with a particular focus on rebuilding those places and spaces that have been allowed to fall into disrepair or have been lost. On the particular issue that the hon. Gentleman raises, I appreciate that it is urgent. I am happy to take it away with the Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), and to ensure that we get the hon. Gentleman a proper reply.
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
Lisa Nandy
I can hear from those on the other side of the House that a lot of hon. Members feel very strongly about this issue, and they have made representations on it over a long period of time. My hon. Friend will know that new measures are coming into force in June to address SLAPPs in relation to cases of economic crime. That was started under the previous Government and has continued under this one. It is my belief that we should take sexual harassment and abuse every bit as seriously as economic crime, and this is an area where action is long overdue. I am happy to work with the media Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), to achieve that.
Several hon. Members rose—
Telegraph Media Group: Anticipated Acquisition
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
I wish to update the House on the sale of the Telegraph Media Group, following the recent withdrawal of the RedBird Capital Partners-led bid to acquire the title, and the news announced on Saturday 22 November that RedBird IMI has signed an agreement with Daily Mail and General Trust, entering into a period of exclusivity to finalise the terms of the transaction.
The Telegraph has been in limbo for a long time. Until now, I have sought to afford the parties selling the call option to own The Telegraph sufficient time to independently manage the process. The 19 months have passed since RedBird IMI announced its intention to sell. A sale has still not happened and the situation has become unsustainable. My particular concerns are that the protracted uncertainty has been detrimental to the stability of The Telegraph and its staff and to the investment appeal of the sector as a whole.
Under the terms of the order made in January 2024, transfer of the ownership of the Telegraph Media Group is only permitted with the prior written consent of the Secretary of State. RedBird IMI and DMGT have said they will use their exclusivity period to prepare the necessary request for securing that consent, which they say they expect to happen quickly. Given how much time has already elapsed in this case and the need for the period of uncertainty to be ended, I expect the submission of that request to take no longer than three weeks. My intention is to build a constructive path toward a timely sale, without further delay, that is in the public interest. In this context I will review any new acquisition of the Telegraph, guided by the following principles in the exercise of my powers:
Upholding the public interest: the media public interest considerations set out in the Enterprise Act 2002 must be properly investigated and appropriately upheld under any new ownership of the Telegraph Media Group.
Exclusion of foreign state funding: any future owner of the Telegraph Media Group, and their controlling entities, must be completely free from any prohibited foreign state influence.
Protecting The Telegraph: until the future ownership of the Telegraph Media Group is resolved and any regulatory scrutiny is completed, the editorial independence of The Telegraph business must be suitably protected.
I reserve my right to intervene under my powers and duties as set out in the Enterprise Act 2002.
I will continue to monitor developments very closely and will update Parliament on this matter as appropriate at the earliest opportunity.
[HCWS1090]
UK Commission on Covid Commemoration Report: Government Response
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
Five years ago the world as we knew it stopped. Covid-19 affected everyone in so many different ways, and many continue to feel those impacts.
Today, the Government have published its official response to the report of the UK Commission on Covid Commemoration which sets out a programme of commemorative activity to mark this unique and challenging period in our country’s history. This response has now been presented to both Houses of Parliament.
I want to place on record my thanks to the right hon. the Baroness Morgan of Cotes and all the commissioners for the care and consideration the commission gave to the report and for its ongoing advice as we have carefully reflected on the recommendations. This Government are grateful to the devolved Governments, with whom we have worked closely to ensure that the response to the commission’s reflects the efforts of individuals and groups across the United Kingdom.
The impact of covid-19 on all of our lives will never be forgotten. My thoughts are with the many families who suffered the devastating loss of a loved one during this time. As Secretary of State, I have had the privilege of meeting with a number of covid-19 bereaved family groups that have worked closely with us in developing this programme. I have heard at first hand the traumatic impact of not being able to be with their loved one, to hold their hand, to say goodbye.
I pay tribute to the covid-19 bereaved families groups for their tireless voluntary efforts to provide networks of support to help others feel less alone or isolated in their grief, while carrying their own. I am also grateful for their input to the commission and their ongoing work with my Department in developing this programme. As we remember and honour their loss, we are committed to continuing to work together as this programme is delivered.
The pandemic saw our communities come together in extraordinary ways to help and support each other in the most difficult of times. We saw acts of courage and dedication from the key workers who kept vital services running, and the millions who volunteered to support others in their time of need. We thank all those who worked so hard to keep our country going and these acts of service will be remembered as part of this commemorative programme.
In March, we marked the fifth anniversary of the pandemic with the covid-19 day of reflection, with events held across the country allowing people to remember in a way that was meaningful to them. In contrast to the experiences of isolation and separation we felt during the pandemic, the day of reflection was a chance for us to come together to remember the lives lost, the sacrifices made, and the impacts that many continue to feel. We will come together again on Sunday 8 March 2026 for this important day.
We will create dedicated webpages on gov.uk to provide information on covid-19 commemoration. This will include a repository of oral histories to ensure that the experiences of the pandemic are not forgotten, as well as details on the many covid-19 memorials that have been created across the country. Working in partnership with NHS Charities Together and Forestry England we will create new covid-19 commemorative spaces that reflect the importance of nature and the outdoors throughout the pandemic and provide spaces for contemplative reflection.
This Government are determined to learn the lessons from the covid-19 pandemic and build our national resilience. I have heard movingly from those who lost a loved one that they do not want others to experience their suffering. As the commission recommended, we will launch a new UK-wide fellowship scheme on natural hazards, delivered by UKRI. to support future national resilience as part of the commemorative programme to honour the loss and sacrifice.
In Parliament, we look across the River Thames to the national covid memorial wall. Nearly a quarter of a million hand-painted hearts span the wall as an outpouring of love created by the bereaved, for the bereaved. This memorial matters greatly to the whole country. I want to thank the friends of the wall for their tireless commitment and dedication to care for the wall. As we commemorate the pandemic, we are committed to working with the friends of the wall and the local partners to preserve the wall.
Through this programme of commemoration we will ensure that those we lost are honoured, that we remember the sacrifices and resilience of so many during this unprecedented time in our history, and that as a country we do not forget.
[HCWS1054]
Points of Order
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
Does the Secretary of State wish to respond?
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am very happy to clarify that point for the hon. Gentleman. The request that I made to officials in my Department was relayed to Mr Kogan. It was, of course, his choice whether to take that advice, but he did. I have to be clear with the hon. Gentleman: from the moment I discovered that donations had been made to my campaign, I did not have any discussions with Mr Kogan about this or any other matter, and I recused myself from the process. I took that seriously. It was for the Minister for Sport to make the final decision, which she did, but from that point, I did not have direct conversations with Mr Kogan until the independent Commissioner for Public Appointments had been able to do his work. I hope that clarifies the matter.
Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition recently visited my constituency for her tool theft campaign, but I do not think that she has been informed that my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) has already secured changes through the Sentencing Bill. The right hon. Lady did not notify me of her visit, and given that she is a long-standing Member of this House, I seek your advice on how she can be reminded of the courtesies to be afforded to Members.
Independent Football Regulator
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a statement on her involvement in the appointments process for the chair of the Independent Football Regulator.
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
In 2021, the former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, set up the fan-led review of football, and selected Dame Tracey Crouch to chair it. This led to a clear recommendation for an independent football regulator, which was strongly endorsed by Members from all sides of the House. The previous Government promised that they would deliver this regulator, but they did not, leaving fans in the lurch as a result. This Government made it a priority and passed that legislation within our first year, because we are fully committed to protecting football clubs across the country.
To make that a reality, the Minister for Sport confirmed David Kogan as the chair of the Independent Football Regulator on 6 October. David Kogan was the exceptional candidate, warmly endorsed across the world of football and by the cross-party Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport.
As the House will be aware, the Commissioner for Public Appointments conducted an investigation into the appointment itself, which was released last week. I am pleased that the report does not question the suitability of Mr Kogan as chair of the IFR. The report also makes it clear that I did not personally know about the donations to my leadership campaign at the time that I selected him as the preferred candidate. It also recognises that, as soon as I became aware of the donations, I chose to declare them and chose to recuse myself from the remainder of the process.
However, as I have made clear, I acknowledge the findings of the report. The Commissioner was clear that the breach around donations to my campaign was unknowing, but I recognise that the highest standards were not met. As the Secretary of State for the Department that ran this appointment, I take full responsibility for that, and it is for that reason that I wrote to the Prime Minister and apologised for the error. I will, of course, ensure that lessons are learned from this process with my Department.
Our focus now is to make sure that no fan ever has to go through what my constituents and I lived through in Wigan. Implementing this regime to help protect clubs in financial peril, and putting the interests of fans up and down the country first, is a priority for this Government and, led by David Kogan, the Independent Football Regulator will get on with the job.
We are here today to debate process, but this is also about real-world impact. Fans up and down the country need us to get on with delivering on our promise and making a difference. This is for Derby County and Scunthorpe United, for Morecambe and Sheffield Wednesday, for Wigan, Reading, Macclesfield Town and Bury. We are putting fans back at the heart of the game, where they belong.
Mr French
Last Thursday, the Commissioner for Public Appointments published his report into the appointment of the chair of the Independent Football Regulator. That report found that the Secretary of State breached the governance code for public appointments, updated by her Government, not once or twice, but three times. The Secretary of State has claimed that she did not know about Mr Kogan’s donations, but the commissioner’s report clearly shows that she was briefed twice by her Department regarding this conflict before she decided to appoint him to a role that must be independent. The report also makes it clear that Mr Kogan was not shortlisted by the previous Government and that it was this Government who put him in the running.
Not until the Secretary of State had already recommended Mr Kogan’s appointment—and the night before his appearance before the Select Committee on 7 May—did she conveniently consider checking whether she had also taken thousands of pounds off him. I find that highly unlikely, and the commissioner makes it clear that the Secretary of State was in a position readily to ascertain the details of donations made by Mr Kogan before she made her choice, but that she failed to do so. It was after the political fallout and six days later that she finally recused herself from the end of the process. To show how brazen this crony appointment was, her Department confirmed it while the independent investigation was still taking place—really shameful stuff. This was not a fair and open recruitment process. The report confirms that Mr Kogan was her preferred candidate, subject to No. 10 giving the green light, and that Department for Culture, Media and Sport officials were asked to make the necessary arrangements for an appointment without competition.
The Prime Minister’s fingerprints are also clear from the commissioner’s report. We understand that Mr Kogan donated to the Prime Minister’s constituency Labour party as well as to his leadership campaign. I almost feel sorry for the Secretary of State; she has apologised to the Prime Minister for three breaches of the rules for choosing his candidate. How is it proper for the Prime Minister personally to have given the green light to a donor? Surely, if the Secretary of State was meant to have been recused for the 2020 donation of Mr Kogan, that must apply to the Prime Minister too—or does the Prime Minister believe that the offside rule does not apply to him?
Who is to blame for this sorry mess? How much did Mr Kogan give to the Prime Minister, and did he declare it? Does the Secretary of State agree that Mr Kogan’s deeply flawed appointment must be rescinded, given the risks to football? Finally, will she stick by her words and say that rule breakers cannot be rule makers?
Lisa Nandy
I will try to answer the hon. Gentleman’s questions in turn. First, this process was subject to a thorough investigation by the independent Commissioner for Public Appointments, and when he questions the findings of that report, he should reflect on whether that is the proper role of this House. The report was absolutely crystal clear on that point. It was also clear—in contrast to what the hon. Gentleman just asserted—that I personally fell short of what was expected on one occasion. There were two other technical breaches from the Department, but as the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, I take full responsibility.
The hon. Gentleman asks about the Prime Minister. As he will know, if he has read the report, I personally took the decision to ask Mr Kogan to put that information in front of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee at his hearing to ensure that it had full information as soon as I had it, within hours of finding out about the donation. Mr Kogan was open and transparent about the fact that he had donated to both my campaign and the Prime Minister’s campaign, but I am the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport; my Department ran this process, and it is for me to take full responsibility for it.
Secondly, the hon. Gentleman asserts that Mr Kogan was not part of the process. I find that astonishing, and I presume that at some point he will come back to correct the record. When he speaks to his colleagues, he will know that one of them—the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew), who is sitting on the Opposition Front Bench—oversaw the process before the general election, at a time when they were proudly extolling the virtues of having a football regulator and governance Act, which they later opposed.
The hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French) will know that Mr Kogan was approached for this job under the last Conservative Government and put on the list, which I inherited from the last Government. I want to be crystal clear on this point. Mr Kogan was not added to the list after the general election; he was on the list from the last Conservative Government.
The hon. Gentleman talks about cronies. [Interruption.] The Opposition can chunter all they like, but the hon. Gentleman is talking about a man who has extensive media experience and represented the Premier League, the English Football League, the National Football League and others throughout his long and distinguished career. He was put on the list by the last Government in the full knowledge that he was a Labour donor. If he is such a crony and unfit to hold this sort of office, why on earth did the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), appoint him to the board of Channel 4? It just does not stack up. Mr Kogan was so good that the last Government approached him themselves.
Finally, I am happy to answer extensive questions about this issue. That is why I have chosen to come to the House and answer these questions, despite the fact that the Minister for Sport, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), made the final decision. The hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup is a Charlton Athletic fan, and I am a bit surprised that, given its experience of bad owners, he is setting himself and his party against football fans in his constituency and the length and breadth of the country by trying to attack a man whose credentials are unquestionable.
Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)
May I say to my right hon. Friend that in the terrible time that Sheffield Wednesday fans have been through in the last few months, not one of them has ever asked me what is happening with this report and review? They say to me, “How quickly can we get a regulator in place who will deal with owners like Chansiri who are ruining our club?” Does the Secretary of State agree that in the appointment of David Kogan, we have someone who is knowledgeable, tough, determined and independent of bad football owners and who will act on behalf of football fans? Is not the fundamental difference here between those of us on the Government Benches who support independent regulation, and those on the Opposition Benches who have given up on it and will simply kowtow to bad owners of football clubs?
Lisa Nandy
As always, my hon. Friend has taken this debate back to focusing on the people who matter most: the fans. They have been through hell over recent years as the last Government committed to act, then dragged their feet, and then refused to fulfil that promise to those fans. It was shameful to see Conservative Members go through the Lobby to vote against their own Bill, but I put on record my thanks to Dame Tracey Crouch for all the work she did and continues to do to uphold that promise. I also sincerely thank my hon. Friend; he and I have had numerous conversations over the course of the saga that has developed at Sheffield Wednesday, and I know how active he has been. That is the approach that this Government will always take. We will not stand by and let football fans pay the price when bad owners take over their clubs; we are putting those fans back at the heart of the game, where they belong.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)
The Lib Dems have welcomed the introduction of the new Independent Football Regulator. Our football clubs are huge, historic institutions that unite generations, bring local economies to life and inspire millions, both at home and abroad. As such, the Secretary of State carries a significant responsibility to earn the confidence of our world-leading football clubs and guide them through the introduction of these vital regulatory reforms.
The news that the Secretary of State broke the governance code by failing to declare in a timely manner donations received from the newly appointed head of the regulator, David Kogan, has undermined trust at a crucial moment. This regulator is about securing the future of our national game, ensuring that clubs remain sustainable, rooted in their communities and capable of thriving for generations to come. She cannot shy away from the potential conflict of interest involved in the breaches of the code that have emerged in recent days. This oversight requires genuine accountability from the Government in order to restore confidence in the new regulator. Will the Secretary of State therefore commit to order an independent investigation into the appointment of David Kogan and, if necessary, rerun the selection process for the IFR chair?
Lisa Nandy
All the way through this process, I have complied fully with the independent commissioner, because I believe that that is important. That stands in contrast to the last Government, multiple members of which broke not just the public appointments code but the ministerial code. The Conservatives still have a member of their Front-Bench team who broke the ministerial code—she now sits on their Front Bench as the shadow Foreign Secretary. Unlike them, we comply with these processes and accept the consequences. However, there has been an independent investigation—it has been going on for six months. I do not know how the hon. Lady has missed it; that is what we are discussing today.
She has also said to me that we need to earn the trust of the footballing world. Throughout the passage of the Football Governance Act 2025, as Conservative Members well know from when they were supporting it, numerous people were concerned about the appointment of anybody to take on the role of chair. One of those was Karren Brady, a very distinguished Member of the House of Lords, with extensive experience in football. Recently, she said that David Kogan has
“dealt with the EFL, Uefa, the women’s game and international bodies. That matters, because football isn’t just about the elite—it’s a pyramid, and if the top crumbles, the base cracks with it…And, more importantly, he’s worked in governance roles that demand accountability.”
If Members want any further evidence of the confidence that the appointment of David Kogan commands across the footballing world, it is that the staunchest critics of the Government’s approach to implementing a football regulator in the first place have come out strongly in support of the man who is already cracking on with putting football fans back at the heart of the game.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
When Tracey Crouch was appointed to lead the review of football governance, there was no opposition from Labour Members or the fans to the idea that a Conservative was going to lead that review; there was co-operation right across this House. When it was expedient for them, the Conservatives supported the fan-led review, but when the Bill went before Parliament and push came to shove, they opposed it. They are using it as a political football, but does my right hon. Friend agree that the football fans do not give a damn about this Westminster bubble argument? What they want is a regulator that is going to be on their side.
Lisa Nandy
I thank my hon. Friend for the years of work that he put into ensuring that we reached this point. I thank him personally as well, because when my club, Wigan Athletic, was in trouble, not once but twice, he and other members of the Select Committee could not have been more supportive in making sure that we got the right outcome and saved our club.
I also thank the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup, because even though he has latterly decided that this is a terrible appointment and that the Football Governance Act is a terrible thing, a couple of years ago he said this to the then Sports Minister, the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew):
“Following years of misery and uncertainty for fans at local clubs such as Charlton Athletic, I welcome the news on an independent football regulator. Will the Minister assure my constituents that the regulator will have sufficient powers to deal with regulatory breaches and strengthen those ownership tests?”—[Official Report, 23 February 2023; Vol. 728, c. 343.]
I am not sure whether the then Minister could give an answer at that time, but I am happy to say that we certainly will.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.
Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)
I want the independent regulator to succeed—not least because of clubs like mine, Portsmouth football club, whose fans had to step in and buy it after it had gone into administration twice—but we need transparency and trust in public appointments. The Secretary of State has said repeatedly that the Culture, Media and Sport Committee found Mr Kogan appointable, and that is correct; we did so under the remit with which we were asked to work. However, we did so taking the unprecedented step of including a recommendation for him to take
“concrete steps to reassure the football community”
of his neutrality, because it was Mr Kogan—not the Department, and not the Secretary of State—who told the Committee about the donations, at the very meeting that was held to decide whether or not he was appointable.
The commissioner’s report points to a wider issue relating to the Department’s public appointments process. All but one of the last 10 public appointments involving parliamentary scrutiny have featured problems with the candidate or the process at some point, which are undermining the organisations concerned and the people who are picked to lead them. Does the Secretary of State accept that the Department must do better when it comes to public appointments, and may I ask her what concrete steps it is taking to achieve that?
Lisa Nandy
I agree with the hon. Lady that it is essential for the public to be able to have confidence in the public appointments that we make, not least because of the many debacles that we saw under the last Government. That is why I personally requested that Mr Kogan make that information available to the Select Committee within hours of being notified of it myself. The hon. Lady is also right to say that the Committee made a recommendation to Mr Kogan that he must take steps to ensure that he was independent of Government. Although that was not a recommendation aimed at me as the Secretary of State, I heard it loud and clear, and it was one of the reasons why I was so quick to recuse myself from the process and take no further decisions in it.
The hon. Lady has indeed raised with me, and with the permanent secretary, the occasions on which the Department has fallen short. We take that very seriously, and we have committed to come back to her with a full list of concrete actions that we are taking. This is not to make excuses, because it is my responsibility to ensure that we get it right, but I might add that the DCMS is responsible for the vast majority of public appointments—I think that we make nearly 50% of all such appointments across Government—and that is even more reason for us to ensure that the proper processes are in place. We are looking at that at the moment, and will come back to the hon. Lady very quickly.
May I also take this opportunity to thank the hon. Lady’s constituents? I remember that when we were in trouble at Wigan Athletic, Portsmouth fans jumped on to a Zoom call with us at very short notice, and could not have been more supportive in giving us advice and guidance to help us to pull through a difficult time. I remember that time as if it were yesterday. I remember how much pain and anxiety we were going through. The footballing world was there for us, and my commitment to the hon. Lady’s constituents, and all our constituents, is that this Government will be there for them too.
Jeff Smith (Manchester Withington) (Lab)
We now have an excellent, highly qualified individual who has been appointed to chair the football regulator, and we have an excellent Secretary of State who made a mistake for which she has apologised. Even the commissioner said that the breach of the code
“was not a knowing breach.”
What football fans want is not this debate in Parliament today; what they want is for the Secretary of State to get on with the job, to protect clubs and to protect supporters. Can I encourage her to ignore the Opposition, who are playing politics with our national game, and just get on with the job?
Lisa Nandy
I thank my hon. Friend for what he has said, and I am pleased that he has joined the Select Committee. He has extensive knowledge of football and has been a consistent champion of football fans, and I very much support what he has said. This Government are absolutely determined to appoint the right people to the right positions, so that when fans go through the difficulties caused by poor owners, as they did at Charlton, they do not feel that they have nowhere to turn.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
It is not my style to attack the integrity of any Member of Parliament, so may I just ask a general question about the whole process of securing public confidence? Can we now consider tightening the ministerial code, and indeed the whole process, so that at the beginning of the process civil servants check on whether a Minister has received any donations, and if that is the case, the Minister recuses himself or herself at the very start?
Lisa Nandy
The right hon. Gentleman is, of course, entirely right to say that we need the tightest possible processes. That is why the Prime Minister took steps, when he was first elected as Prime Minister, to strengthen the ministerial code and also to strengthen the oversight powers of the independent adviser on ministerial standards, Sir Laurie Magnus, in relation to the code. However, as the report makes clear, in this particular case I did ask for information about all donations to my leadership campaign. I was given the information but it turned out to be incomplete, and as soon as I was notified that that was the case, I took the decision to declare it, to ensure that the Select Committee was aware of it, and to recuse myself from the process.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
Does the Secretary of State agree that rather than obstructing and delaying the work of the Independent Football Regulator, the Opposition need to do right by the fans and let David Kogan get on with the job? May I also request—slightly selfishly, as a Carlisle United fan—that one of the first things he does is press the English Football League to lift the limit on the number of places for promotion from the national league?
Lisa Nandy
I know that my hon. Friend is a fantastic champion for her constituents, and that this is something they care about. Both the Minister for Sport and I have heard the strength of feeling from the national league. This matter is not within the scope of the Independent Football Regulator—we deliberately kept its remit tight so it could focus on the many issues that have been raised, not least by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield South East (Mr Betts)—but I know that what has been said has been heard by the EFL, and the Government will continue to follow this closely.
Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)
I like and respect the right hon. Lady and I do not doubt her sincerity, but I do wonder whether she would have been quite so forgiving had I chosen to appoint a Tory donor to lead this regulatory body. Moreover, although I supported the establishment of the regulator and, indeed, initiated it at the time of the risk of a European Super League, I fear that since then the regulator has become excessively bureaucratic. It risks deterring international investment and the broader investment in the game that has been so beneficial for it. Does the right hon. Lady think that it might be time to look again at this regulator, and to put more emphasis on self-governance in football? I think that in recent years, it has shown itself to be capable of stepping up to the challenge.
Lisa Nandy
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the tone that he has taken, but I must say to him that if he does not think that David Kogan was fit to be considered because he was a Labour donor, his party should not have put him on the list while knowing full well that he was a Labour donor, or, indeed, appointed him to the board of Channel 4. I appreciate that it is inconvenient for the Opposition, but I am afraid that that is the fact of the matter.
The right hon. Gentleman asked whether it is time to reconsider the Independent Football Regulator. Football fans were promised in 2021 that the last Government would act to deal with the many problems that we had seen in football clubs throughout the country, but they had to wait for a Labour Government to make good on that promise. In October this year, the Minister for Sport was able to confirm that Mr Kogan had been appointed and that we would start that work immediately. He has had a few weeks in which to get on with the job, and he has already achieved more in that time than the last Conservative Government achieved in 14 years.
Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)
The Football Governance Act is an excellent Act which was driven through this place by the Tory Government, but at the very last minute, on Third Reading, they decided to oppose it. That was horrendous behaviour. It is worth wondering why that happened. On the appointment of Mr Kogan, it has been said in many places that he was on a list, had been approached by the Conservative Government about taking up the position, and was then offered it by the Labour Government. What evidence do the Labour Government have to prove that was the case?
Lisa Nandy
Well, I can confirm that Mr Kogan was on the list that was held by the Department; there are obviously records of that. I was also presented with that list when I took up this post in the summer of 2024. Not only was Mr Kogan on that list, having been approached by a Conservative Government about the job, but he was appointed to the board of Channel 4 by the last Conservative Government, so the Conservatives are obviously well aware of his credentials for the job.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham and Chislehurst (Clive Efford) mentioned Dame Tracey Crouch, I take this opportunity to thank her for the work that she has done. I was reflecting recently on how far the Opposition have fallen from the days when they had Members of Parliament like Dame Tracey Crouch, who could command the respect of the whole House.
Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)
During the Select Committee pre-appointment hearing with David Kogan, I raised the issue of whether his appointment would be construed as being politically biased. Does the Secretary of State accept that appointing a known Labour donor to lead an independent regulator has created exactly the perception of political bias that I warned about during that hearing?
Lisa Nandy
As I have made clear, David Kogan was approached under the last Government and is eminently qualified for the job. Of course, as soon as I knew about the donations, I chose to declare them and recuse myself, and I then played no further part in the process, but I have a responsibility to football fans the length and breadth of this country to appoint the right person to this job, and there is no question but that David Kogan was the outstanding candidate—as he is already proving, having wasted no time in getting on with the job.
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
The shadow Minister spoke of risks to football. We need to be clear that the only risk to brilliant, grassroots, local community football clubs, such as Altrincham FC, is the Conservative party’s constant attempts to oppose and obstruct an Independent Football Regulator. The Secretary of State has taken on board the findings of the investigation and has taken responsibility. Does she agree that it is unedifying to watch the Opposition Front Benchers use this as another opportunity to obstruct an Independent Football Regulator, and stand against the best interests of the game?
Lisa Nandy
I thank my hon. Friend for that, and for being such a fantastic champion for his constituents; it was a pleasure to meet some of them when I came to his constituency not that long ago. I agree with him that the Conservatives appear to have no respect for football fans, for independent processes, or even for their own manifesto, which made it crystal clear that they supported the Football Governance Act 2025.
Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)
Can the Secretary of State confirm whether the Prime Minister, or anyone acting on his authority, declared his conflict of interest before Mr Kogan was asked to reinstate his withdrawn application? If a conflict of interest was declared, who declared it, and when?
Lisa Nandy
I think I have answered that question. I have been absolutely crystal clear: it is my Department that appoints the chair of the Independent Football Regulator. I was responsible for this process, and I take full responsibility for it. Just to be absolutely crystal clear, because hon. Members do not seem to be listening and seem to be all asking the same thing, I recused myself from the process, so it was the Minister for Sport who ultimately made the appointment decision, but I am the Secretary of State responsible for the process as a whole.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. While this Government are focused on finally delivering for fans and securing the future of our national game, the record of the party opposite tells a very different story. We have for years seen Conservative donors and insiders appointed to organisations across the board—to the NHS, to the UK Health Security Agency, and to the British Museum. We have also seen major donors becoming peers, and the Conservatives opening covid VIP lanes for their pals. It is the same old question—the one that Margaret Thatcher famously asked—“Is he one of ours?” Football fans do not care who is one of “theirs”; they care about saving their clubs and having a regulator who will do that. Does the Secretary of State agree that David Kogan, as chair of the Independent Football Regulator—chosen for his experience and merit, not for party loyalty—is finally putting fans first and protecting our beautiful game?
Lisa Nandy
I thank my hon. Friend for that, and for all the work she has done to support football fans for many years, even before being elected to this place. I completely accept that appointments will be made, under any Government, involving people who have made political donations—by definition, those people want to be involved in public life—and I have never criticised the Conservatives for making appointments on that basis. When I have criticised them, it has been when there was a strong dispute about whether the candidate had any qualifications for the job. There is no such dispute in the case of David Kogan.
When I have particularly criticised the Conservatives, it has been for not being prepared to comply with and respect independent processes. That is the difference between us and them. The independent Commissioner for Public Appointments decided to open an inquiry on what happened during this process. I complied with it fully throughout, and I have accepted the consequences.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
I and like-minded football fans welcome the much-needed creation of an independent regulator. Indeed, I am not even questioning the merit of the individual appointed as its chair. The issue is this: the Secretary of State, by her own admission, forgot that she was given money by the new chair before he was appointed. That comes alongside the £33,410 that he has given to the Labour party over the past five years. Despite what the Secretary of State has just said, she has previously called out the Tories for double standards, said that Boris Johnson trashed the UK’s global reputation, and has, over many years, called for the Tories to “come clean”. Should she not consider her own reputation, rather than joining those sleazy ranks?
Lisa Nandy
It is difficult to know where to start, given the number of inaccuracies in that statement, but I will have a go. First of all, I did not “forget” to declare the donations; if the hon. Gentleman had read the report—he obviously has not—he would know that the independent Commissioner for Public Appointments was convinced that I did not know about those donations, and that as soon as I did know about them, I chose to declare them and recused myself from the process. He might want to reflect on that. Secondly, I think that his quote about Boris Johnson related to the abolition of the Department for International Development; he might want to go and check that as well. I have heard quite a few comments from him recently, on social media and elsewhere, about the accuracy of things said at this Dispatch Box. I absolutely stand by what I have said, and the next time he comes to this House, he might want to do a bit of homework first.
James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)
I have to say, I am quite surprised at the lack of contrition from the Secretary of State, given a very damning report. In November 2024, Mr Kogan withdrew from the application process because, he said, there was
“a lot of noise going around about Labour donors”,
but in March, in a move that the commissioner said was “highly unusual”, Mr Kogan’s candidacy was reinstated, and he was rapidly sifted, interviewed and appointed. Are the public really expected to believe that this was an open and fair process, when the decision-makers took donations from the candidate?
Lisa Nandy
Again, I think the hon. Gentleman should have more respect for the independence of these processes. The independent Commissioner for Public Appointments investigated this thoroughly and found that the breach of the code was unknowing. Nevertheless, I have taken full responsibility for it.
I have to say that the Conservatives have some brass neck; when their shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), was in government, she broke the ministerial code and was told to resign, but refused to do so, and she is now one of their most senior Ministers.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
First of all, I welcome the Secretary of State’s comments. She is a right honourable Lady; I know that, and I hope that everybody in this Chamber does, as well. I very much welcome the Independent Football Regulator, but my constituents have asked me to ask a question, so I will; that is my job. Yesterday it was the BBC, and today it is the football regulator appointment. The general public are sceptical of appointments that, it seems to them, may breach the code on public appointments. Public confidence is truly at an all-time low, so how can the Secretary of State ensure that positions are fit for purpose, and that political affiliation or support will never be a material consideration in appointments?
Lisa Nandy
The Prime Minister has made it clear, and the Cabinet strongly believes, that although mistakes will always be made, we have to comply fully and openly with independent processes when those mistakes are made. We have to respect those processes, and we have to accept the consequences. The hon. Gentleman will note that in the report that was written and published by the independent Commissioner for Public Appointments, not a single recommendation was made to me. There were recommendations for the Department, but there was not a recommendation for me. Nevertheless, I have chosen to apologise to the Prime Minister, because I believe that the right thing to do is to take responsibility for the things that we are responsible for.
The hon. Gentleman mentions the BBC. I imagine that he is alluding to an issue that was raised yesterday by many Members of this House: the political appointments that were made to the board, and the appointment of one board member in particular, which has been highlighted by many Members as being of concern. He will know that those appointments were made under the last Conservative Government. The last Conservative Government also chose to extend the term of the board member in question, just a few weeks before they called the general election, so that board member has been in post for several years. However, there is an opportunity to look at the issue in the upcoming charter review, and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we will.
Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for explaining, and I am sure that people are glad to hear about the involvement of a sponsoring Department and a sponsoring Minister in a public appointment. In answering my question, she need not revisit the points made about her role—we all understand them, and she has explained them clearly. She will know that when a Secretary of State has made a provisional appointment, it is not unusual for it to go to No. 10 for further review. Putting aside her role, can she confirm whether anybody in No. 10 was involved in any way, shape or form in this appointment?
Lisa Nandy
I am happy to clarify that this was not a prime ministerial appointment; it was an appointment made by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. As the hon. Gentleman knows, as soon as I discovered the donation and that the information given at the start of the process was incomplete, I chose to declare that. I recused myself from the process, and the final decision was made not by the Prime Minister, but by the Minister for Sport.
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
Along with many others, I fully supported the Football Governance Act and the introduction of the Independent Football Regulator. I accept the Secretary of State’s comment that she sincerely was not aware of the donation, but does she understand the public’s perception that an “independent” appointee was chosen because of their donations to the party in government? What steps will she and the Government take to review the process and make improvement, so that it commands the public’s trust and is completely unimpeachable? I understand her comment about donors wanting to participate in public life, but the Government should consider putting down a really clear marker about the kind of roles donors can and cannot perform in support of the Government.
Lisa Nandy
Oversight of the whole process and the way that public appointments are made is the responsibility of the Prime Minister, but I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s suggestions and comments about the need to uphold the highest standards. In relation to this appointment, we did not meet the highest standards. It was a complicated process, and the post required a specialist skillset, and the appointment took place under two different Governments. That is not to make excuses; it is just to explain that this process was highly unusual. We have learned lessons from it, and we are implementing the commissioner’s recommendations in full.
In the end, the test of whether the public can have confidence in this appointment is whether Mr Kogan and the Independent Football Regulator are able to deliver on the promise that we will deal with bad owners and put fans back at the heart of the game. I am confident that we have made the right appointment, as evidenced by the fact that since he was appointed on 6 October, he has wasted no time at all in getting on with the job.
Points of Order
Lisa Nandy Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I thank the hon. Member for her point of order. She will be aware that she had two minutes during the course of the statement to raise her concern. [Interruption.] The Secretary of State wishes to respond.
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to make it clear that, as I have consistently said to the House, a very high legal threshold must be met in order for board members to be removed—that is set out in the terms of the charter—so I am unable to take the action that a number of Members have requested.
Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Last week, the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick) published juvenile and shameful AI-edited videos of proceedings in this Chamber. I have written to Mr Speaker about this matter and whether it is a breach of the terms and conditions of parliamentlive.tv, which explicitly prohibit the altering of video or audio recordings in any way. I trust that that will be fully investigated.
More broadly, although that video was obviously edited, I am deeply concerned about the use of generative AI, which is fast evolving. The House must protect itself and our wider democratic system by drawing a firm line in the sand. Attempts to edit the words that Members speak in the Chamber and lessen their gravitas, and to make Members seem less responsible, are not acceptable, are disrespectful to colleagues, and are moreover an affront to democracy. What sanctions can be imposed on Members of this House to deter and prevent such behaviour, and if those sanctions are not adequate, what more can be done to ensure that our democracy is better protected from that use of AI technology?