Digital, Culture, Media and Sport

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Wednesday 9th September 2026 Written Corrections

The following is an extract from the statement on Online Safety on 8 September 2026.

[Lisa Nandy]

…Children are facing unacceptable levels of sexual harm online. They are being groomed, coerced and manipulated into creating and sharing intimate images across online services. The Internet Watch Foundation believes that 91% of these images are self-generated by children. They are used for blackmail and sexual extortion.

[Official Report, 8 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 917.]

Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the right hon. Member for Wigan (Lisa Nandy):

[Lisa Nandy]

…Children are facing unacceptable levels of sexual harm online. They are being groomed, coerced and manipulated into creating and sharing intimate images across online services. In 2024, 91% of reports of child sexual abuse imagery assessed by the Internet Watch Foundation contained at least one instance of self-generated images. They are used for blackmail and sexual extortion.

Online Safety

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the next steps that this Government will be taking to protect children online. This Government’s ambition is to be the world leader in shaping an online environment that works for us. We intend to be an active Government that will help to create an online environment that is not just safe, but enabling and empowering. That starts with fixing the fundamentals, and this House can expect to see us acting more quickly and more decisively from now on to keep us safe online.

In December last year, the Government published their action plan to tackle violence against women and girls. I would like to put on record my gratitude to my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), who are here today, for their clear ambition and determination that the UK would become the first country in the world where it would be impossible for children to take, share or view nude images online. In June, the Government challenged industry on a three-month timeline to work with us and set out road maps for how they would strengthen device-level protections for children with a view to preventing children from taking, sharing or viewing nude images on phones and tablets.

Today I can update the House on the progress that has been made and the next steps that this Government will take to protect children. Since June, officials from my Department and the Home Office have overseen an unprecedented work programme with Apple and Google, working with senior leaders and engineers to explore new ways of preventing child sexual abuse and strengthening protections for children online. I can report that, following this engagement, Apple and Google have provided the Government with significant commitments. Both companies have developed meaningful changes at operating level to make it harder for children to share nude imagery. We have seen progress in the blocking, not blurring, of nude imagery on underage devices, and this builds on significant milestones already in implementation, including Apple’s roll-out earlier this year of operating system-level age assurance and tighter safety features preventing a child from receiving or sharing nude imagery on iMessage or FaceTime. These proposals are a step in the right direction. However, the truth is that they do not meet the scale of this crisis.

Children are facing unacceptable levels of sexual harm online. They are being groomed, coerced and manipulated into creating and sharing intimate images across online services. The Internet Watch Foundation believes that 91% of these images are self-generated by children. They are used for blackmail and sexual extortion. Each year, around 9,000 child sexual abuse offences involve an online element, with under-18s the subject of almost a quarter of online blackmail. I challenge anyone to listen to those statistics and come to the conclusion that the internet is a safe place for kids or that the Government should not get involved.

This is not the first time in history that new forms of technology have up-ended society, but what is unique to this moment is that the technology has been developed almost exclusively in the private sphere. I am clear that there is a central role for Government in shaping that technology for good, not just to protect from harm—although that is a basic obligation of any Government—but to enable and empower.

When it comes to the development of technology that affects our lives, we are not neutral. In no other walk of life would we tolerate this crisis harming our children, and we will not tolerate it online. For too long, technology companies have failed to protect children from some of the worst harms. To be frank, I am not prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt that progress will continue at the pace we need it to, while harm is being done now.

For that reason, I make the following announcements to the House. First, the Government today commit to introducing primary legislation to require major tech platforms to build in device-level protections for children. We will introduce the legislation to Parliament as soon as we can, recognising the urgency of the issue while ensuring that we work with colleagues across the House to get it right. We want to see movement on this quickly. If platforms in scope of the draft legislation develop and implement technical solutions while our work is ongoing, we will of course reassess whether legislation is necessary. We know that this is a sector that can, when required, innovate at an extraordinary pace when the chips are down.

Alongside the measures on devices, the Government will, as soon as possible, require that apps used by children prevent children from accessing or sharing nudity. We will explore what legislation is needed to implement that commitment, with a view to moving as quickly as possible. This will ensure that the whole ecosystem changes, tackling the means by which children are most often abused or groomed online. Put simply, we will give tech companies the chance to lead; we will not give them the chance to lag.

These measures, taken together, will make Britain the first country in the world to go this far, and a world leader in online safety. The message we are sending to tech companies is clear: planning must now become implementation, and progress must translate into protections that make a real difference to children’s lives. I give my commitment to all Members of this House, and to anybody listening out there in the country who has been desperately worried about what is happening to our children online, that when it comes to children’s safety, we are not, and never will be, bystanders. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement. It is heartening that she so clearly recognises the seriousness and urgency of the child safety issue before us. I welcome the spirit of today’s statement in two capacities: as shadow Secretary of State and as a mother. Every parent wants to know that, when their child inevitably picks up a phone, they have done everything reasonably possible to protect them from exploitation, abuse and harmful content.

We should take a moment to remember children such as 16-year-old Murray Dowey, who took his own life just hours after being tricked into sending an intimate image online. No young person should ever be put in that position, and no family should ever have to endure such a tragedy. I therefore welcome the Secretary of State’s focus on device-level protections, particularly the commitment that children will be prevented from taking or sharing nude images on their devices. That is a huge practical step, which has the potential to prevent immeasurable harm.

I remember raising device-level protection from the Back Benches before summer recess, so I am pleased that this work is being pursued. But although the good intent is clear, the execution is often more challenging, so I would welcome more detail on the Secretary of State’s plans, including on what exactly can be done to ensure that tech companies take more responsibility in this space.

Before recess, the Government set technology companies a clear three-month deadline. Ministers said that if sufficient progress was not made, they would act. The Secretary of State’s assessment today is that progress has not been good enough, so the House now needs to know exactly what will happen next. We have heard a commitment to primary legislation, but “as soon as we can” is not yet a timetable. When does the Secretary of State expect to introduce the legislation? She has also said that the Government may reassess whether legislation is necessary if companies make sufficient progress in the meantime. What precisely would constitute sufficient progress and who will make that judgment?

I would welcome clarity on the devices themselves. Is the aim for these planned protections to apply only to new phones and tablets, or will companies be expected, wherever technically possible, to push them through software updates to devices already in use? Millions of phones are in young hands at this very moment. Protecting only the next generation of devices would leave a large gap. Where older devices cannot support these measures, what assessment has the Secretary of State made of the scale of that problem?

The Secretary of State also said today that

“there is a central role for Government in shaping…technology for good”.

It is a very broad proposition, and I hope that she can reassure the House about exactly what she means by it. The Opposition want to see device-level protection and support further exploration, but it is just one part of a far larger picture. I pay tribute to the shadow Education Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), who has led the charge by the Conservatives for stronger online protections for children. As His Majesty’s Opposition, we have relentlessly pushed for restrictions on social media for under-16s. To be frank, the Government got to the right place in the end, but we did have to drag them kicking and screaming. Can the Secretary of State therefore confirm that the under-16s social media restrictions remain on course for early 2027, and that the necessary age assurance and enforcement arrangements will be ready in time?

There is considerable common ground across this House. We want parents to be more empowered, children to have stronger protections, and technology companies to take responsibility for the content they display to young people. I look forward to working constructively across the House with the Secretary of State and the Ministers towards these worthy goals.

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank the hon. Member for the way that she has engaged with these proposals. I will try my best to briefly answer as many of her questions as possible. First, on the detail, I have instructed my officials today to begin working up legislation. I appreciate that it is frustrating when a Minister comes to the Dispatch Box and says, “We intend to do this imminently”—the hon. Lady’s party has been in government; they understand the difficulties—but I want to reassure her and the whole House that we intend to do this without delay. The only reason there is not a firm timetable at the moment is because we are the first country in the world to do it. There are a number of questions, some of which she posed, which we need to iron out to ensure that we get this right.

On what would constitute sufficient progress that would rid us of the need to introduce legislation, I would much rather the technology companies move at pace to meet their own social and moral obligations, but in the absence of that, the Government will step up and act. Frankly, if we were able to reach a situation very quickly, which we should be able to do with the right will, where children were not able to take or share nude images, then the problem would be solved. But I have to say, based on what I have seen in progress over the last three months, it is almost certain that we will be legislating in this area.

The hon. Lady asked about which devices. It is phones and tablets at a minimum, but I accept the point she makes, and we are exploring whether it is possible to extend this to other forms of technology.

The hon. Lady asked what I meant when I talked about shaping technology for good. I am a big supporter of the action we are taking on social media for children. I say this as the mum of an 11-year-old and someone who is going through it at the moment and trying to help navigate that; I know all parents across the House will recognise the challenges. I would love us to get to a situation as a country where all people, including children, can be online and find good, trusted information and things that help them to be creative, to feel empowered and to enable them to live the richer, larger lives that they want to live. I think the Government have a right and proper role in helping that to happen. One of the ways in which we are already doing that, building on the great work of my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall), is in trying to use gov.uk as a pioneering service that really does help people to live better lives.

The hon. Lady says that this Government had to be dragged kicking and screaming to doing this. Her party was in government for a very long time, and the amount of time it took them to try to introduce any legislation in this area at all was quite shameful. That is not to downplay the role that some members of the Conservative party played in ensuring that we got there, but if it was not for my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West, I do not think I would be standing here today in a position to make this announcement. We should give credit where credit is due: this is a Government who are leading the world in keeping children safe.

The last thing the hon. Lady asked me about, which I know many colleagues are concerned about, is the social media ban that we announced earlier this year. I can reassure the House that we do intend to stick to both the spirit and the letter of what my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West set out earlier this year. We are on track to meet the timetable that she set out, to lay the first regulations by the end of this year and for the ban to come into force in the spring of 2027. We also intend to go somewhat further than our initial proposition statement, and I would welcome the opportunity to talk with the hon. Lady in more detail about that.

[Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)]

I really welcome the announcement made by my right hon. Friend today. It will, indeed, be a world first to take this action on device-level protections, protecting children right across the country, and I am very proud to be part of a party and a Government who are doing that. I also thank her for confirming that the vote on the ban on social media companies providing their services to children under 16 will take place this year, for the ban to come into effect early next year. Could she say more about the timetable for other proposals that were made on AI chatbots, overnight curfews and bans on doomscrolling for older children? Together, this package will make the world a safer, better place for children online—that is as well as the work we are doing offline.

[Lisa Nandy]

Once again, I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend and thank her so much for all her support both when we worked together in government and since; she really is a class act.

I am not in a position to give a firm timetable for the measures that my right hon. Friend mentioned, but I will commit to coming back to her with one, because I understand that Members across the House will want to know that there will be no delay in taking action on those things. We are also looking at a more comprehensive system, very much in the spirit of the reforms that she set out earlier this year, and we intend to move quickly on that without delay. I do not think we will be in a position to do the whole package by the end of the year, but I would be very disappointed if we had not made enormous progress by then, including meeting the commitments that she set out. I would be particularly disappointed if, by this time next year, we did not have a much more robust and comprehensive package of measures in place.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

When the last Prime Minister gave tech giants three months to voluntarily implement technology that would prevent children from taking and sharing nude images, the Lib Dems were clear that we should not rely on the good will of companies that have repeatedly put profit before children’s safety, and I am pleased to see today that the Government agree with us. The need for action cannot be clearer. In 2024, 91% of online child sexual abuse reports involved self-generated content from children online, and last year there was an 8% rise in child sexual abuse image offences across the UK. These are not just statistics; they are real children being exploited online.

This is a serious problem that urgently demands serious legislation. That is why the Lib Dems welcome today’s announcement of primary legislation that will require device-level and app-level protections for children online. However, this House has heard the phrase “as soon as possible” many times before. I hear what the Secretary of State is saying about a timetable for legislation, but what she said earlier slightly hinted that what the tech giants were doing might affect the progress of the legislation, so I seek reassurance that legislation will be ploughing forward regardless of what those companies are doing.

The Lib Dems are supportive of legislation to protect children from abuse online, but protection cannot come at the expense of privacy. Any legislation that is brought in must be accompanied by guarantees that technology will be highly effective and preserve privacy. Can the Secretary of State confirm that that will be the case?

Too often, the Government have left tech companies to mark their own homework. I am glad that today they have decided enough is enough, but this announcement could have been made three months ago. If we truly want to protect our children, we need a Government who act before harm is done, not a Government who wait until it is too late. I hope that will be the case going forward, as the Secretary of State has intimated.

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank the hon. Lady for her support for these measures. She asks me a number of questions. Will the legislation be developed regardless of the action taken by companies? Yes, it will—my officials have begun drawing up that legislation today. Both she and the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) raised specific issues. We will want to discuss those issues with Opposition parties and colleagues on the Government Benches to ensure that our response is right, and privacy is one of those issues. It is not our intention to ignore or sideline the privacy concerns, and we believe that it is perfectly possible to do this without encroaching on privacy in any way.

There is a particular challenge around end-to-end encrypted services, which the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine) will be aware of. I would welcome cross-party discussion about that; we have a number of potential solutions that we are currently exploring, so it would be good to discuss the matter further with her.

Finally, the hon. Lady heard what I said about acting quickly and more decisively. Many colleagues will know that before I came to this place, I worked with children and young people. Keeping children safe is the first and most basic responsibility of any Government, and I am very pleased to hear such broad consensus on that across the House.

[Jess Phillips (Birmingham Yardley) (Lab)]

This statement and the previous one are about the two things that I have previously resigned over, so I feel that my moral compass is back. [Laughter.]

First and foremost, I want to help out my right hon. Friend. To those who are concerned about the timeliness of this statement, let me say that the original statement may have had a timeframe in it, and I found in my negotiations with her that that was not quick enough. Actually, “as soon as possible” is quicker than what was going to be suggested, so I have every faith that she will do this quickly.

I want to stress the importance of the “take” element; there is no privacy issue if we just stop children taking images in the first place—the image will not exist to be able to go anywhere. But the take is the thing that the tech companies, for some reason, are faltering on. It is the most important thing to stop children being abused and groomed. Addressing that element will move the market away from our children here in the UK; they will not be able to use their phones for that terrible market of sexual abuse any more than they will be able to use them to make toast, because that will not be what they are for. When we remove the UK market, though, we will send the market somewhere else in the world. I therefore ask the Secretary of State to work with partners across the world to ensure that while we lead the world, we are not standing alone for too long.

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend makes a typically well informed and well thought-out point. I thank her not just for her support, but for all the work she has done to ensure that we have got here. I know that she is appreciated not just by me, but by many of the incredible, brave families who I have had the privilege to get to know over the last few weeks and who have wanted to see action in this space for a very long time. I pay tribute to those families as well as to her. She has made an important point about working with Governments and other partners across the world to keep children safe. That is the promise of the UN convention on the rights of the child. A child harmed anywhere means that children can be harmed everywhere, and we have to take that really seriously.

My hon. Friend should be encouraged—and I suspect that she is—by the fact that many Governments are now acting more decisively. They are stepping up and recognising that the development and regulation of new forms of technology cannot be left to the private sector alone. There is a clear role for active, empowering Governments working in this space, and my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) and I have not hesitated to reach out to like-minded Governments across the world to see what more we can do together.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Chair of the Select Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

At the risk of spending the entire duration of this statement paying tribute to absolutely everybody, I thank the hon. Lady and her Committee for the work they have done on this issue, and that she has done in particular. I agree with her that it is a damning indictment if a country does not step up to keep its children safe, and I hope she is reassured by what she has heard today.

The hon. Lady has asked a specific question about how this policy will be enforced, and I have heard loud and clear the concerns from across this House about the enforcement of the Online Safety Act. Before she left office, my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) appointed a new chair of Ofcom, and specifically tasked Ofcom with stepping up its enforcement work; I have picked up the baton on that work, and I continue it.

When it comes to this specific issue, we are looking in particular at the making and selling of devices here in the UK that do not have technology enabled to prevent children from taking and sharing nude images. We are also looking at what we can do in relation to particular apps, especially where highly verified age assurance does not apply, to make sure that we close every loophole. Given that we are the first Government in the world to do this, the way I would describe it to the House is that we are taking a major problem—a crisis—and trying to come at it from every single angle in order to keep children as safe as possible. I look forward to working with the hon. Lady to develop the detail.

[Natasha Irons (Croydon East) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for this major step forward—it is a massive intervention in this space. She has rightly given the industry time to think about how it is going to approach these issues, but we cannot wait forever. Time is of the essence, and our young people are being put at risk every single day, so can the Secretary of State assure the House that while this legislation is being developed and while we look at the issues around it, the Government will continue to press these companies to act with the urgency and sense of moral leadership that they should be acting with?

[Lisa Nandy]

Overnight, I was thinking about how to address the House on this issue. During the financial crash, there was a live debate about the moral and social responsibilities that companies have to citizens, to one another and to all of us. I think we have slightly lost that part of our public debate. Working with some of these companies, I have been struck by how seriously they take those obligations. I want us to bring back that sense that we are all in this together—that we all have a responsibility to keep children safe—and given that these are some of the most innovative, fast-moving and successful companies in the world, it cannot be beyond our collective wit to do this more quickly. Frankly, I do not think we should be in a position where a Secretary of State is standing at the Dispatch Box and announcing that we have to legislate in order to uphold our responsibilities to our own children; but, like I said, if we have to, of course we will.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)]

I welcome the intent that the Secretary of State has set out this afternoon, and the urgency with which she will require the relevant companies to act. I think she knows that I sympathise with the Government in respect of the complexity of this legislative area and the challenge that they face, but she may also know that my ongoing concern has been the compatibility of the individual measures that the Government may take with the ongoing responsibilities of these companies under the Online Safety Act. Would she be prepared to meet me to discuss that in a little more detail?

[Lisa Nandy]

I should be happy to do so.

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)]

Children are being exposed daily to horrific, violent content online. Ofcom’s own research shows that nearly a quarter of 11 to 17-year-olds have seen violent content in just four weeks, and nearly three quarters have seen harmful content of some kind. The number has barely moved since the Act’s child safety duties came into force. Much of this content is not even sought out, but is served up by algorithms as children scroll. We know the pattern: cruelty to animals first, then violence against people, desensitising a generation and, for some, opening a path to real violence and criminality. Primary legislation to enforce all this at the app and device level is welcome, but we need to give Ofcom the tools that will enable it to deal with this immediately, as it becomes an issue.

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend is right. Let me say to him, as someone who shares his concern about the increase in exposure to violent content to very young children, that we are also looking at the issue of chatbots and strengthening the law to ensure that we protect children better from all these different forms of exposure.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I welcome these actions on child online safety, and the Minister’s comment that there is a role for the Government in shaping technology and not being neutral on online harm. She may have seen, in the last 24 hours, some very disturbing posts on Meta and X in which the identities of brave rescuers from the Royal National Lifeboat Institution have been revealed. In response, charities such as the RNLI are now having to ask people to take real action on their personal safety and their privacy. What more can the Government do to hold tech companies to account and take down posts that put the safety of children and adults at risk through doxxing?

[Lisa Nandy]

I have had an initial discussion about this with some of the tech companies. As the hon. Lady will know, as well as the horrific incidents that she mentioned, there has been a campaign by the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers relating to the way in which shop workers have been targeted. The Government are concerned about this, as am I personally, and I look forward to working with the hon. Lady to see what more we can do.

[Chris Kane (Stirling and Strathallan) (Lab)]

May I place on record my heartfelt appreciation of the dignified leadership that the parents and family of my constituent Murray Dowey have shown on this issue? Will the Secretary of State say more about the ongoing conversations that she will have with tech companies while the primary legislative clock is ticking, so that they know we expect them to tackle this issue with the same speed of innovation that they show in bringing new products to market when profit, not safety, is the goal?

[Lisa Nandy]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s constituents, and thank him for being such an outstanding advocate for them. He will have heard what I said about ongoing discussions with tech companies. We ought to be moving quickly on this, and it ought not to require primary legislation, but given the lack of progress, I think it only right for the Government to step up. We do, however, want to see faster progress, and I think that many of the tech companies will have noted the strength of feeling throughout the House about their own responsibilities in this regard.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

Children are facing unacceptable levels of sexual harm online, and they need protection. When the Government do the right thing, I will say so, although it has taken them rather a long time to get to the right place.

Many children use older phones handed down by family members. How will the Secretary of State ensure that children using devices with older operating systems are fully protected?

[Lisa Nandy]

We have been discussing that as a Department, and it is something that officials are currently exploring. I am very familiar with what the hon. Gentleman says: many children will be using older devices. We think there may be some solutions to this, but I am very keen to work with colleagues from across the House to address some of these issues.

Although we will not hesitate to take the action that we need to take or to take action where it is needed, as I said to the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage), we are trying to come at this issue from lots of different angles to ensure we close loopholes one by one, and close as many as we can at the same time. Part of that is about the action that we are taking not just on the taking of nude images—as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips) said, that is the most central part—but on the sharing of nude images. Even if a child has an older device, the protections that we are bringing in around the sharing of nude images will take effect immediately.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

As a parent, I can understand the anxiety that Gloucester parents have about keeping their children safe online, so I thank the Secretary of State for today’s announcement. Given the financial resources that the tech companies have and the innovative, brilliant minds that they have working for them, will she reassure the House that she will not accept any argument that it is too expensive or too difficult to stop children being able to take nude images and send them to people?

[Lisa Nandy]

I strongly support that; frankly, there is no excuse. My hon. Friend mentions the anxiety that many families feel. I have worked with the outstanding organisation that is the NSPCC, and with Childline, for many years, as has the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson)—we used to work together many years ago. This particular form of abuse is happening in families’ homes. It is often happening in children’s bedrooms while their parents are in the house, but it is not known to them. There is something particularly frightening about that for many parents. Speaking for myself, I find it particularly disturbing. Having worked with bereaved families for just a few weeks, I have been struck by how hard they have found it to come to terms with that element of this issue. They did not know that it was happening, even though at times it was happening under their own roofs.

Once again, I pay tribute to all the families who have campaigned so long and hard to make this happen. I give them my commitment that we will work with them and not hesitate to continue to innovate and to take the steps that we need as the technology develops.

[Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)]

I first raised the issue of self-generated images in Parliament more than four years ago. I have asked almost every single Culture, Media and Sport team about the issue of livestreaming. I am pleased to hear from the Secretary of State that action is being taken, and about the belt-and-braces approach that is coming in. Even though we will have a social media ban and there will be device-level protections, I would like to see children’s accounts banned from livestreaming, regardless of whether it involves nude images, because so much of that can be held over children for the purposes of blackmail or abuse. I would appreciate it if the Secretary of State reassured me that that action will be taken, as well as the other actions that are moving ahead.

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank the hon. Lady for being such a long-standing campaigner on this issue, and I am sorry that it took many Secretaries of State before we were able announce this. I am really committed to looking at the issue seriously. I will go away after this statement and ask my officials to come back to me on it, and then I will reach out to her so that we can have a proper conversation about it.

[Tom Collins (Worcester) (Lab)]

I really welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. We have a massive crisis of digitally enabled child sexual exploitation in the UK. As an illustration, there is a global industry for livestreamed abuse material from the Philippines. The UK is the second largest global consumer and is second only to the US, which is a much larger country. The abuse extends beyond our borders. It extends to adults as well as children on adult devices, and it extends to interfaces as well as content. We will need a broader approach. The Secretary of State is right to identify that technology has disrupted society before. In such cases, we have seen massive expansion, harm and then regulation, and then moved to product safety. I have been working with experts and innovators on how a product safety approach might work. Will she meet me to discuss that?

[Lisa Nandy]

I would be very happy to meet my hon. Friend. We have talked a lot about the tech companies in relation to this, and it is right to do so because there are obligations that must be met, but there is also traditional law enforcement, and we need to ensure that we do not let the individuals causing harm to children off the hook. The Home Secretary has been incredibly supportive of working hand in glove to ensure we deal with this from every angle.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

I also welcome the statement. I would be grateful if the Secretary of State shared with the House a little bit about how the highly efficient age assurance system actually works. In particular, I confess to the fact that over 60 years ago my parents, recognising that my sister and I were rather precocious readers, lent us their tickets to the senior library, rather than the junior library where we were confined. What would there be to prevent a parent choosing to allow a child to use their phone under their identity, and would there be a penalty for doing so?

[Lisa Nandy]

We are not envisaging imposing penalties on parents. However, the right hon. Member is right that, as we are already anticipating, with any system we introduce there will be people who find ways to get around the safeguards we put in place. That is one lesson we have learned from the pioneering approach taken in Australia. When I say to the House that we intend to move more quickly and more decisively, it is precisely for those reasons. We will have to keep revisiting the safeguards for children in this space to ensure we close loopholes.

On the highly effective age assurance, companies are already rolling this out, including through iOS 26. This requires someone to have a form of ID to prove their age. At the moment, as all parents will know, most of the apps and sites that children use just require them to either tick a box to say that they are over the age of 18, or to put in a birth date. They do not require them to show a form of ID—a credit card or some other form of ID. The new systems are requiring that, and one lesson we have learned from looking at what happened in Australia is that unless we do that, most children will find a way around.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

I commend my right hon. Friend for her statement, but also for her personal decision to leave Elon Musk’s X. I left the platform over a year ago because I did not want to have any association with a platform whose founder has consistently called for civil war in our country and that amplifies extremist content. When she sits around the Cabinet table, will she make the case to her colleagues that there are many ways we can reach our constituents by social media, but we do not have to play by Elon Musk’s rules?

[Lisa Nandy]

I think this is a personal decision, and all Members of the House should be free to decide how and where they communicate, but for my own part, I did not want to encourage more people to a site that I think has become more of a force for harm than for good.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s announcements. As she said, she and I have worked together on children’s issues for many years, so I know how committed she is, but may I press her a little further on AI companions? We know that they can expose children to inappropriate sexual content, even when safeguards are in place. While the Government announced earlier this year a ban on sexualised AI chatbots for under-18s, it remains unclear how these will be defined and how any such a ban will be enforced. Can she provide any clarity on that work, and whether the legislation she is announcing may be broadened to cover that issue?

[Lisa Nandy]

This is a live issue and it is very much at the front of my mind. Over the last few months, I have been working with campaigners and Members of this House and the other place to ensure we get this right. With some of the protections previously asked for, particularly in relation to offences involving creating AI companions and chatbots that fulfil particular functions, I think recent developments have shown that that approach may have its limitations. She will be aware of the recent case in which an AI system was able to escape its own sandbox and the parameters set for it, and caused damage. We are looking at strengthening our approach in this area, because at the moment there is a great big gap where there is no liability for the output from those AI systems. We urgently need to resolve that major gap in our child safety protection system. It is not straightforward to solve, but we are determined to get on the front foot on this. As I have said to other Members of the House—I say it particularly to the hon. Lady, given our history—I am very happy to talk about it with her further.

[Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)]

Like the Secretary of State, I pay tribute to the Ministers before her who have laid out some of the tough language and now the tough legislation that we will bring in. This could be done tomorrow. All it requires is an update to the iOS and Android operating systems. That software exists. Will she join me in calling for these companies to turn it on in the next update and to make that tomorrow? Will she promise every child and parent in this country that if those companies do not do that quickly—in fact, even if they do—we will introduce legislation within the year?

[Lisa Nandy]

We are moving as fast as possible, and I give my hon. Friend my word that we will not unduly delay. She will have heard the debates that I have just had with some hon. Members about some of the complexities, but complexity cannot be an excuse for inaction when children are being harmed now. I give her my word that we will move as fast as is humanly possible to resolve this. I support what she has just said about the obligations on technology companies. Far more could be done right now, and we would like to see them do it.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

A child cannot unsee a sexualised image online. I raised with the former Secretary of State parents’ concerns regarding highly sexualised images popping up in children’s games online. Will today’s announcement cover in-game adverts, or is that a loophole that the new Secretary of State can commit to looking at?

[Lisa Nandy]

I certainly commit to looking at that issue. I am concerned by what the hon. Lady said. I will take that away and make sure that we take the appropriate action to protect children from those sorts of images.

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

Like parents and grandparents in Hartlepool, I find it incredible that technology companies even had to be asked to put software in place that protected against child sexual abuse. Having been asked, they apparently have said no. As the Secretary of State rightly points out, there will be further loopholes that need to be closed. Would it be better just to assume these companies’ moral bankruptcy and not ask in future, and just to legislate straightaway?

[Lisa Nandy]

I support what my hon. Friend says. We need to stop thinking about the online world as somehow distinct from the offline world. As someone who worked with children and young people for many years before I came into Parliament, I know that there are systems and protections in place for people to work with children and young people in the real world. It would be unthinkable not to have that. I find it astonishing that we do not have the same level of expectation for the online world. I very much support what he says.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

The Secretary of State is right to push the tech companies to live up to their responsibilities to keep children safe. One of the many horrifying things when considering online safety is the number of abuse perpetrators who themselves are children. We have had a case in my local area where a young girl—I obviously will not name her—had covert images taken of her, which were run through a nudifying app. Those images were then circulated by a fellow pupil. Can the Secretary of State say more about what she is doing with colleagues in the Department for Education and elsewhere to support schools and families as they work to prevent children from becoming victims or perpetrators?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Lady raises an important point about some of the apps that exist. I commend my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) for taking such quick and decisive action in this place on Grok. The hon. Lady is right to say that other forms of technology out there are a problem.

The hon. Lady is also right to point to the fact that we need to be much better at supporting schools, parents and wider families to help protect children. When we developed the national youth strategy last year with young people across the country, one of the biggest concerns that both they and their parents had was that far too many young people growing up in this country do not have an adult they trust who can help them to navigate the online space. Many of us—I say us, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I am on a very steep learning curve as the mum of an 11-year-old—would welcome extra help and support. That is something we have been seeking to address through the national youth strategy, but I intend to put rocket boosters under it now.

[Sarah Smith (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and the work done by my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) to finally take back control of our children’s safety online. Tackling misinformation and disinformation is also a part of creating safe online spaces. I have been leading, with my constituent Debbie Duncan, a campaign to tackle tragedy trolling. Will the Secretary of State meet me to find out more about the importance of trying to protect victims who have lost people in suspicious circumstances, when that horror happens to them?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend and her constituent for their campaign. I would be very happy to offer a meeting with the relevant officials and to discuss this issue personally with her. She is absolutely right to highlight the importance of tackling misinformation and disinformation. She will know that the House recently debated proposals to give more prominence to trusted sources of news online. One reason for doing so is that young people in particular consume broadcast media in a very different way from older generations. I personally believe that we are not doing enough to help them find accurate information and distinguish between truth and fiction.

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

I welcome the statement by the Secretary of State, the work she is doing and the work begun by the hon. Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips). Protecting our children is very important. My query relates to the allegedly robust complaints procedure provided by social media apps. For example, a constituent of mine faced serious harassment on TikTok. Numerous complaints were made, but nothing was done. In fact, the X account of the leader of Birmingham city council has been hacked for weeks now and cryptocurrency is being sold in his name, but very little has happened. What steps can the Government take to ensure that social media providers follow their complaints processes?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman gives an astonishing example. I am very happy to pick that up with the social media companies directly.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

I echo the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) on misinformation and disinformation. We know that hostile states around the world, from Russia to Iran, are actively using social media disinformation as a tool as part of their forward defence strategy to disrupt democracies and sow division. What more will the Government do to address that?

[Lisa Nandy]

We are coming at that from a number of angles. As well as the measures I have been outlining to colleagues today, we are looking at how we can develop gov.uk. We are pioneers when it comes to gov.uk, but we believe we could do even more to make it more relevant and to provide better avenues to trusted sources of news. My hon. Friend will also know that, along with the Minister of State, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), we produced the first ever local news strategy to support the incredible local news outlets that did such amazing work during the riots a few summers ago to tackle misinformation and disinformation and to do myth-busting on the ground. Colleagues will also know that we are about to embark on the BBC charter review, which is our opportunity to take what is perhaps our best weapon against misinformation and disinformation, and make sure we put it on a firm and secure footing for the foreseeable future.

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

I join the House in welcoming the statement and thank the Government for the steps they are taking to keep our children safe. Earlier this year, I met campaigners from SafeToNet who had invented hardware-level protection that they had installed on HTC-only devices and were trying to persuade other mobile manufacturers to include it. As well as software controls, hardware-level controls are out there, so I urge the Secretary of State to look at those. We know that Meta has just agreed to pay $18 billion in a legal settlement in the US, so will the Government pursue similar robust enforcement against such companies?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the issue of enforcement. As has already been mentioned, any legislation that we introduce is only as good as our ability to enforce it, so we take that extremely seriously.

[Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)]

As the youngest parent in this place, I warmly welcome the Secretary of State’s leadership and that of our Prime Minister. Will she look at AI-enabled smart glasses, which could be filming our children, and the content from them that is being put online? Will she also look at loopholes in VPN usage—in particular, with app-based browsers—as she looks to progress the measures?

[Lisa Nandy]

I have already discussed issues around VPNs with officials; device-level controls are one part of the answer but not the whole answer, so my hon. Friend is right to raise the issue. I will take up the issue of smart glasses as well.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

When I speak to parents in Bracknell Forest, they tell me of their anxiety about what their young people might be exposed to online and their feeling of powerlessness—they do not feel that they have the tools to do anything about it. Today’s statement makes it clear that this Government believe that the power to act lies squarely with the tech companies, and that they should get on and fix their platforms so that our young people can be safe.

[Lisa Nandy]

I support my hon. Friend in saying that it is the responsibility of all of us to keep children safe, and we would like to see the tech companies do more—and more quickly. Today’s statement also shows that the Government can do things to improve people’s lives. We are not powerless; we were elected to do that, and we intend to fulfil that promise.

[Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)]

I welcome the announcement from the Secretary of State, but the focus is too often on what young people are doing, rather than on the adults who are grooming and coercing them. Can the Secretary of State say more about the work that her Department and others are doing with tech companies to identify and disrupt adults who are targeting children and pressurising them to put images online?

[Lisa Nandy]

I saw my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips) nodding vigorously at that point. My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) is absolutely right, and I am working closely with the Home Secretary to ensure that we come at the issue from every angle and hold to account all who are responsible.

[Kevin McKenna (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Lab)]

I strongly welcome the statement from the Secretary of State. It is long overdue and builds on great work by her predecessors. Unfortunately, we do not have full sovereign capability in developing our own tech in this country, and we are vulnerable to politics in other countries. Will the Secretary of State tell me what she is doing to work with people across Government to ensure that if there is pushback against these changes, particularly in the United States, and challenges from the tech companies, Britain will get what it wants—not what some people in certain other countries want?

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend raises two linked and important points. First, we are the Government of the United Kingdom and are responsible to the people of this country. Although we have close friends and allies all over the world, we reserve the right to take our own view on technology. Particularly when it comes to keeping children safe, that is non-negotiable. Secondly, we have to be on the front foot in developing new forms of technology. I believe that tech, the online space and AI should be—and can be—a force for good in the world, but in order to help create that and be leaders in the field, we have to be on the front foot in developing forms of technology and having sovereign capability. I can reassure my hon. Friend on that point because I discussed it, this very morning, with the Business Secretary and the AI Minister.

[Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)]

I thank and commend the Secretary of State for the Government’s world-leading action. Does she agree that at some point in the future, we are going to look back and wonder how we let the tech companies get away with hijacking our children’s attention and safety for so long? She talks about closing loopholes, but will she say more about what is happening across Government and with the regulators—as well as internationally—to ensure that those who produce the devices and what goes on them all play their part in keeping our children safe?

[Lisa Nandy]

I think we have been living through a revolution in the way we interact with one another and with Government, compared with when I was growing up. I am going to sound incredibly old now, but I think I was 17 before I got my first email address, and Google was not a thing at that point—it was Ask Jeeves, if anyone remembers that. We have been living through this revolution for quite some time, and it is about time that Governments caught up. We have to ensure that we are on the front foot, helping to shape the society we want to have, not just allowing that to be relegated to the private sphere.

My hon. Friend talks about the global consensus, and I think there is a global consensus forming on this. We are seeing more and more that states are prepared to step up and be on the front foot and taking action. We are working closely with our friends and allies around the world, trying to move in step so that this can be as effective as possible.

[Ben Coleman (Chelsea and Fulham) (Lab)]

This is a really tremendous statement—I welcome it, and congratulate and thank my right hon. Friend for it. We have touched on the tech companies. Sadly, we can expect them to push back, and they may get support on the other side of the Atlantic. I encourage my right hon. Friend to work closely with our friends in the European Union who have similar aims to protect their children to give ourselves as much clout and oomph in the negotiations ahead.

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As a rule, I think this Government have taken that approach; we want to have a much closer relationship with our closest friends and neighbours across Europe and to repair some of the needless damage that was done to that relationship under previous Governments. When it comes to tech and what happens online, it is absolutely essential that we work with other like-minded countries in order to move in step, so I can certainly reassure him on that point.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. Unfortunately, young people and their parents in my constituency do not believe that the big tech companies are taking their responsibilities seriously. I speak to young people in schools across Harlow who are concerned that it is very easy to flout the age verification rules. In much the same way as it is a shop’s responsibility to ensure that no one under the age of 18 buys alcohol, can we make it very clear to the big tech companies that it is their responsibility to ensure that underage people cannot use their software and sites?

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank my hon. Friend for that point. I think the views of his constituents in Harlow are probably mirrored in every constituency across the country. I want to be really clear about our message today to parents who have been struggling with this matter for so long: you are not on your own. We believe that we are as responsible for keeping their children safe as they are, and we are stepping up to take the necessary action, whether that is through support, advice and training for parents and children, or through the reforms and measures that I have outlined today—we are the first country in the world to do so, and I strongly suspect that we will not be the last.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

For the final question, I call Tom Hayes.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

Democracies face a choice between allowing the online world to be a wild west or stepping in, so I really welcome this Government’s decision to regulate the tech titans that have been putting profit before protection. I have families in my constituency who have been deeply affected by traumas online that have repeated what has been experienced in the real world, and they would really welcome the chance to meet the Secretary of State at the Department. Would she meet them with me so that they can share their experiences and help to shape the legislation as it goes forward?

[Lisa Nandy]

Yes, of course; it would be a privilege to meet them. I have had the honour of getting to know some of these families—both bereaved families and families of survivors whose children have been harmed because of the lack of action in this space—and I gave them a commitment that I will do everything in my power to stop another family having to experience what they have gone through. I would be very happy to meet my hon. Friend and his constituents.

Bill Presented

Illegal Trading (Temporary Closure of Premises) Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Gideon Amos presented a Bill to make provision about the temporary closure of premises connected to illegal trading; to make further provision relating to such closures; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the first time; to be read a second time on Friday 27 November, and to be printed (Bill 141).

Warner Bros. Discovery: Proposed Acquisition by Paramount

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

On 30 June 2026, my Department wrote to Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery on my behalf, informing them under the Enterprise Act 2002 public interest regime that I was minded to intervene in the proposed merger between the two companies, and I issued a written ministerial statement setting this out, which is available at: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2026-06-30/hcws162

The parties were given the opportunity to make representations to me by 6 July in response to my concerns. Paramount put forward a set of assurances, seeking to address the issues I raised. These assurances included a range of commitments on future investment in the UK, maintaining the distinct editorial identities of key services, and the editorial independence of news. Following further discussions with DCMS officials, Paramount offered to strengthen those assurances and turn them into legally binding commitments by way of a “deed of undertaking” made in my favour.

On 6 August, the Competition and Markets Authority announced its decision that there are no competition aspects of this proposed merger in the UK that necessitate its further intervention.

In parallel, after careful consideration, I decided not to issue a public interest intervention notice, on the basis that the assurances and further legally binding commitments I secured from Paramount provide a set of protections that will help safeguard the continued availability of a diverse range of broadcasting and on-demand services in the UK; the continuation of their distinct editorial identities; and the distinct editorial identities of key UK news programmes. Paramount has committed to providing me with annual statements of compliance with the undertakings in the deed, and DCMS will closely monitor their implementation. In the circumstances, I have decided to accept the deed and have informed the parties of my decision. A copy of my public statement issued on 6 August, the letter of assurances from Paramount and the deed can be found on gov.uk here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-statement-proposed-acquisition-of-warner-bros-discovery-by-paramount-decision-of-no-intervention-on-public-interest-intervention-or-foreign-sta

Having made this decision and informed the parties, I made a public statement on 6 August, and wish to formally update Parliament of my decisions, now that it has returned from summer recess.

I have made this decision based on the specific powers currently available to me under the Enterprise Act 2002, which only relate to matters concerning the UK broadcasting and news media landscape. As set out in the “Watch this Space” Green Paper published on 23 June, the media sector is undergoing a profound and rapid transformation. I believe it is of the utmost importance to protect plurality, diversity and distinct British voices across our wider creative industries, including film, and I share the concerns about the impact consolidation could have on the UK’s creative industries.

I have met with Paramount CEO David Ellison to obtain specific assurances about the impact of this proposed deal on film outputs and diversity of content. I look forward to continuing to work with both Paramount and sector leaders to ensure that our world-leading creative industries feel real benefits as a result of these discussions. Beyond this, as set out in my public statement, I am also considering all avenues to ensure the Government have the ability to protect plurality, diversity and British content when it is under threat.

Video on demand services

In my previous written ministerial statement, I noted that should I decide to intervene in this case, I would bring forward secondary legislation to amend the plurality of control public interest consideration set out in the Enterprise Act, to enable Ofcom to examine the impact of the proposed acquisition on video on demand services. While DCMS will no longer be bringing forward secondary legislation in relation to this specific merger, I may do so in future, given the role on demand viewing now plays in the market.

Foreign state influence regime

Having considered the proposed merger under the statutory foreign state influence regime, I have concluded that I do not have reasonable grounds to suspect that my duty to issue a foreign state intervention notice has arisen. I am therefore currently not minded to intervene in this case. I will reassess the position if any new information comes to light suggesting otherwise.

[HCWS309]

Sporting Events Bill [Lords]

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

Just over 14 years ago, we lifted the curtain on the opening ceremony of the London 2012 Olympic games. It did not disappoint: 29 gold medals, super Saturday, Usain Bolt winning medal after medal—sporting moments that will remain with us for the rest of our lives. But London 2012 did more than that. It told our national story on the world stage, and it sent a clear message to future British athletes that there should be no ceiling to their ambition.

Fourteen years on from London 2012, I still meet athletes who talk about that moment as the moment that changed their lives forever: when they were inspired, when they saw something, and when they thought, “I can do that.” That is why major events matter. They bring world-leading athletes and competitors to our shores. They show children across the country where ambition and talent can lead them. Perhaps not all of those children will go on to be the Mo Farahs and Jess Ennises of their generation, but they will, because of the power of sport, go on to live richer, larger lives.

If done right, these events leave lasting legacies, they help to fund grassroots projects and they break down the barriers to opportunity, and we should not be shy about saying that here in the UK, we are really, really good at delivering them. From the women’s rugby world cup, to the Commonwealth games in Glasgow, to the European athletics championships in Birmingham, time and again we have welcomed the best of the best and put on an incredible show.

Our Government are not going to stop there. Over the next few years, we will host the 2028 Euros and the Tour de France grand départ, but I want us to go further, I want us to be bolder and I want us to be bigger. I want us to harness the power of major events, to build social cohesion, bring people together, spread opportunity and deliver long-lasting change to communities whose contribution has not been seen or valued for far too long.

Alongside our bid for the FIFA 2035 women’s world cup, I am delighted that we have submitted a bid to host the world athletics championships in 2029. We are also clear that this Government would love to see the Ryder cup return to the UK, and we are continuing to explore at pace a bid for an Olympic and Paralympic games in the north of England for the first time.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

I am the MP for Rushcliffe, where we have Nottingham Forest’s City Ground and Trent Bridge, the world-renowned cricket venue. We also have the National Water Sports Centre, which is one of three locations in England with a 2 km rowing lake, but it has lacked investment over many years. For us to be able to bid for a northern Olympics, we are likely to need that type of venue to be within our collective offer, so will the Secretary of State meet me and the Mayor of the East Midlands, Claire Ward, to look at the investment that needs to go into that site via UK Sport?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I would be very happy to offer my hon. Friend a meeting with the relevant Minister and officials to discuss that specific site. He is absolutely right to say this is precisely the reason that this Government believe in major events: because of the lasting legacy they have for our country and our communities. As we go on to explore the Olympic bid in the north of England, we are really clear that with that has to come the world-class infrastructure that we deserve, which includes not just sporting infrastructure but transport infrastructure as well.

If we are successful in our bids to host those events, I give my commitment that we will use every one of them to their full potential, not just to drive growth but to deliver change and to enrich people’s lives. We will learn from exceptional mayors like Steve Rotheram, who has not only launched a major events strategy to showcase Liverpool, but is deliberately anchoring major events and urban regeneration in some of the historically most deprived neighbourhoods in his city region.

I want major events not only to inspire and light up the world but to be a powerful lever for change in areas that have been neglected for far too long. But to do that, we need to ensure that we are in the best possible position to tap into the opportunities that exist, and that is what the Bill is for and what it will achieve. The Bill will provide a framework for delivering major events, sending a clear message to event organisers across the world that the UK is serious about being a world leader in major sporting events.

As well as providing important commercial protections, the Bill will tackle ticket touting for qualifying events, complementing the Government’s broader legislation on secondary ticketing. For too long, fans have been locked out, priced out and ripped off. Under the provisions set out in the Bill, event organisers will maintain control of ticket distribution, helping more people to access tickets at face value, and protect against price gouging, which has harmed sporting events for too long.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for the points she is making about ticket touting. I have the good fortune this Saturday to be travelling with the Crystal Palace faithful to Craven Cottage in search of our first three points of the season. I paid £30 for my ticket—as a Crystal Palace season ticket holder; even a cursory glance on the internet shows me that the equivalent tickets are on sale for £130, £140 and £150. It is totally wrong that this practice continues; is it not right that the Government are seeking to tackle and clamp down on the issue?

[Lisa Nandy]

This is a matter that commands support across the whole House. I think we all believe that these events—whether football or live music—belong to the fans, and that it is completely unacceptable that touting has been allowed to happen in plain sight for too long. Let me take a moment to reassure the House on this point. Members will know that the Government introduced draft legislation in this session; we did so to ensure that the legislation was watertight, robust and would work, and that it was subject to the full scrutiny of both Houses. We do not intend to delay that legislation. The Prime Minister feels particularly passionate about this issue, and we will give the legislation the priority it deserves.

[Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)]

It is great that sport is going to be protected from the ticket touts, but as the Secretary of State said, all that music and live entertainment is getting is a draft Bill, which seems very much like a delaying tactic—putting it in the long grass. Will she give a guarantee that we will see that Bill, and that it will be introduced over this next Session of Parliament?

[Lisa Nandy]

It is my intention that we introduce the Bill as soon as possible, and we may be in a position to do better than the hon. Gentleman suggests. I will update the House shortly, but I have heard the strength of feeling on all sides of the House about this issue and I share it. The Government intend to treat this piece of legislation as a priority to ensure that we get it on to the statute book without delay.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State is being incredibly generous in giving way. She is right to pay tribute to the spirit of the 2012 Olympic games. I was a teenager at the time, I am afraid to say, and it changed my life; being able to go to some of those events was transformative. It did not turn me into a world-class athlete, it has to be said, but it nevertheless gave me a sense of pride in my country.

I share the Secretary of State’s ambition for us to bid for future events—hopefully future football world cups as well as future Olympics. However, the Secretary of State will also know that many were concerned by some of the scenes at the world cup this summer—not on the pitch, but in relation to ticket sales and the high price of tickets. Can she assure the House that, if this Government bid for events, we will always prioritise making them as accessible as possible as part of those bids?

[Lisa Nandy]

I hope I can reassure my hon. Friend on that. We have the immense privilege of hosting the Euros in 2028, and I have been pleased to work alongside the various sporting bodies, which have given an assurance that they will not be using dynamic ticket pricing for that event. We will always do everything we can to ensure that football remains for its fans. He will know that one of the first things the Minister for Sport and I did was to introduce the Football Governance Act 2025 in order to protect football clubs from owners who prey on them. We will not hesitate to pull every lever we can to put fans first. I thank my hon. Friend for his advocacy on behalf of fans in his constituency; they will really appreciate it.

This Bill will also introduce provision to manage transport and traffic in relation to a sporting event in England, as well as bespoke funding powers for events in either England, Scotland or Northern Ireland. That will remove the current piecemeal reliance on powers from across multiple other Acts and enable us to fund related activities beyond the sporting event itself.

Finally, I want to touch on the issue of including domestic events in the Bill’s provisions—a concern regularly raised in the other place. I reassure the House that we have heard those concerns loud and clear. We recognise that there is a real opportunity here for some of our incredible domestic events. We will therefore seek to address that issue throughout the passage of the Bill, and I look forward to working with Members from across the House to achieve that.

The Bill is a clear signal that this Government are serious about major events and about harnessing the power of sport and culture to change our country, and the lives of the people in it, for the better. Driven by a new enhanced Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, Britain will rebuild its sense of self-confidence and go out to deliver extraordinary major sporting events that light up not just our towns, villages and cites, but the world. This Bill is about ensuring that we are ready for those global moments, and that when the world comes calling, this country will stand ready. For that reason, I commend it to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)]

I refer hon. Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.

I have particularly enjoyed today’s reminiscing about London 2012. I remember Super Saturday very well, because I was watching the beach volleyball, which was just up the road, of course, at Horse Guards Parade. I think that was the third time I went to the beach volleyball—for some reason that attracted me quite a lot—and there were a lot of good events going on. Unlike the hon. Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow), though, I was very much not a teenager at the time.

I will take this opportunity to reiterate something I said this morning by welcoming the shadow Secretary of State to her role. This is an incredibly broad, fascinating, but also daunting brief—I think anybody who has been involved in DCMS recognises that—but she will enjoy it, and I wish her the very best of luck. If there is any way that I can support her, she will always have my support.

I would also like to thank my former team: my hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French), who is on the Front Bench right now, my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson) and Lord Parkinson. I also thank the broader team, who did such a good job at supporting me and, most importantly, the sectors.

I can see already that there will be a good working relationship between Opposition and Government. In those areas where party politics is not relevant—that is often the case in DCMS matters—that relationship is important. It is not always seen in the Chamber—it is often seen at events or in the corridors—but it is important that there is that dynamic.

I am not going to lay it on too thick, though. I am not going to say that I will ever vote for the Secretary of State or the Minister, but I think that the most important thing to recognise is that Members can be opponents while also being civil to each other, decent and, quite frankly, nice people. People do not always see that in this place. Politics is politics—there will always be areas of disagreement—but a constructive relationship where a constructive relationship is required is vital for British democracy, and long may that continue. I do empathise with the Minister, by the way. I have been there, so I know about the constant disagreements and challenges when it comes to asking the Treasury for money.

Let me stick to the key theme here of co-operation. I support this Bill. The tone today has obviously been one of general co-operation, for the very reasons that many colleagues have already articulated. The UK, rightfully, has a world-renowned global reputation for doing these kinds of international sporting events not only well but superbly well. We are all committed to delivering international sporting events, and we need even more opportunities to do so, because they do create genuine lasting legacies and inspire the next generation of talent. Sport interest, engagement and participation can have a really positive impact on the nation’s wellbeing by inspiring a more active and healthier nation.

It can also lead the way on inclusivity. Think of the amazing achievements in the integrated Commonwealth games, where able-bodied and para-athlete events are held alongside each other. Britain has a proud reputation for not only investing in para-sport and sponsoring para-athletes but broadcasting it on key channels at peak times—something I will come on to again shortly.

Hosting major international sporting events makes huge economic sense for UK plc, as several Members have mentioned today. When done well, they can be profitable, and the multiplier impact on spend, travel, and hospitality venues such as pubs, bars, restaurants and hotels—of course from both domestic and international visitors—can be absolutely huge. We must remember that inbound visitor spend is export revenue. Every year, over a million people come to the UK primarily to watch a premier league game, generating over a billion pounds for the UK economy. That is export revenue, so this Bill is not trivial.

With Government support, we already have major events secured, including the Euros in 2028 as well as the Fifa women’s world cup in 2035. When I say Government support, it is important to recognise that I mean multiple Governments, because the nature of the extraordinarily long bidding process timelines often meant that not only do the Government have to commit to them but the Opposition have to commit to them as well. Those who are holding the events that we are bidding into often want to see cross-party support, because there could be a different Government by the time of the next event. I am certainly hoping that that will be the case.

[Lisa Nandy]

Never!

[Nigel Huddleston]

Perhaps then we can turn the tables and see Conservatives benefit from Labour’s hard work, rather than the other way around.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)]

1. What steps her Department is taking to improve the regulation of short-term lets.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

Can I associate myself with your kind words, Mr Speaker, about the legend that is Sir Billy Boston? It was also a real pleasure to hear you say the word “Wigan” in the context of rugby league without choking.

This Government are committed to implementing the regulation of short-term lets. We believe in our communities and in their right to shape their own areas. This regulation is about putting power back into people’s hands so that they can shape the right balance between the benefits that tourism brings and the needs of people locally for decent housing.

[Joe Powell]

Over the summer, the abuse of short-term lets in my community has continued with breaches of lease, antisocial behaviour, subletting of private rented properties and social housing, and even short-term lets hosting brothels. We still do not have a way of identifying where these lets are so that enforcement action can be taken, nor do we have a way of implementing London’s 90-day cap on lets, so will the Secretary of State please do all she can to make it a priority to tackle these serious harms? Can she tell us when the register will go live, and will she work with those of us affected and local councils so that we can find solutions for our communities?

[Lisa Nandy]

I assure my hon. Friend that we certainly will. The problem that he points to is a problem across the country. I recognise it in my own constituency of Wigan, where the council has taken decisive action to clamp down on houses in multiple occupation. What we have seen instead is short-term lets springing up to get around the ban, which is causing havoc in local communities. I can reassure my hon. Friend that in his first week in the job the Prime Minister asked me to accelerate this work, and that work is now continuing apace. In any case, the register will be up and running in full by March.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

In rural areas such as Glastonbury and Somerton, the growing number of short-term lets is displacing local families and workers from the rented sector, hollowing out our rural communities. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to make sure that any new regulation protects rural rented stock from being removed from the market?

[Lisa Nandy]

That is precisely why we are bringing forward the measure to introduce a register of short-term lets. We believe that local leaders need to be able to understand what is happening in their local areas and to shape that in order to have the benefits of tourism. Some areas may want to have more short-term lets available to support the tourism industry, but there are other areas, including in the hon. Lady’s constituency, where there is a real need for local housing for local people, and local leaders should have the power to provide that.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

2. What steps she is taking to help make sports more accessible for poorer families.

--- Later in debate ---

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

4. What recent assessment she has made of the potential impact of frontier AI on society.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

I point the hon. Gentleman to the recent report from the AI Safety Institute in December, which showed that AI’s role in social interaction, online harms, cyber-security and the workplace is increasing. We are taking the risks of AI as seriously as we take the opportunities, working closely with colleagues in the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade and the Cabinet Office. We are clear as a Government that companies cannot be allowed to mark their own homework.

[Shockat Adam]

I welcome the response from the Secretary of State. The company OpenAI has just created a program called Astra, which, in its own words, is the most dangerous program it has ever created because it can hack other programs autonomously. That follows other AI programs unleashing themselves from their own security system and hacking other programs simply because they can—because they speak a language that only they seem to understand. AI is inevitably our future, but with the Government handing over NHS contracts and our public service records to big American AI companies, what is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that we are kept safe in this dangerous world?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman is right to point to the fact that as frontier AI develops, it poses new challenges and new risks, not just in the area of hacking but by creating confusion about legal liability, safeguards and who is responsible. There is a clear role for Government, and we are working hard to make sure that we meet those expectations.

[Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

My Select Committee’s report “Science diplomacy: Sovereignty, strategy and the global race” highlighted the risk of the UK being cut off from frontier AI models at the whim of other countries—one country in particular comes to mind. What assessment has the Secretary of State made of the impact on the UK’s society and economy if we were unable to access those models?

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend is right to point to the UK’s need for sovereign capability in AI. I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall), whose work I have inherited in this area. I also thank my hon. Friend for the contribution of the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee over a long period of time. We are taking the need to deal with the exposure of the UK very seriously, and I would be happy to meet her to discuss that further.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

Frontier AI is supercharging misinformation online, but we still cannot get to grips with harms much closer to home. There are campaigners in the Public Gallery today, including Tulisa Contostavlos, who was the target of a fabricated story following an undercover tabloid sting, and is proof of the damage that an unregulated press can do. Such examples are why the Lib Dems want the full implementation of Leveson 1 and the commissioning of Leveson 2. Will the Secretary of State meet me and Tulisa to discuss finally getting proper regulation of the press?

[Lisa Nandy]

I would be delighted to offer the hon. Lady that meeting. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to Tulisa, whom I have admired for many years for the way in which she has taken such a dreadful experience and used it to help others. Mr Speaker, can I also take this moment to acknowledge the absolutely tragic death of Professor Jason Arday, which happened since the House last met? There is an ongoing inquest and an ongoing investigation by the University of Cambridge. While the Government would not wish to undermine in any sense those ongoing inquiries, I want to reassure the House, and the many families who have been affected by the sort of practices that the hon. Lady references over many years, that we are not neutral when it comes to protecting our citizens.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

It helps if you get up to say the question number, Dr Opher.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

I will get up, Mr Speaker. I thank my hon. Friend for his long-standing work on this—[Laughter.] Let me start again!

I thank my hon. Friend for his intense work on this issue. The Minister for sport will be delighted to meet him. However, my hon. Friend will know that lidos are a personal passion for me, and reversing the neglect of these much-loved community assets is something that this Government intend to make a priority. We will be in a position to say more about that shortly, but in the meantime I pay tribute to him and to my hon. Friends the Members for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) and for Bournemouth West (Jessica Toale) for their campaign to ensure that lidos have their proper place in British public life.

[Dr Opher]

In Stroud I celebrated the reopening of our lido by making a splash, jumping in fully clothed next to a woman dressed as a lobster. I want to thank Save Stroud Lido, the Friends of Stratford Park Lido and the whole community for working to reopen the lido. As the Secretary of State knows, most of our lidos were built in the 1930s and are in financial difficulty, so I really look forward to meeting the Minister and maybe establishing a lido fund to support our lidos nationally.

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend makes a very compelling case. While I do not wish to pre-empt any imminent announcement, I will just say that the Government really recognise the need to support communities with the funding pressures that lidos face, including energy costs, and we will have more to say about that shortly.

[Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)]

There is a very passionate group of people in Winchester who have long campaigned for a lido to be built in the old leisure centre, and they are very excited that one of the proposals for the old leisure centre is a lido. Could the Minister explain what support is available for such facilities, which get people outside, exercising and being part of the community, which is good for physical and mental health?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman will have heard the Minister for sport talk about the £400 million that we are putting into grassroots sports facilities, and he will also have heard my answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) about a forthcoming announcement that we are planning to make specifically around lidos. I congratulate the hon. Gentleman’s community on defending, supporting and championing not just leisure facilities but lidos in particular. Most of the lidos in this country exist because of people like his constituents, who care for them and have supported them to stay open for many years. I would be very happy to visit and meet them at some point—but only on the condition that there is a woman dressed as a lobster as part of the event.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

8. What steps her Department is taking to support the tourism industry.

--- Later in debate ---

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

Let me start by recognising the extraordinary British sportsmen and women who lit up the world this summer. I also put on record what an honour it is to return to this place with a newly created Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) for the extraordinary work she did in a very short period, opening up opportunities for young people to benefit from the technological developments of the future, and taking decisive action on social media. I also thank the hon. Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston) for the constructive way he has both challenged and supported us as a Front-Bench team since the general election, always acting in the interests of the sectors that we both care passionately about. I welcome the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) to her place, and I am very much looking forward to working with her.

Finally, I wish to pay tribute to the rugby league legend Sir Billy Boston, and to his incredible wife, Lady Joan, who sadly passed away a few weeks before Sir Billy. Billy was a sporting giant. His talent, determination and legacy will inspire generations for years to come. It was a privilege to work with you, Mr Speaker, following your campaign over many years to right a historic wrong and to ensure that he became the first ever knight of rugby league. Rest in peace, Sir Billy Boston.

[Adam Thompson]

Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick recently said that its business is now well over 90% digitally distributed. Take-Two has confirmed that the physical box of “Grand Theft Auto VI” will not contain a physical disc, but will instead contain a download code. Killing physical media prevents consumers trading in or sharing their games, and it erodes the concept of true ownership of a product. What is the Secretary of State doing to support the physical ownership of video games, as well as music and film?

[Lisa Nandy]

The Minister of State, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) has just reminded me that he and I are so old that we started out loading cassette tapes when we played video games as kids. I am aware that people feel very strongly about this issue. My hon. Friend will know that decisions around media formats are ultimately for companies, but we as a Government believe that companies should always be clear with customers about what they are paying for. That is why we have commissioned the Chartered Trading Standards Institute to develop guidance that will clarify people’s ownership rights when they purchase digital games, music and films.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her warm words. I am looking forward to working constructively with her and her team.

May I begin by paying tribute to PC Matthew Blades and PC Tom Clough, who were killed in a horrific head-on collision on the A66 last month? The car that collided with them was travelling in the wrong direction. My thoughts are with their families and friends at this terrible, terrible time. Their deaths have renewed concern about videos on TikTok and other platforms that glorify dangerous driving and police chases. The behaviour these videos encourage can have fatal consequences. We know the Government recently raised this issue with social media companies, yet the content remains up. What more will the Minister and the Secretary of State do to ensure that TikTok and other platforms crack down on that before more lives are lost?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right, first of all, to pay tribute to those incredible police officers who lost their lives. May I associate myself with her remarks and put on record my sadness, love and sympathy to their families and loved ones? I agree with her that there is more that must be done to tackle what is becoming an epidemic in young people in particular using social media to encourage dangerous behaviour. I have a meeting set up with TikTok in the coming days. We have obviously been in close discussion with it and other social media companies since that tragic, appalling incident, but there is more that we as a Government intend to do and I would be very happy to meet her to discuss that further.

[Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)]

T3. Nearly 60 years ago, a Labour Government designated Milton Keynes a new town. Today, we are one of the fastest growing cities in the United Kingdom. Millions are also drawn to attractions such as Bletchley Park, the MK Gallery and our international festival. I cannot think of a better candidate to be the UK city of culture. Does the Minister agree with me that culture and economic growth go hand in hand? Will she meet me and my Milton Keynes colleagues to discuss the merits of our bid?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

T6. As we saw during the world cup, football is fundamental to our national identity. Football fans are having to pay almost £700 to follow their club in this season’s premier league, so does the Secretary of State agree that we need to have more free-to-air sport, not less?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Member will know from previous discussions we have had in this place that there is a balance to be struck between making sure we get the right level of investment in sport and making sure those sports are opened up to the widest possible audience. That is a conversation that we continue to have. There is another element to this, which is the cost of tickets, and this Government are taking action on secondary ticket touts, which I know the hon. Member’s party strongly supports. Later today, we will have the pleasure of introducing the Sporting Events Bill to this place. Through that Bill, we are taking action to make sure ticket prices remain affordable and that those practices are stamped out when it comes to sporting events.

[Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)]

T7.   Football is not the private property of Gianni Infantino or a handful of rich and powerful men; it belongs to the billions of people who watch it, play it and enjoy it. Given that UEFA is proposing to make a criminal complaint about the conduct of FIFA’s leadership, will the Minister join me and others in calling for a genuinely independent investigation into FIFA’s decision to try to sell off the world cup?

[Lisa Nandy]

I absolutely, 100% agree with my hon. Friend that football belongs to its fans. For far too long, fans have been treated as at best an afterthought and at worst a nuisance when it comes to the future of their own clubs, their own tournaments and their own game. As a Government, we are appalled by what happened recently regarding the world cup, and the Prime Minister has been crystal clear that it is time for a change of leadership at FIFA.

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

T8. An ever-growing list of charities have faced serious allegations of peddling extremism and even funding terrorism. Despite lengthy Charity Commission investigations, most of them continue to operate, such as the Iranian regime-linked Islamic Centre of England, which is reportedly sponsoring visas for people to enter the UK. It is painfully clear that the Charity Commission lacks sufficient powers to shut down these offending charities, yet the Government have wasted six months since first acknowledging this clear and immediate threat. Will the Secretary of State confirm when those powers will be granted?

Government Plan for Music

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Monday 13th July 2026 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

Music is the shared language that connects us. It crosses boundaries, bridges divides and helps us understand one another. In a time when it feels too many of us have lost the ability to understand one another, music matters more than ever.

It is woven into the fabric of our national life. In the UK, a live gig or concert takes place every 137 seconds. It accompanies our celebrations and our sorrows, marks our milestones and brings people together.

We are rightly proud that the UK is one of the world’s three largest exporters of music producing artists who light up the world. Music is not simply one of our greatest success stories; it matters deeply to who we are as a nation. That is why, today, we are publishing “Turn It Up: Our plan for music”: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/turn-it-up-our-plan-for-music

But music’s value cannot be measured only by chart success or export figures. It is a civic space—as important as any high street or town hall—where communities come together, where young people discover confidence and creativity, and where new ideas flourish. When someone is excluded from a life animated by music, we all lose. Our culture is poorer, our communities are weaker, and we miss the talent that might otherwise have enriched so many lives.

That is why this plan is rooted in one simple principle: music belongs to everyone. It is broad and inclusive. It should never be the preserve of those whose parents can afford lessons or instruments. Every child deserves the chance to experience the richer, larger life that music can bring.

Nowhere is that more important than for children in care. We are their corporate parents and we should be as ambitious for them as every parent is for their child. Like sport, art, dance and drama, music can be the lifeline that sustains them at the most difficult moments of their lives. We owe it to them to ensure those opportunities are not the exception but the expectation.

We celebrate the artists who represent Britain on the world stage: Ed Sheeran, Adele, Harry Styles, Stormzy, Dua Lipa and so many others. But great artists do not emerge by accident. No man—or woman—is an island. The success of every great artist rests on the support of someone who believed in them—a teacher, a parent, another artist or a friend—great venues, communities who back them, audiences who care.

Every headline act started somewhere, often in the grassroots music venues where they learned their craft. Yet those foundations have come under increasing pressure. In the last decade, creativity has too often been pushed out of classrooms and communities. The number of young people taking arts subjects at GCSE has fallen dramatically. Grassroots venues have struggled to survive, leaving too many towns and cities without the places where musicians develop their skills and audiences discover something new.

As Paul Simon once sang,

“every generation throws a hero up the pop charts”.

But pop is getting posher, and that must change. We are not short of talent, but while talent is everywhere, opportunity is not. So after a decade when culture and creativity were erased from the classroom and the community, we have wasted no time putting music back at the heart of the curriculum, investing in creative careers and rebuilding opportunities for young people in every part of the country.

Through this Government’s new programme, Every Child Can, we will stop at nothing to ensure that every child can find their spark through new measures such as turning our incredible network of libraries into music lending libraries and a creative mentoring programme for children in care. We are strengthening the ecosystem that supports talent from schools to grassroots venues and from rehearsal rooms to recording studios because success depends on every part of that journey.

Thriving music depends on thriving places. These places and spaces are, for us, an integral part of our civic inheritance that should be protected, nurtured and defended. In my town, Wigan, that gave us brass bands, northern soul and The Verve, almost all the venues that bands cut their teeth in have disappeared. This cannot be right. We were the first Government to back a voluntary grassroots levy to support our venues, but we will do more, whether it is defending our venues against noise complaints or reforming the system so more money flows to the grassroots.

To everyone who makes music happen—this Government are on your side. And to the fans who make the UK music scene the best in the world, this plan is for you. We will stamp out ticket touts who are causing misery in the industry and we will always have your back.

Because when everyone has the chance to make, perform and enjoy music, we do more than create great artists. We build stronger communities, broaden opportunity, strengthen our national story and ensure that Britain’s music continues to light up the world for generations to come.

[HCWS227]

National Lottery Good Causes

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

Today the Government are announcing a major call for evidence on national lottery good causes funding: “National Lottery Good Causes: Fund What Matters To You”. When John Major launched the national lottery in 1994 he promised that the new lottery would give

“anyone who has ever burned with the desire to change the face of their town, their village or the whole country a chance to do so.”

Since then, our national lottery has provided more than £53 billion across arts and culture, sport, heritage, and charity. Around 70% of adults in the UK now play the lottery in one form or another, every single year. Funded by the millions of ordinary people who take part every week, the national lottery is not just public money, it is literally the public’s money.



However, not since the brilliant Tessa Jowell in 2002 has anyone asked if we are spending the public’s money the way they actually want it to be spent.

Today’s call for evidence asks precisely that question, and for the first time in decades, brings the public back into the conversation after two decades—and puts people in the driving seat. They will write the next chapter in the story of the national lottery and of our country.

The national lottery has delivered some incredible things. Without it the Lowry would not exist, the People’s History Museum would not be able to thrive and our country would not have won so many record-breaking Olympic gold medals.

Instead, it is about being honest that the model—which sits largely unchanged from its launch over 30 years ago—is showing its age. It is rooted in a different era. Too often decisions are top-down, remote and made in distant rooms hundreds of miles away from the communities who know their needs and ambitions best.

Funding is concentrated in London and the south-east and is weighted to reflect populations, rendering too many towns and villages invisible to decision makers.

The majority of funding is spent on large grants to the detriment of smaller, community-led organisations. Smaller organisations face significant barriers—administrative burdens, digital exclusion and capacity constraints. The system favours those who have the ability to write grants that meet the needs of the system, rather than the system bending to the needs of communities.

It is time to address this and put the national lottery back in the service of all of our people and all of our communities.

As a consequence, our call for evidence will be guided by three simple principles.

First, this funding belongs to the public. The billions that the national lottery invests—£33 million a week—must reflect the modern priorities of the British people—in all communities.

Secondly, decisions must be made by the public. It is time to trust the people who know their streets, their community spaces, and their heritage best.

Thirdly, community ambition should not be met with red tape. We are determined to strip away the bureaucracy that acts as a barrier to community investment, making it easier for grassroots groups to access the funding they need.

We are also clear that this review will not tamper with the principle of additionality.



Heritage, arts, sport and culture belong to us all and it is for the people to determine what that is and what they treasure. They must be the authors of the story we tell ourselves about ourselves as a nation.

That principle will continue to be fiercely advocated by this Labour Government and we will not allow the national lottery to be used to plug day-to-day funding pressures.

Instead, we will equip it for the future, so that every time a player purchases a ticket and chooses their numbers, they will know that their money will go directly towards changing the face of their town, village, or city and living up to the ideal set out by John Major more than three decades ago.

The Government’s call for evidence can be found on www.gov.uk and we invite everyone to share their views on the future of good cause funding over the next 12 weeks.

[HCWS169]

Paramount-WBD Merger: Public Interest Considerations

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

On 27 February 2026 Paramount announced it would acquire Warner Bros Discovery for $110 billion—£83 billion.

Under the Enterprise Act 2002, I can intervene if I have reasonable grounds to suspect that arrangements are in contemplation which, if carried into effect, will result in the creation of a relevant merger situation and I believe that one or more public interest considerations under the Act may be relevant.

Following engagement with the parties and independent research, my Department has today written to the current and proposed owners of Warner Bros Discovery on my behalf to inform them that I am minded to intervene on the following public interest grounds:

The need for, to the extent that it is reasonable and practicable, a sufficient plurality of views in news media in each market for news media in the United Kingdom or a part of the United Kingdom.

The need, in relation to every different audience in the United Kingdom, or in a particular area or locality of the United Kingdom, for there to be a sufficient plurality of persons with control of the media enterprises, or the enterprises providing on-demand programme services or both, serving that audience.

I am conscious that the proposed acquisition is global in nature. In reaching this decision, my focus has been, and will remain, on the UK public interest and the range of services available to UK audiences, including Channel 5, TNT Sports, Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon, and CNN International, as well as Paramount+ and HBO Max.

The public interest consideration regarding plurality of persons with control of media enterprises, or enterprises providing on-demand programme services, is not currently specified in section 58 of the Act. However, under section 42 of the Act, I may specify a new public interest consideration for Ofcom to consider in relation to the merger, if I consider it ought to be specified in section 58. As the legislation was drafted at a time when viewing was largely via broadcast linear channels, it does not cover the effect of a merger on streaming or video-on-demand services. I believe this ought to be able to be considered in relation to this and all future media mergers given the role on-demand viewing now plays in the market. If I decide to intervene in this merger on that basis, I will bring forward secondary legislation to finalise this public interest consideration as the Enterprise Act requires me to do.

The letters to the parties, and other relevant updates, will be published on gov.uk.

It is important to note that I have not taken a final decision on intervention at this stage. The “minded to” letter invites further representations in writing from the parties and gives them until 6 July to respond.

If I decide to issue an intervention notice, the next stage would be for Ofcom to assess and report to me on the public interest considerations, and for the Competition and Markets Authority to assess and report to me on whether a relevant merger situation has been created, and any impact this may have on competition.

Following these reports, I would need to decide whether to refer the matter for a more detailed investigation by the CMA under section 45 of the Act. I am mindful of the need to reach a final decision in a timely manner, and I will endeavour to do so as appropriate.

I will update Parliament on my final decision at the earliest opportunity.

[HCWS162]

Media Green Paper

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a statement on the publication of the media Green Paper.

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for bringing this urgent question to the House and giving us an opportunity to discuss this important advancement. Yesterday the Government published a Green Paper, “Watch this Space”, to set a new strategic direction for media policy in the UK. The way we consume broadcast media is changing, and television is undergoing a profound transformation, having moved away from a system of traditional channels to a far more fragmented system in which people access TV on demand and on video-sharing platforms. Young people, in particular, are far more likely to access media on their phones and tablets through streaming services and platforms, and the Government believe that we are not adequately equipping that generation with access to high-quality media.

There are three key areas where we intend to act. The first is digital prominence, where we are exploring legislative options to require social media platforms and connected TV interfaces to make public service media content, particularly trusted news, highly visible and easy to discover. This is not about promoting Government narratives or only the BBC; it is about ensuring that brilliant journalism from many of our news publishers—both local and national—and broadcasters can get in front of the public. For that reason, we are also opening a conversation about how we define “public service broadcasting” in the modern age.

Secondly, the transition to internet TV is where we are outlining plans for a managed shift away from terrestrial broadcasting to internet-delivered IPTV. We know this is an essential switchover in terms of both access and cost, but we want to ensure that the transition is managed responsibly and that nobody is left behind. We are therefore consulting on two dates for the switchover: 2034, when current licences expire, or 2044, with any date contingent on a full and watertight transition plan.

Finally, we are protecting major sporting events. We will add on-demand and streaming rights for major sporting events such as the world cup and the Olympics to the listed events regime, protecting free universal fan access as viewing habits shift online.

Taken together, these proposals set out a vision for a future TV and media policy in which everyone can access world-leading public service broadcasting content, including children’s and news programming, away from the misinformation and disinformation that has defined too many of our online lives. This Government will ensure that no matter where people access their TV, they are given access to high-quality programming that informs, educates and entertains, and this Green Paper is the next stage of our ambition.

[Nigel Huddleston]

Thank you for granting this urgent question, Mr Speaker. I agree with much of what the Secretary of State has said, and there is much to be applauded in the media strategy. The overall intent, which is to ensure that everyone has access to trustworthy news and to counter misinformation, is noble. The challenge and its potential danger is how we do that.

Of the positive elements that the Secretary of State mentioned in the strategy, I welcome the Government’s intention to add on-demand rights to the free-to-air listed sports regime, but there are many controversial aspects. As she said, the plan to close down digital terrestrial transmission by 2034 or 2044 is a major concern, especially for those living in remote or rural areas. The strategy also covers interventions to support media literacy and promoting the questioning of the accuracy of news, but pushing such an onus of responsibility on to the media companies themselves may reduce the responsibility on schools or, indeed, parents. What are her thoughts on that?

We then come to the thorny issue of prominence. The Government are proposing interventions to make trustworthy news providers easily discoverable to counter misinformation, and that includes national and local news publishers and broadcasters, but who decides who is a trustworthy news provider and what trusted content is? Will there be an approved list, or will it be an algorithm or a human being? We need to be careful about descending into some kind of Orwellian society. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are vital to our free society, and the concern of some of the press is that, to qualify for prominence, a newspaper may need to sign up to a state-backed regulator. Can the Secretary of State rule that out?

The proposals in the Green Paper to support our public service broadcasters such as the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 are well intended, especially in an age when there is undeniably so much misinformation online, but a requirement for third-party platforms and social media entities to make such broadcasters’ content prominent is problematic for the obvious reason that their content is not always to be trusted and is not always unbiased either, so who decides whether it is? Many people question the BBC’s coverage of politics in general, of trans rights, of Israel and so on. The BBC doctored a video of President Trump, it fails to call Hamas a terrorist organisation, it has pushed highly questionable content through BBC Arabic and it reprimanded a newsreader for saying “pregnant women” rather than “pregnant people”. There may be plenty of people who like the idea of legislation to push woke or leftie content online, but I am not one of them, and many people agree with me. Can the Secretary of State provide more details about how trusted content will be defined and who will ultimately be the arbiter?

Finally, can the Secretary of State confirm how extensively she has engaged with the industry to come up with these proposals?

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that series of questions, and I will do my best to answer them all as swiftly as I can. First, he rightly talks about the importance of getting the transition right and choosing the date of 2034 or 2044 well. He talks about the particular challenges in remote and rural areas, which this Government recognise. As he knows and as we have discussed before, there are also particular issues for older people, people with disabilities and others. We are working with the industry to put together a watertight plan to help people make that transition and ensure that nobody is left behind. We are asking these questions now precisely to make sure that we are ready and do not leave people behind.

On media literacy, the hon. Gentleman is right to say that the onus cannot just be on media companies alone. There is a responsibility on all of us, including schools and those of us in public life, to make sure we are equipping our young people with the skills they need to be able to navigate a completely transformed media landscape from the one we had in this country when he and I were growing up. I want to reassure him that this is not about pushing all the responsibility on to media companies and letting everybody else off the hook. We all have to work together to achieve this. It is not just about young people, either. There are serious challenges with people from every generation seeing information online that is just simply false.

Who defines trustworthy news—who decides what is trustworthy news and how we decide what is trustworthy—is one of the most challenging aspects of the consultation. The hon. Gentleman will know that the definition of public service broadcasting is set out in law, but trustworthy news is a separate matter and that is precisely why we have asked the question.

I would gently push back on some of the narrative that the hon. Gentleman advanced about the BBC. It is still the most trustworthy source of news not just in this country but across the world. On Monday, I was on “Newsround” explaining the consultation and the social media ban that we are introducing to the generation of children who will be most affected by it. It strikes me that there is no other country in the world that has quality programming like that through their public service broadcaster, so I think we should be careful about not trashing the BBC. He and I have shared serious frustrations about some of the specific issues that he mentioned, and we should always demand the highest quality content, but I still firmly believe that the BBC is one of the best broadcasters in the world.

[Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)]

I welcome this bold Green Paper, which refers to:

“access to, accurate news, and informative and entertaining content that reflects the diversity of the UK and brings audiences together.”

Will my right hon. Friend do all she can to uphold the practice of independent, rigorously researched journalism in this world of algorithmically driven clickbait content that monetises hate? Given the record fines it has had from Ofcom, is there any way of reining in GB News—and maybe even looking at the effectiveness of Ofcom?

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend asks a number of questions and I will try to address them. First, in the Green Paper we have deliberately broadened out access to good quality trusted news and content to potentially include print media as well. It is not lost on me that during the Southport riots people were seeking out the Liverpool Echo and other local news outlets to try to find real information, as opposed to the misinformation and disinformation they were seeing online. She will know that alongside that, one of the things the Government have done is publish the first ever local media strategy to try to support that industry to be able to continue to provide high-quality news.

My hon. Friend mentions algorithms. One reason we are particularly keen to ensure the prominence of quality, trusted and high-quality content online and on platforms such as YouTube is that at the moment the algorithms decide what children, in particular, see. I commend YouTube for its work on YouTube Kids, but we need to see more of that. At the moment, we are putting up with a situation where the older generation tends to watch traditional television on television sets and can easily find good-quality content and trusted news, but the younger generation tend to be on devices online and cannot do so. That is not acceptable.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

The Green Paper rightly recognises the severe financial challenges facing our public service broadcasters, which have been vividly exposed by recent devastating cuts at the BBC. The Liberal Democrats have long proposed that the BBC World Service should be fully funded directly from Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office budgets, protecting its vital global footprint while freeing up £221 million a year to be reinvested at home. Will the Secretary of State take on board our proposals? What urgent conversations has she had with her Foreign Office colleagues to make that a reality?

Turning to online spaces, the proposal to highlight trusted news sources on social media is welcome, but unfortunately this is just a sticking plaster over the fundamental issue that big social media platforms are already rigged against truth, fairness and impartiality. The real threat to our democracy are the harmful platforms themselves, which use algorithms deliberately engineered to amplify foreign disinformation while systematically choking out trusted journalistic sources. Should the Secretary of State not be focusing the full weight of her Department, and that of her colleagues in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, on cleaning up social media platforms once and for all, rather than fighting a losing battle against bad actors on systems that are built to work against us?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Lady rightly talks about online regulation. She will know that that is primarily the responsibility of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, but my colleague the Secretary of State and I work very closely together on that. We must ensure that we both take action to deal with the scourge of misinformation and disinformation online, which she rightly talks about, but that we give people access to news they can genuinely trust and that that news is much more readily available. The two things should be seen together.

I apologise, my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq) also asked me about Ofcom. She will know that we recently appointed a new chair of Ofcom. We believe that Ofcom must do more to act decisively and quickly in this space.

On the BBC World Service, the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine) will know that the Government have already stepped in, with the support of the FCDO, to ensure it continues to be funded, but colleagues across the House will have seen recently the funding cuts that were announced at the BBC.

The hon. Lady rightly says that one of the pressures on such broadcasters is the fact that they are currently trying to broadcast through two distinct channels, so it is important that the Government grip that issue. She will know that the charter review is running in parallel to this process. We wanted to look at it all in the round. It is our intention, through the charter review, to ensure that the BBC is adequately funded and that it goes on not just to survive, but to thrive until well into the latter part of this century. She will also know that we recently announced that through that process we will put the BBC on a permanent charter, so that it exists for all of us forever.

[Natasha Irons (Croydon East) (Lab)]

I declare an interest: I worked for a public service broadcaster and my husband still does. I say as somebody who understands the sector a bit that it is not just about public service but about recognising Britishness on our screens and in the media and, essentially, protecting what it is to be us, as well as providing opportunities for people to get into the sector. I really welcome the thinking on this issue, but can the Secretary of State give us a bit more detail on how the changes will ensure that our public service media are protected for the future, so that people can continue to access high-quality news and content in general, and are given opportunities?

[Lisa Nandy]

I strongly endorse what my hon. Friend says. We have lost many parts of our civic realm: thriving town centres where people come together, the social clubs that used to exist all over our country, and the youth clubs that we are busy rebuilding. I thank her for all her help and support. I believe that the media, and in particular public service media, are an essential part of that civic realm. Whether it is VE Day, Remembrance Sunday or the world cup which we are all currently enjoying, public service broadcasters provide the shared moments where we come together as a nation and celebrate what it means to be us. We are determined to grip these issues and not allow us to drift into a transition, so that our public service media are adequately funded and are able to continue to do that.

[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.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

Right now, Britain’s adversaries around the world are investing heavily in disinformation designed to disrupt democracies across the west; we are seeing the impact in this country as well. I welcome the regime set out to promote truthful content on social media, but promoting the good content is not the same as tackling the bad. I worry that there is quite a disparate approach across Government—across Ofcom, DCMS and the defending democracy taskforce. What will the Secretary of State do to pull together across Government to address disinformation and misinformation from hostile states around the world?

[Lisa Nandy]

I reassure my hon. Friend that I am working closely with the Secretary and State for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Home Secretary, as well as with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, who leads the social cohesion taskforce that is specifically looking at misinformation and disinformation, and at how we join up across Government to tackle the issue. We have recently had a huge debate in this House about the defence of our nation, and, given the global climate, we are rightly stepping up to invest more in defence, but there is a war being waged in our communities—on our streets, online, on social media—that we have got to take as seriously as we take equipping our armed forces with what they need.

[Damian Hinds (East Hampshire) (Con)]

This House ended the licensing of the press on 3 May 1695, when it declined to renew the relevant legislation. That makes the definition of news sources difficult. Perhaps that is why the Green Paper talks about prominence for public service media and “potentially” for local and national news sources. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is unthinkable to have a situation where we would be promoting BBC and Channel 4 news, but not our major national newspapers and trusted local news sources?

[Lisa Nandy]

That is precisely why we have asked the question. The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that there are different ways of approaching the issue. One is, quite simply, to promote public service broadcasters. We think we may be missing a trick there, which is why we have asked the question in the consultation.

[Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State’s dedication to trusted news and promoting public service media is really welcome, but I am sure she shares my concerns that this will be dramatically undermined by the recent announcements of brutal cuts at STV and the BBC, as thousands of jobs and programmes are at risk of being lost. Will she urgently intervene to project jobs and the future of public service media?

[Lisa Nandy]

The Government have been talking to the journalism trade unions to ensure that people are protected when those cuts are made, and that we do everything we can to protect that really good quality—not just the journalists, but the technical staff and others, particularly those across our nations and regions, who feel vulnerable to those cuts. The cuts at STV and the BBC are precisely why we need to manage the transition and get it right. We cannot duck the question of when we make the transition, because doing so places incredibly onerous costs on public service broadcasters in an already very tight funding landscape. As my hon. Friend will have heard me say to the hon. Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston), we are determined to manage the transition well and ensure that nobody is left behind.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

During a recent bombing of Tehran, a power outage hit that city and 20,000 bots promoting the cause of Scottish nationalism turned off instantaneously. I say that not to question in any way the legitimacy of a political position—admittedly one that I disagree with—but because it reveals the extent to which our country is under daily assault from those who would seek to tear us apart. What plans does the Secretary of State have to build out from this media Green Paper and take a whole-of-Government approach in order to enhance media literacy, to bear down on the conduits that are driving disinformation in our society, and to ensure that our armed forces and security services have precisely the resources they need to secure our integrity as a nation?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman asked a number of questions, and I strongly agree with the essence of what he is saying. There is a war being waged in our communities and on our streets, and on local online forums as much as on national ones. When the recent by-election in Makerfield was triggered, overnight the targeting of people in my town of Wigan with misinformation and disinformation went through the roof. That is often deliberate, it is often triggered by foreign state actors, it can have an extremely disruptive influence on communities, and it is something that we need to deal with. The Green Paper deals with questions of media literacy and prominence, and other measures that we think will help, but nobody in this House should take this as the beginning and end of the conversation. I am working closely with colleagues across the House—including in Defence—to make sure we are equipped on every front for the war that we find ourselves in.

[Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State will be aware that terrestrial television is not just an entertainment platform but a resilient form of communication that reaches into communities where digital, broadband or mobile signal quite simply do not have the reach or the reliability. Does she share my concern that the switch-off of terrestrial TV in either 2034 or 2044 could cut off communities in my constituency from that resilient communication platform, and will she meet me to discuss my concerns?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I am confident, having heard my hon. Friend championing his constituents in this House, that he would never allow that to happen, and neither will we. I am happy to offer him a meeting with the relevant Minister.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

On a similar theme, undoubtedly near the top of the Secretary of State’s to-do list today is to answer written question No. 11584, which is due for answer tomorrow. The question is about the threat posed by the BBC World Service apparently discontinuing its longwave transmitters at Droitwich, Burghead and Westerglen. What we want to know is: how will closed societies like Russia be able to receive news information when they are subject to the suppression of all the internet-based routes?

[Lisa Nandy]

I will, of course, ensure that the right hon. Member gets the answer to his written question in a timely fashion—by tomorrow. I am also more than happy to follow up and discuss it with him.

[Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)]

I welcome the Green Paper’s focus on media literacy, so that people in Portsmouth have the skills they need to identify misinformation and disinformation. As viewing habits change and technology develops, can the Secretary of State reassure the House and residents in Portsmouth, particularly those who may be less confident online and have limited access to digital services, that any transition towards internet-based television will be carefully managed?

[Lisa Nandy]

I am really happy to give my hon. Friend that assurance. That is why we are getting on the front foot now and working with industry to manage the transition. Access is obviously extremely important, but so too is affordability, and we are looking at that closely.

[Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)]

Let me get this straight: the Government—either a Minister or, worse, unaccountable civil servants—are planning to decide which news providers are deemed trustworthy and which are deemed untrustworthy; and then the Government, or unaccountable civil servants and quangos, are going to give priority to the services that they deem to be trustworthy, and reduce the prominence of those that they do not like and consider to be untrustworthy. That sounds quite dystopian to me. How can it be seen as anything other than a serious attack on freedom of the press and freedom of speech?

[Lisa Nandy]

I am not going to take any lessons from him and his disgusting party, given the way that they spread misinformation and disinformation. This House has already come together to define what “public service media” is in law. The definition was passed by Parliament, and I do not recall there being a lot of concern about that; it has been enormously beneficial. One way that we could define “trusted news” would be to follow that definition, but we could also, for example, align with the editors’ code of practice. There are lots of different options, but to somehow claim that this is about the Government controlling what people see is absolute nonsense.

[Jeff Smith (Manchester Withington) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome the publication of the Green Paper. None of us has all the answers when it comes to the fast-moving media landscape, but setting out the challenges and some principled ways forward is a good start. I especially welcome the focus on a duty for media literacy. My personal view is that a public purpose for the BBC on media literacy might be better than one on growth, but that is a debate for another day. Is the Secretary of State slightly disappointed, as I was, in the tone of some of the contributions from the Opposition about the prominence of trusted news? We already have a prominence regime in place; we just need to update it for the modern age. In an era when misinformation and disinformation are rife, is it not more important than ever that people get access to trustworthy news, and is that not what a prominence regime allows?

[Lisa Nandy]

I agree. In particular, we are letting down a generation of young people, who, as I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq), are often consuming media very differently from my generation and the generations before us. It cannot be right that my generation, who often watch and consume broadcasts on television sets, are able to easily and quickly find high-quality content and trusted news, but the younger generation are not.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

Hostile state actors routinely broadcast misinformation to our young people and radicalise them in their own homes. I agree completely with the Secretary of State that we have to take action; the problem is that primary legislation will never keep up with technology. I urge her to therefore consider a media Bill with wide-ranging powers that makes use of secondary legislation that can keep up with those changes to technology.

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman makes a similar point to the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee. He is right to push us to think about how we can very rapidly adapt to this very rapidly changing landscape. There is a question for the whole House as to how much oversight the House will want to have and how much scrutiny will be given to any measures that we bring forward. The House will have to decide together whether the use of secondary legislation in this space is something that we collectively believe is acceptable. However, there is merit in what he proposes.

[Matt Turmaine (Watford) (Lab)]

As a former employee of the BBC for 15 years, I know the importance of those Reithian principles to educate, inform and entertain, which are at the core everything the organisation does. Dissemination of fake news and misinformation online is a genuine risk to our democracy. Does the Secretary of State agree that even if people are going to trusted sites and sources online, such as the BBC, ITV and Channel 4, there is a real risk of the mix of slop around it polluting people’s ability to see accurate information, and that this demonstrates the absolute need for trusted news sources online?

[Lisa Nandy]

As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton earlier, during the Southport riots, there was an increase in people going to the BBC and the Liverpool Echo to get information; we saw something similar after the Manchester Arena bombing, when people sought out the Manchester Evening News as a trusted source of news. My hon. Friend will be aware that many of those trusted sources are under serious financial pressure, which is one of the reasons that we acted—particularly through the local media strategy—to ensure that they remain available. We want to ensure that those sources are more prominent and easier to find online, but in order to do that, we have to ensure that they are actually there in the first place.

[Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)]

The proliferation of misinformation, invidious algorithms and harmful content are the defining features of the current media landscape, and they are causing real harms and divisions within our communities. We need bold action to tackle this, and that surely includes taking on those who direct and abuse these situations. How will the Secretary of State promote trusted sources when there are people, even in this House, who are prepared to undermine them, and we are losing jobs and services at public service broadcasters?

[Lisa Nandy]

That is partly what this TV Green Paper is designed to address, although, as I said earlier, it is one part of the whole. Getting regulation online right, getting the enforcement of that regulation right, and being far more proactive through Ofcom in enforcing the existing law, are essential parts of this, as well as the measures that we have proposed around prominence and other areas.

[Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)]

I welcome this Green Paper, which is both timely and forward looking. The Government are right to respond to the fact that people get much of their news from social media nowadays. As more and more people turn to artificial intelligence chatbots for news and information, what work are the Government doing to ensure that trusted sources of information are given prominence?

[Lisa Nandy]

We have done a number of things in this space. AI summaries online put real pressure on existing publishers, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and I have met the publishing industry to discuss how we can better protect original sources, which are often far more accurate than the AI summaries that draw on their work. As I said to the Chair of the Select Committee, when it comes to media literacy, we need to equip not just the younger generation, but all of us with the skills necessary to navigate AI.

[Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)]

I urge the Secretary of State to keep a genuinely open mind on this consultation, and to be prepared to drop measures if the evidence does not stack up. The concept of prominence in particular will be very difficult to translate from a linear age to this age without imposing excessive costs and bureaucracy on broadcasters. As we have seen, the concept of trustworthy news is problematic, because one person’s “trustworthy news” is someone else’s propaganda. Just look at the debate between the BBC and GB News—frankly, right now, plenty of my constituents would trust GB News over the BBC. We cannot allow debate on this issue to become an echo chamber for liberal/left groupthink; otherwise, it will further undermine trust and confidence in this place.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that any responsible Government will be careful about how we navigate this landscape, because the definition of “high quality” and “trustworthy” is contested, and we need to protect the plurality and diversity of our news and the broader media industry. I do believe, however, that we have for a long time failed to empower our citizens and equip them with the ability to navigate the new landscape that we are in. The Government are particularly concerned about the blurring of news and fact with polemic and opinion, and that is a space in which we intend to act.

[Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)]

Given that we are in a world of fake news, and the impact of that on public trust, I really welcome the Secretary of State’s work to modernise the prominence regime. The BBC is the jewel in our national crown. People have mentioned the cuts; it is a real shame that we are seeing cuts to really important consumer shows, like “Money Box Live”. Scams are everywhere, so these shows are vital to our nation. Can the Secretary of State say a bit more about the BBC and its importance to our nation?

[Lisa Nandy]

I will say, very candidly, that I am concerned about the cuts that have been announced, too, and I raised those concerns directly with the incoming director general. The charter review process is obviously ongoing, and I would not want to see the BBC dismantling good structures, dismissing good journalists and closing down good programmes at a time when we are seeking to work together constructively to ensure that it is properly and adequately funded going forwards. There are significant pressures on all our public service broadcasters at the moment, and that is one reason why we have to grip this issue of transition, and work together to ensure nobody is left behind.

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

My question is in a similar vein to that asked by the hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes). I was really concerned to hear of the cuts at the BBC; “The World Tonight” is going, and “Today” is being cut back. This follows on the heels of cuts at “Newsnight”. It seems that the justification for these cuts is that programmes are being reoriented towards young people, which is obviously a good thing in and of itself. However, when I was 18, I did not listen to any of those programmes; now that I am in my 40s, I listen to them all. Do these cuts not undermine the BBC’s mission to educate and inform, and in this age of disinformation, is it not vital that we keep those programmes?

[Lisa Nandy]

As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes), the elephant in the room is funding, because the BBC has not been adequately funded for quite some time. The hon. Gentleman will know that fewer and fewer people are paying the licence fee, which is becoming a major challenge for the BBC. We will set out a range of options, through the charter process, that are designed to tackle that, so that we can protect the high-quality programming that he rightly commends.

[Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)]

We know that misinformation and disinformation is on the rise right across our country, and that was shown in the recent Makerfield by-election; the Social Market Foundation reported that ahead of that by-election, there was a quadrupling of fake news, and that one in six posts on all the local Facebook groups were fake news. We have seen the same thing in my constituency; after a news article was published, the news went rampant across our town that a woman and child had been attacked at a train station. It never happened, but it caused fear and anxiety.

I warmly welcome the Green Paper, but how can we get more support for our trusted local news services, including local papers and broadcasters? They are what residents turn to in times of crisis when they need information. The Secretary of State rightly pointed to the example of the Liverpool Echo.

[Lisa Nandy]

I was really struck by that report by the SMF, and I certainly recognise that there is misinformation very close to home. My hon. Friend rightly says that that is not new. In fact, my local police force says that the biggest challenge it faces is misinformation and disinformation online, which leads people to believe that more violent crime is happening than there actually is, and that streets are not safe. It causes serious challenges to social cohesion. Earlier this year, we published the local media strategy, which is the start of our ambition for local media—it is the floor, not the ceiling. There is more we need to do, particularly in the online space, to ensure that publications such as the Liverpool Echo are able to thrive.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

As a former journalist, I salute the Secretary of State’s ambition to leave no one behind, but as the hon. Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) pointed out, the death of terrestrial television risks leaving a lot of people in remote and rural Scotland behind. My constituency has a lot of notspots, and terrestrial television is a key source of news and entertainment. Can I ask the Secretary of State to use her influence in the forthcoming northern powerhouse Cabinet to get broadband rolled out properly across this country?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to talk about the centrality of broadband access. We are looking really carefully at digital exclusion, and we will make sure that this transition does not leave his constituents behind. I am looking to work with him to make sure that we get this right.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

Last week we had a powerful reminder of how important trusted news broadcasting is when the BBC reported that arson attacks targeting the Prime Minister and his family were orchestrated by Russia. Not stopping there, Russian-backed bots then spread homophobic misinformation about those attacks. We know how the Conservative party responded to that: its deputy chair, the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers), went on national TV and laughed. Now we can see how this Labour Government are responding to the issue. Can I urge the Secretary of State to go even further on supporting trusted news sources, as a powerful response to misinformation and disinformation online, a lot of it fuelled by our foreign adversaries?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend is right to say that we should demand the highest standards from Members across this House and people in public life. I share his absolute horror at the way that the deputy chairman of the Conservative party responded.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Your Party)]

I absolutely welcome this Green Paper. I think it is a really good step forward that we are having this national debate, but in it, I hope that the Leveson inquiry and its proposals will not be forgotten.

The Secretary will be aware that younger people—the majority of the population, in fact—do not watch mainstream television, or read newspapers, either in print or online; instead, they rely entirely on social media for their news, information, opinions and so on. Much of that content comes from behind a cloak of anonymity, and often it is dangerous, racist or abusive. We have a whole generation growing up whose only source of information is anonymous stuff on social media. I realise that we face a very difficult balancing act, in controlling access to wonderful technology and ensuring some degree of accuracy and accountability. I am sure that the Secretary of State is aware of this huge problem. Does she feel that there is a way forward on this conundrum through debate on the Green Paper?

[Lisa Nandy]

The right hon. Gentleman mentioned the Leveson inquiry. I can tell the House that I met the families of the victims of press intrusion very recently. We have always acted with care in this space to ensure that we protect a free and fair press, but he is right to say that action is needed to better protect people in this space, and this Government are determined to take that action. I share his serious concern about the way that young people consume news. That is partly what this Green Paper is intended to address, but it is also one of the key driving forces behind the social media ban that my colleague the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology announced recently. We have not done enough to protect young people online, and we need to do more.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I have been working with the publishing industry to make sure that we protect our trusted sources and do not allow higher-quality content to be undermined by AI summaries. It is a concern that we recognise and share, and we will bring forward proposals around that to the House. We have seen lots of very good-quality independent news providers spring up around the country, and it is great to hear about my hon. Friend’s local newspaper in Harlow, but there are too many local news deserts across our country. That is precisely what the local media strategy intends to address.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

I have been relying on the BBC to deliver news since the days when Jack de Manio was presenting the “Today” programme and John Snagge was reading the news, and I still rely on the BBC to a considerable extend, but it does annoy me intensely at times, particularly recently, when cuts were announced. The programmes that it seems to be cutting are public service programmes, not ones delivered by the commercial sector. On top of that, we see the demise of news coverage on local radio. Will the Secretary of State assure me that she will convey those views to the BBC? Hopefully, it will have a rethink.

[Lisa Nandy]

I am very happy to do so, and the hon. Gentleman is right to mention the importance of local radio.

[Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her informed answers. The new media Green Paper highlights the importance of continued universal access to good-quality, trusted television. Part of maintaining that access is making the content in the first place. With the news that the BBC Cymru Wales will face £9 million in spending cuts by the end of 2027-28, it is inevitable that Welsh commissions, already on the decrease, will decline even further. How will the Secretary of State protect Welsh-language content from such sweeping cuts, especially considering that access is already limited for us?

[Lisa Nandy]

I was recently at the BBC in Cardiff. The importance of Welsh-language content is not lost on this Government, and I have discussed the matter with both the interim director general and the new director general. We have been very keen to impress on the BBC the importance of protecting a regional footprint across all our nations and regions—something pioneered by former director general Tim Davie. Through the charter review process, we are ambitious for more power and funding to be dispersed out of London, so that the BBC becomes the engine of the nations and regions, producing content that reflects all our nations and regions, not just some parts of the country.

[Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)]

I add my voice to those concerned about the transfer to TV over IP. Technology moves very fast, and I accept at face value the Secretary of State’s commitment that no one will be left behind. However, we have had 20 years of change, from fibre to cabinet and now fibre to premises, yet some of my constituents are still on copper to premises, surviving on download speeds of 2 or 3 megabits per second, which is not capable of getting television into their homes, whether the switchover is in 2034 or later.

Can I urge the Secretary of State, before any decision is made, to work very closely with DSIT? No matter what the core statistics say about how many homes have fibre to premises, people will still be left behind, particularly in rural communities. Added to that, in many villages where there is only one fibre provider and no competition, there is fibre and there is fibre, and not all of it is as reliable as it looks.

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right, and I am happy to give him that assurance. He will know that the Minister for Media is also a Minister in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, and I am sure he will be working closely with his colleagues to make sure that we address those concerns.

[Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)]

Over recent weeks, one of the most frequent adverts served to me and many others on X is an AI-generated fake image of a Member of this House fighting with the Governor of the Bank of England. When half of adults cite social media as one of the sources from which they get their news, can the Secretary of State confirm what conversations she has had with colleagues in DSIT to make sure that these fake-news social media adverts do not become our news?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman is right to raise that issue, which I have discussed with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology. She and I are determined to make sure that we properly regulate the online space so that we protect people from those sorts of fake, generated images.

[Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)]

Many of my constituents in Epping Forest are very worried about proposals to stop terrestrial TV broadcasts from 2034. Like local radio, for many people in both urban and rural areas, and for older and more vulnerable people, terrestrial TV is a lifeline in their daily lives. Will the Government have a strong rethink about this?

[Lisa Nandy]

As I said in previous answers, we have to manage this transition. We cannot just drift into an unmanaged transition, which is precisely why we have brought these proposals forward early, with genuinely open questions about the date of the transition. I reiterate what I have said to many hon. Members: we are absolutely determined to get on the front foot and make sure that nobody is left behind.

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

I am confident that everybody in this House wants freedom of speech and freedom of expression. However, we are all against freely available misinformation and disinformation, whether it is about the lack of integration in certain neighbourhoods or international affairs. There is clearly distrust, so something needs to be done. I welcome the Secretary of State bringing forward a Green Paper, but how will the Government ensure that those with the deepest pockets do not get prevalence when we look at mainstream media?

[Lisa Nandy]

One of the things we are trying to do is protect the plurality and diversity of our media, and also make sure that people have better access to high-quality sources not just of news but of content as well. That includes things such as children’s programming, which are really important. However, the hon. Gentleman is right to recognise that we have lived through a revolution in media and media consumption, and we just have not been quick enough to respond. That is partly what this TV Green Paper is designed to address.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

I welcome the Green Paper. Many of my constituents in Stockland Bristol and Fiddington continue to endure very poor or non-existent broadband coverage and mobile signals, so they are concerned about the Secretary of State’s proposal to stop terrestrial broadcasts by 2034. Will she ensure that the proposal does not cut off my constituents in rural areas?

[Lisa Nandy]

I also represent a largely rural constituency, and I absolutely recognise the challenges that the hon. Gentleman talks about in relation not just to broadband but mobile signals. I cannot get reception in my own house, to be honest. There is a real challenge, which is precisely why we have brought forward these proposals now, with a genuinely open question about 2034 or 2044, so that we can work with industry to ensure that his constituents are not left behind.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Secretary of State very much for her answers and her positivity in responding to all the questions that have been asked. Mine is a very specific question relating to Northern Ireland, and I think she will be quite perturbed when I give her some figures. With the new media Green Paper pushing for a total IPTV transition by 2034, what specific guarantees can she give to nearly half of all households in Northern Ireland—some 370,000 people—that still rely entirely on digital terrestrial TV via an aerial, so that our rural and vulnerable communities are not left in a digital blackout as a result of the Green Paper’s proposals?

[Lisa Nandy]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that there are particular challenges in certain parts of the country, and Northern Ireland is very firmly at the forefront of not just my mind but the mind of the Minister for Media as well. I would be more than happy to discuss it further with him, but we will work together to make sure that nobody is left behind.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lisa Nandy Excerpts

Thursday 18th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

2. What steps she is taking to help ensure that children from less privileged backgrounds can access music and dance training.

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

This Government believe that every child in this country has the right to access high-quality arts provision, including music and dance, which gives young people the chance to live a richer, larger life. I am really pleased to tell the House that the music and dance scheme’s allocation of future funding for this financial year represents an increase on the commitment of the previous year.

[Tessa Munt]

I thank the Secretary of State for her response. Wells Cathedral school is in my constituency, and it has 80 young people who are on the music and dance scheme. It is a fantastic scheme, and I pay tribute to the outgoing headteacher, Alastair Tighe, who has done his very best to ensure that the scheme reaches deep into the community and those from less advantaged backgrounds, including one of our local cleaners—she is able to pay just £200 a year for what is a £50,000 a year education. However, there has been a 10-year drift between inflation and the amount of the money that the scheme receives. Can the Secretary of State have another look at this issue and make it absolutely certain that pupils benefit from better funding—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We have only 30 minutes.

[Lisa Nandy]

I join the hon. Lady in paying tribute to Alastair Tighe and all the people who make this commitment real. They change children’s lives, and this Government cannot do that alone from Whitehall. What we can do, however, is fund such schemes adequately. Even in these difficult financial circumstances, we made a £36.5 million commitment to the music and dance scheme last year, and we have increased that by £1.3 million to ensure that it can continue.

[Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)]

Musical theatre and dance are important parts of the creative industries. Kristian Thomas Company in my constituency provides extensive training for young people aged four upwards, up to formal qualifications at BTEC and foundation degree level. What financial support is given to organisations such as KTC so that they can continue offering valuable education in the arts for all young people in North West Leicestershire?

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend is a great champion for North West Leicestershire and for all the young people in her constituency. As I said to the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt), we have been investing in music and dance in particular, but we have also invested £425 million in the creative foundations fund to support arts venues across the country, because one of the key things that we have identified is that it is not just about the bursaries that we provide to enable access for all; it is about those institutions existing in every part of the country.

[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.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

Will the Secretary of State join me in congratulating Sam Ashford and the Livewire theatre in Harlow on 25 years of supporting young people into music, dance and the theatre with its hard-hitting shows? I pay particular tribute to the work it did to support young people remotely during covid.

[Lisa Nandy]

Of course, I will. I appreciate the efforts that my hon. Friend puts in not just to ensure that Harlow is referenced in this Chamber at every opportunity, but, sincerely, to change the lives of young people in Harlow and across the whole country. He really is one of the best champions for young people in this House.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Green (Chesham and Amersham) (LD)]

5. What steps she is taking to help support creative industries.

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

The UK’s creative industries are world leading, which is why the Government have made them a priority. We are backing them in our industrial strategy as one of eight industries that we believe have the greatest potential for the future. Our sector plan is working, with the creative industries expanding 3.1% in the last quarter, outperforming the wider economy.

[Sarah Green]

The Secretary of State will know that nearly a third of those who work in the creative industries are self-employed. I have been contacted by creative freelancers in my area who feel that their voice is not always heard. One of them is a licensed chaperone, responsible for safeguarding those under 16 working on productions away from their parents. She told me that some chaperones are waiting for up to eight months to be paid, caught between agencies and production companies, which blame each other, before everyone moves on to the next production. That is just one example of many. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss ways we can better support freelancers in our creatives industries to help them and the sector thrive?

[Lisa Nandy]

The Government are acutely aware of the challenges of a very casualised industry in which freelancers often do not have the voice they need to stand up for their rights, protect them at work and make sure the industry they work in is fair and safe, so I thank the hon. Lady for raising this issue in this House and for being their voice. I would be delighted to organise a meeting with the relevant officials so that she can discuss this issue. I can also update the House that we have recently appointed the freelance champion role. They will advocate for the creative sector’s freelancers within Government. We will be in a position to announce those names shortly.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Dame Jessica Morden. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”]

[Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)]

Grassroots venues in Newport such as The Cab and Le Pub, where the fan-led review was launched recently, are a vital part of our city’s creative industry, drawing thousands of people into our city centre each month. The ticket levy announced by the Government could help such venues to manage rising costs and develop talent. Larger events were encouraged to participate voluntarily in the scheme, so could we have a bit of a progress report and an idea of next steps?

[Lisa Nandy]

My right hon. Friend the Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend to update her on the progress we have made on protecting these vital venues. If I may, I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate her on the long overdue recognition for the work she has put into this Chamber and for what she has done in public life.

Mr Speaker, may I also take this opportunity to have a rare truce between Wigan and Chorley and thank you for the work you have done over a long period of time to campaign for Sir Kevin Sinfield to be given a knighthood? It is an absolute privilege to be the Secretary of State who has been able to ensure that both Sir Billy Boston and Sir Kevin Sinfield have been rightly recognised as the first two people from rugby league ever to receive knighthoods, which were long overdue.

[Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)]

6. What steps she is taking to help ensure the sustainability of the BBC’s long-term funding.

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

The BBC is one of our most important national institutions. Now, more than ever, the need for trusted news and high-quality programming is essential to our democratic and cultural life. We are currently conducting the charter review, which I believe will be the most consequential in the BBC’s history, given the current political climate. We have already announced that, as part of the charter review, we will be putting the BBC on a permanent charter, so that it exists in perpetuity for all of us, forever.

[Olly Glover]

Yesterday, as part of £500 million cuts, the BBC announced the scrapping of BBC Radio 4’s “The World Tonight” programme after 56 years, among others. It is very welcome to hear the Secretary of State’s support for the BBC, but can she say a little more about what she is going to do to protect the future of the BBC, following the end of the BBC charter consultation in March?

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question, because I know this issue has raised significant concerns across all our nations and regions. I met the BBC director general recently to discuss the announcement that has just been made. Obviously, those decisions are a matter for the BBC. What is squarely within the Government’s remit, however, is ensuring that, as part of the charter, the BBC is adequately and sustainably funded. We will not accept a smaller BBC. A core objective of the charter review is to expand both the scope and reach of BBC services.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

The hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) mentioned reports that BBC Radio 4’s “The World Tonight” programme may be cut. Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that in the age of fast news, disinformation and misinformation, we need more programmes such as “The World Tonight”, not fewer, and that we need more contemplative journalism so that our voters can understand politics and the world around them more effectively? Does she agree with me that the BBC perhaps ought to look at the vast salaries they pay their stars, both in entertainment and in news, in order to retain programmes such as “The World Tonight”, which will be much missed if it goes?

[Lisa Nandy]

I concur with my hon. Friend’s view that, now more than ever, the BBC’s role in providing trusted news and information is essential. For all the challenges that the BBC has faced, it remains the most trusted source of news in this country, and one of the most trusted sources of news across the world. I recognise that the BBC has had some serious challenges to deal with, and has had to make some difficult decisions, but this Government are determined to support its efforts by ensuring that it is adequately funded. We have recently published the first ever local news strategy. Colleagues will know that in the current by-election in Makerfield—next door to me in Wigan—there has been a huge upsurge in the amount of misinformation and disinformation targeted at residents. The BBC has a role to play in countering that, but so too do tremendous outlets such as the Wigan Post, which provide much needed balance.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)]

Last year the BBC lost another 300,000 licence fee payers. The BBC’s current scale and financial model is clearly unsustainable. Yesterday the BBC announced controversial cuts, including “The World Tonight” and “Money Box Live”, without anyone in Parliament expressing a view. That is not right. The Government appear to be restricting parliamentary debate about the future of the BBC. They announced the BBC charter via written statement, not a debate. They have already ruled out some alternative funding models and consideration of the size, scope and scale of the BBC’s operations, leaving the BBC to take action unilaterally. Will the Secretary of State reconsider the scope of the charter review, and ensure that Parliament has a proper say on the future of the BBC?

[Lisa Nandy]

I will try to reassure the hon. Member on that, because we have no intention of restricting debate on the future of the BBC. I share some of his concerns about the way in which the BBC made the recent announcement. One of the things that I was keen to ensure was that decisions that could affect the future of the BBC, and the services on which we all rely, were made by the new director general and not in the interim, in the absence of a permanent director general. The charter process sets out a clear role for Parliament, which this Government will respect and uphold. There will be adequate opportunity to debate the proposals that the Government put forward with the White Paper on the future of the BBC later this year.

[Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)]

7. What steps her Department is taking to publish the draft ticket tout ban Bill.

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

I know that Members across this House will be horrified and disgusted at the serious allegations of abuse against women in the TV industry that have emerged recently. Everyone has the right to be safe and treated with dignity. The Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts recently met Channel 4 about the serious allegations that have emerged about “Married at First Sight”. We are not satisfied as a Government with the response that we have received, and I will discuss that further with Channel 4 in the coming week.

Since we last met, Mr Speaker, we have launched a new partnership with Gareth Southgate and the King’s Trust to provide mentors for young people, as part of our commitment through the national youth strategy to ensure that every young person in this country has somewhere to go, something to do and someone who cares. We have also launched “Every Child Can” to give young people, wherever they live, the chance to find their spark and build the confidence and positive relationships they need to succeed. As the world cup gets under way, and after such a strong start, the whole House will join me in wishing both home nations every success.

[Mr Speaker]

And Bolton Wanderers, who got promoted.

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend will have heard my answer to colleagues about the future of the BBC. The Government are committed to ensuring that the BBC is set up on a sustainable basis for the future through the charter review, so that it can thrive for many years to come. But the BBC, he is right to say, is not the only public service broadcaster in this country. We have public service broadcasting that is the envy of the world, and the Government are determined to do everything we can to support and safeguard it, including by challenging where necessary—as we have with the response to “Married at First Sight” by Channel 4—when we believe that those standards are not being upheld.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)]

I echo the Secretary of State’s introductory comments and congratulate England and Scotland on a great start to the world cup.

Since coming to power, this Government have cut funding for school sport, listed places of worship, tourism marketing and so much more, yet they have found billions for welfare, Chagos and inflation-busting pay rises for their union mates. Last Sunday, the Secretary of State went on telly to say that she was in discussions about cutting DCMS spending even further. Well, where and when? And who is to blame: is it the Prime Minister, for his weakness and failure to tackle welfare spending, or is it the Chancellor, for her utter economic incompetence?

[Lisa Nandy]

One thing I learned at school was that the answer to a multiple choice question is usually option (c). The hon. Member missed option (c) out, because the real answer to “Who is to blame for the situation this country is in?” is him and his colleagues, because of the appalling mess they made over 14 years of Conservative government. They cut our armed forces to a size that has not been seen for generations, they refused to treat our veterans with respect, they crashed the economy and they left working-class people in every nation and region paying a very heavy price.

We are investing: we have announced the biggest uplift to arts funding, in a single Parliament, in history; we are investing additional resources in young people to turn around the life chances of a generation; and we have invested more than £1 billion in school sport, which the hon. Member’s Government squandered. He should be ashamed of himself—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We have only four minutes left, and we have to get through the Order Paper.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)]

T4. The National Centre for Arts and Music Education is due to be up and running this September. Can the Secretary of State tell us whether it will be ready in time and who will run it, and can she give us an overview of its remit?

[Lisa Nandy]

We are working very closely with the Department for Education to ensure that the national centre is launched in September, and we will update my hon. Friend and the House very shortly on the progress that we are making.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

Grassroots sports clubs such as Wokingham Town football club are at the heart of our communities, but many clubs struggle to find and maintain facilities and equipment. Would the Secretary of State consider convening twice-yearly meetings with grassroots sports governing bodies to strengthen collaboration and advocacy for community sport?

--- Later in debate ---

[Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)]

T5. Can the Secretary of State advise what steps will be taken and what funding provided to encourage young people to take up sport, drama and other activities when the social media ban comes into place?

[Lisa Nandy]

Through the national youth strategy, we were absolutely horrified to find that a majority of young people in this country spend all, or almost all, of their free time alone in their bedrooms online. As part of the commitment to keep young people safe online and to get them out of their bedrooms and into the real world, we have been pleased to announce a significant uplift in funding for young people to ensure that we build the next generation of youth clubs and grassroots sports facilities, rebuild youth work and ensure that every young person has those opportunities in our country.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (Wetherby and Easingwold) (Con)]

Recognising the answers that the right hon. Lady gave earlier, may I ask her to ensure that before the charter review comes out, she absolutely emphasises the need for radio news? Many people do not get to watch television news—I am sure she will be travelling later today and will not be able to watch the TV. May I ask her at this early stage to ensure that the BBC recognises just how important these radio news programmes are?

[Mr Speaker]

He’s got a face for radio!

[Lisa Nandy]

Wow—can I not associate myself with those remarks? [Laughter.]

I agree with the hon. Member about the importance of radio and regional news. Recently, the outgoing director general of the BBC told me that regional news now has greater reach than national news. That includes local radio as well, and we will of course ensure that it becomes a priority through the charter review.

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

T6. Redditch local history museum tells the story of our new town, our proud industrial heritage and much more. However, the museum was recently evicted from its premises and is now searching for a new home. Can the Secretary of State advise me on how her Department might be able to assist me in helping provide the museum with a new place?

--- Later in debate ---

[Claire Hazelgrove (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Lab)]

I am so proud to back Filton’s bid to become the UK town of culture 2028. From our vibrant community to our vast heritage, including as the British home of Concorde, we have so much to offer the whole country. Will the Minister agree to meet me to hear more about this bid and what makes Filton so special?

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank my hon. Friend for being such an outstanding champion for her constituency. She and I have discussed the great, vibrant, diverse cultural offer and contribution that her community has to make, including the fact that it is the home of Concorde. Through the town of culture, we hope that many towns across the country can up their cultural offer, shout loudly about their achievements, take wings and soar.

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State rule out extending the BBC licence fee to streaming services such as Netflix?

[Lisa Nandy]

We have been very careful not to get drawn into speculation about the future funding arrangements for the BBC, except to say that we have ruled out a levy on streamers, and we have also ruled out direct taxation going to fund the BBC because of the need for the BBC to retain its independence. But I look forward to debating this issue with the hon. Member and for the whole House to come together to ensure that we get this right through the charter process.

The right hon. Member for Kenilworth and Southam, representing the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission, was asked—