(2 days, 4 hours ago)
Commons Chamber 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?
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?
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.
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?
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?
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.
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)
Sport occupies a special place in this country. We all know the power that it has to bring communities together, inspire millions of people to take part, and provide some of those increasingly rare occasions when the whole country seems to stop and watch the same thing. Britain can also take enormous pride in its place in the sporting world. There is no doubt that we excel across the board, and the patriotism that such events can generate is truly wonderful.
We are home to Wimbledon, the Open, the British Grand Prix and the London marathon. We have successfully hosted Olympic and Paralympic games, Commonwealth games, world cups and European championships—and we do it exceptionally well. Those events are part of our national culture. They create memories that last for generations, inspire children to pick up a racket, a football or a pair of running shoes, and showcase the very best of Britain to audiences around the world.
By way of example, take the London Olympics and Paralympics, which the Secretary of State has just mentioned—we obviously share some similar memories. I think it is fair to say that, before it started, there was a bit of grumbling about the disruption, cost, impact and even the logo, as some Members may remember. But once it started, the overwhelming pride that we all felt in our home nation, our capital and our sportsmen and women was something that I am sure none of us will forget. It was a truly momentous, once-in-a-lifetime event that made me so proud to be British. Those of us—including me—who worked in London at that time, certainly enjoyed the instruction to try to work at home during that busy period.
These big sporting events are not only sources of pride and joy for millions. Taken as a whole, sport is also a roaring economic engine. The Government’s latest estimates suggest that the wider sport sector directly contributed £63.2 billion to the UK economy in 2024 and accounted for 1.3 million jobs.
Major sporting events alone can generate considerable returns for our country. In 2023, investment of £10.8 million from UK Sport and Government supported 16 major sporting events, which generated an estimated £373 million for our economy. The Birmingham Commonwealth games is a particularly striking example, with research finding that the games contributed almost £1.2 billion to the overall UK economy, as well as nearly £80 million in social value.
Those are very substantial numbers. They represent money being spent in hotels, restaurants and pubs, business for suppliers, employment in event management, broadcasting and security, and visitors coming to parts of the country they might otherwise never have visited.
Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)
I welcome the shadow Secretary of State to her place. I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. On the point about economic benefit, I am the Member of Parliament for Silverstone, and the grand prix has given a huge boost to the economy in our area; it is vital part of our economy, but it is on the annual calendar only because of the hard work of the team to keep it there; there is no guarantee that we will have it every year. I very much welcome the Secretary of State’s looking at widening the definition of “major events” to capture Silverstone, because it is so valuable to our sporting calendar; it is absolutely vital.
Rebecca Paul
I thank my hon. Friend for making that point. She is passionate about Silverstone, and she is absolutely right in all the points she makes. We must never be complacent about it; we must strengthen and build on all the great sporting events that we have in this country.
Sport also strengthens Britain’s reputation overseas. Few countries combine our extraordinary sporting heritage, wonderful venues, broadcasting expertise, enthusiastic crowds and experience of putting on major events that the whole world wants to see. It is therefore very much in our national interest to ensure that the United Kingdom remains one of the best places in the world to host these big events.
That is the context in which the Opposition approach the Bill. We support its underlying objective and will support its Second Reading. It absolutely makes sense, and it is in this country’s interests, to create a standing legislative framework of this kind.
When the United Kingdom bids to host a major international sporting event, the governing body will commonly require host country guarantees covering matters such as ticketing, commercial rights, advertising and transport. Historically, Parliament has often had to legislate specifically for individual events. There is an obvious inefficiency in recreating substantially similar provisions every time Britain secures another major tournament. If we know that certain protections are repeatedly required, it is reasonable to place a common framework on the statute book that can be tailored to the needs of individual events. This should make Britain a more competitive prospective host and give international sporting organisations greater confidence that the protections they require will be available.
That confidence is vital, as international competition to host major sport is fierce. Countries across the world understand the prestige that these events bring, the visitors they attract and the economic activity they generate. We cannot simply assume that Britain will continue to win the rights to host them if we become less accommodating than our competitors. We need to make the strongest possible case for the UK, and part of that is demonstrating that when we make commitments as a host nation, we have the legal framework to deliver them quickly and effectively.
With that objective in mind, there is much in the detail of the Bill’s proposed framework that we support. It is right that organisers should have effective tools to prevent professional ticket touts from exploiting supporters; it is right that genuine sponsors, who may invest very significant sums in making an event possible, should receive reasonable protection against businesses falsely passing themselves off as official partners; and it is plainly sensible to have the capacity to make temporary transport and traffic arrangements when hundreds of thousands of additional spectators may be moving around a city or region.
James Naish
The Secretary of State moved on from this quickly earlier. I wanted to talk specifically about transport arrangements, as in my constituency, we have three international venues in very close proximity, and it can be extremely difficult for the residents who live in that area. Would the shadow Secretary of State agree that it is extremely important that local councils have the power to enforce the transport plans that are put in place, so that the residents in the areas hosting these major sporting events can live alongside those venues?
Rebecca Paul
I thank the hon. Gentleman for making that point. It is really important that we explore this in more detail in Committee. This obviously requires a bit of balance. We need to consider both sides of the matter to get to the right place. This is a great starting position, and hopefully we will have a lot more detailed discussions as the Bill moves through the House, assuming it passes Second Reading, which it looks likely to do.
We are not concerned about the concept of the Bill, and colleagues in the other place approached it in exactly the same spirit: they supported the principle, while working constructively to improve the legislation. I want to acknowledge the important work undertaken in the other place to ensure that the framework is of benefit to not only major one-off international tournaments, but the great recurring sporting events already woven into British national life, which the Culture Secretary mentioned. As originally drafted, the Bill risked producing the rather peculiar result that an international tournament visiting Britain for the first time might qualify for these protections, while Wimbledon, the Open, the London marathon or the British grand prix might not. That was a significant gap, and Opposition peers, including Baroness Evans and Lord Parkinson, worked closely with colleagues across the House, and with the sporting sector, to address it.
The All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club, the England and Wales Cricket Board, the Football Association, the London marathon, Silverstone, the R&A, the Rugby Football League, the Rugby Football Union, the Sport and Recreation Alliance and UK Athletics were among those supporting a widening of the framework to include repeat events. These great recurring events are not simply fixtures in our sporting calendar, but strategic national assets. They attract international audiences, support thousands of jobs, generate significant economic value and serve to showcase Britain around the world. We should therefore always seek to maximise the opportunities and returns that they bring.
As originally drafted, the Bill was principally aimed at major one-off or infrequent international events, but amendments made in the Lords widened that framework, so that our great recurring UK sporting events of national or international importance, such as Wimbledon, the Open, the London marathon or the British grand prix, can also ask to benefit from its protections. That does not mean that every protection in the Bill will now automatically apply to every one of those events every year, but where a major recurring event can demonstrate a genuine need for one or more parts of the framework, it can ask the Government to apply them. Ministers must then agree, and any use of the framework will remain subject to parliamentary approval. Baroness Evans put the principle neatly when she described the Lords’ approach as providing opportunity, not obligation. It is a sensible and proportionate approach, and I welcome the assurances that have been given that the final legislation will deliver that objective and allow our great recurring events to benefit from the framework.
I understand that there may be some technical tidying required as the Bill proceeds through this House, and we will engage constructively with the Government on that work to ensure that the Bill does what is intended. The sporting sector has worked hard to secure this change. I was hopeful that the Culture Secretary could reassure the House today that the Government remain committed to delivering it in full and to preserving the substance of what was achieved in the Lords, and I believe we have heard that from her today. I thank her for that.
There are inevitably some further areas that we will want to examine as the Bill enters Committee stage. That is not because we oppose the powers themselves, but because a permanent legislative framework needs to strike the right balance between giving organisers the protections they require and avoiding unnecessary burdens on those affected.
The first such area is the impact on existing businesses. One of the central reasons why we want major sporting events in Britain is the economic activity that they generate. We want visitors filling hotels, restaurants and pubs, we want local businesses benefiting from increased footfall, and we want traders to share in the opportunities created when tens or hundreds of thousands of people arrive in an area. There will plainly be occasions when crowd safety, security or legitimate commercial arrangements mean that some restrictions are necessary, but the Government’s own impact assessment assumes that a substantial proportion of street traders in affected areas may be unable to trade while restrictions operate. Colleagues in the other place pressed Ministers on that point and secured a useful change, requiring existing trading licences to be taken into account. The Government also committed to work with organisers and local authorities to consider alternative arrangements when an existing trader cannot remain in their usual location. In Committee, we will want to ensure that the practical arrangements around notice, authorisations and treatment of existing businesses are fair and proportionate.
The same principle applies to advertising. We support action against genuine ambush marketing. Official sponsors make substantial investments in major sport and are entitled to protection. At the same time, the framework should operate sensibly for existing advertisers and should distinguish between falsely claiming an official association with an event and legitimate commercial activity, such as a company truthfully promoting an athlete whom it genuinely sponsors.
In the Lords, Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay raised the concerns of the Advertising Association. The Government undertook further engagement with the industry, which we welcome. It would be useful to have an update from the Culture Secretary on how those discussions have progressed. Again, that strikes me as exactly the kind of detailed matter that could be worked through constructively in Committee.
Finally, clause 25 gives the Government a broad standing power to provide financial assistance in connection with sporting events. There is a certain lack of clarity about what the criteria and eligibility for such payments would be. I ask, again, that that be considered further in Committee.
We all want Britain to remain one of the finest places in the world to host major sport. We all want to attract new world cups, European championships and other global events, as that is good for the sporting sector, our economy, the country and our people. We are fortunate that Britain starts from a position of considerable strength, with its world-class venues, experienced organisers, passionate spectators, internationally recognised events and a sporting heritage that few countries can match. Now we must capitalise and further build on those strengths to fully unleash the sector’s potential. The Bill can meaningfully contribute to that.
Our task now is to preserve the improvements made to the Bill in the other place, so that we deliver on the intention of ensuring that our great recurring events are properly covered. The Opposition support the principle of the Bill and the ambition behind it, and we will support its Second Reading while working constructively with the Government to improve and clarify it further as it proceeds through the House.
Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
Major sporting events are something that we do very well as a country—I think everybody in the House is agreed on that—and making it more straightforward for us to host them is vital. I therefore really welcome the Bill. I need to declare at the outset that I am a member of the England Supporters Travel Club—formerly the England Football Supporters Club—and a season ticket holder at the home of quality football in south London that is Crystal Palace. I, and many of my constituents—a lot of them are Dartford football club supporters, but there are supporters of many other clubs as well—are united in hugely looking forward to Euro 2028 being hosted across England, Scotland, Wales and the Republic of Ireland. Hopefully, home advantage will enable England to go one further than they did in 2024.
Hosting major sporting events like the Euros and the recent women’s rugby world cup and cricket world cup has the potential to inspire the next generation of young athletes. Anything that we can do to increase physical activity across society—most of all in our young people—is important, and supports the efforts of our 10-year plan to create a healthier society.
I am really pleased that sporting legacy and inclusion of our young people in sporting activity is a core part of the Government’s objectives in attracting major sporting events. The nation’s most vivid memories are often sporting ones. I was privileged to be in the stadium when Jess Ennis won her 2012 heptathlon gold, and I was there—apologies to Scottish colleagues—to witness that goal by Paul Gascoigne against the auld enemy in Euro ’96. It is not just about the memories; these events help to illustrate why the UK remains such a well placed country to host international sporting events. We have a range of excellent, large, atmospheric stadiums, a vibrant hospitality sector, and brilliant fans, while also being a transport hub that much of the world can easily travel to.
The British public embrace major sporting events. Take the excellent and record breaking crowds for last year’s women’s rugby world cup as an example. Last month, there was mostly a full stadium for Birmingham’s European athletics championships, mentioned by the Secretary of State. May I give a big shout out to Dartford Harriers’ Emily Newnham for winning a brilliant silver medal in the 400 metres hurdles?
The British public want us to bid for international events. It is wonderful to hear that the Olympics is a target for the Government in the next decade. We should also be targeting another men’s football world cup in the late 2030s or in the 2040s, alongside our bid to host the women’s football world cup. Of course, I hugely welcome London’s bid to bring the world athletics championships back to the UK in 2029.
I pay tribute to the efforts of the England team at the recent world cup tournament in Mexico, the USA and Canada; the team took us as close to repeating the 1966 triumph as we have got in my lifetime. It was a great world cup; however, there is no doubt that many ordinary fans were priced out of attending. As a member of the aforementioned England Supporters Travel Club, I saw the comments on our Facebook page over the summer—many loyal fans simply could not afford to go.
On extortionate ticket prices, ticket touts selling football tickets at inflated prices outside grounds or online remains far too prevalent. Despite the efforts of football clubs—as an example, I can attest to what Crystal Palace has been doing, ensuring that any spare tickets can be bought only by club members—tickets for just about any premier league match can still be found at an inflated price on StubHub, Viagogo and some other platforms, as well as from illegal touts. We have to address that. I am pleased that the Government are doing that.
It was noticeable that in July it was reported that more than £1.2 million in assets were seized and 432 lifetime bans issued as part of joint work between Liverpool FC and Merseyside police to investigate ticket touting, but a change in the law is still needed. That is why the measures in the Bill are so welcome. It is long overdue that we create a criminal offence for the unauthorised resale of tickets for a sporting event. I hope that we will see more joint working between the police and sports clubs, building on these new powers, to ensure that more tickets are within fans’ reach. I look forward to more major events being held in this country, and more opportunities for us as a country, as these sporting events inspire a new generation.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)
Trying to speak in Parliament after developing vocal cord paralysis feels like a major sporting event. Let us see how I get on.
In the last 15 years, we have seen four separate acts of Parliament passed to deliver four separate events. Each of those Bills essentially repeated the same core provisions from scratch through bespoke legislation. This Bill is therefore a welcome change that will make it easier for the Government to deliver major events. But, for the Lib Dems, there are a few areas where we think the Bill could be taken further.
First, on the scope of the Bill, I am glad that the Government accepted a Liberal Democrat amendment in the other place so that the legislation now applies to world-famous domestic events that happen every year in the UK, but that was not the only area where the Bill’s scope did not go far enough. The Bill is also limited by applying only to sporting events. Major sporting events bring in hundreds of millions of pounds to the economy, but the music industry is in a different ballpark. In 2024, music contributed a record £8 billion to the UK’s economy, and last year 24.7 million music tourists attended live events. The reality is that music and cultural events are large international events. They face the same issues the sporting events do, but they are not covered by the Bill.
Simply, the problems that the Bill aims to address do not stop with sports. Let us look at Eurovision 2023: a major international event that saw organisers having to improvise ticketing and trading arrangements locally rather than relying on a national framework that would have provided a clear and easy solution to the problems that arise from organising large events. If the Bill’s framework is good enough for sport, why cannot the Government extend it to other music and cultural events?
I hugely welcome the fact that the Bill takes action on the outrageous ticket sales practices that we have seen in recent years, and I understand that the Government promise further ticket touting reforms later—but when the harm is happening now, and we have the legislative architecture available, why are we delaying action? How many people across this House, how many of our constituents, must pay extortionate prices to see their favourite artists and bands before the Government decide that change needs to happen?
It is not only ticket prices that are blocking fans from watching their favourite sports teams, however. For a long time, public service broadcasters pioneered free-to-air coverage, but sporting events that have always been free-to-air are increasingly being locked behind a paywall. Just a few months ago we saw the implications of that, with fans locked out of watching the champions league final.
The Lib Dems support free-to-air sports on all occasions, and especially when events such as those provided for in this Bill are paid for by the public. Currently, the Bill makes no promises that public money means public access to sports on TV. My colleagues in the other place tabled an amendment to make free-to-air coverage a condition of financial assistance through this Bill, and I intend to push for that again.
One final area that I will be pushing on in Committee is grassroots support. Big events should never hollow out local businesses or grassroots sports and culture. The Lib Dems therefore seek clarification from the Government that commercial deals under the frameworks of this Bill will treat small and medium-sized enterprises fairly and ensure that grassroots organisations see a tangible benefit from large sporting events in the UK.
For the Lib Dems, this Bill is not simply about making international events easier to host; it is an opportunity to make them more accessible, more affordable and more enjoyable for the very people who make British sporting and other culture what it is. That is what I will be pushing for as this Bill passes through this House.
Imogen Walker (Hamilton and Clyde Valley) (Lab)
We are a nation of sports fans, and for good reason: from a kickabout in the local park to the great tournaments, getting together to watch or play sport brings joy to millions. When Scotland went to the world cup this summer, football even united the Scottish MPs on the Government side of the Chamber with hon. Members on the Opposition side—and that is quite the achievement.
At home, we were so proud that Lewis Ferguson, from the town of Quarter, a former Hamilton Accies player, was part of the squad. He took our hopes and dreams with him to the States and he did us proud. Evi Mackie, from Lanark, represented Scotland at the Commonwealth games—another local talent to make it to the international stage on the back of her hard work and determination, and with the support of the brilliant Lanark Amateur Swimming Club. Those incredible athletes have not only done Lanark, Hamilton and Scotland proud, but shown the way for the next generation of athletes, who deserve the chance to compete at every level.
The provision in this Bill for the Scottish Government to fund sporting events really matters. Our pride in our nations, our teams and our sportspeople cuts across political boundaries—a power sport has that is rarely seen elsewhere. When the Hamilton Accies ran into difficulties that threatened their very future, the fans made it clear what the club meant to them. One young fan, just 18 years old, wrote to me:
“I was introduced to the club by my father…and I have been forever indebted to him for making me an ‘Accies Man’. He gave me a platform to develop relationships with others, take in live sport, and to help me understand the true meaning of joy when those victories occurred or goals hit the back of the net.
I believe the club has a massively positive impact on the mental health of many people, man and woman, every week. Win, lose or draw, the club gives people a place they can go and get away from the stresses of employment, unemployment, addiction, financial stresses, grief and general loneliness.”
That puts it very well, I think. It was fans like that who came together to show their love for the club, overcame all the odds and, after several months at another ground, brought the Accies home this season to Douglas Park.
Sport is universal and it cuts across divides. Lewis and Evi show that we do not need to be from a big city to reach the top, and that the talent we have in Hamilton and Clyde Valley is world-class. But let me be clear: young people do not train day in, day out to make a profit for ticket touts. They have dedicated their lives to pursuing a dream—a dream that gives people hope, inspiration and something to believe in—not to buy some crook another Merc. This Bill is important, cracking down on ticket touts and building on the UK’s track record of hosting major events, bringing people together and supporting local economies. That is how we will inspire and support the next generation and make sure that their hard work leaves a legacy and keeps dreams alive.
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.
Perhaps then we can turn the tables and see Conservatives benefit from Labour’s hard work, rather than the other way around.
James Naish
I must say, I think that was the case with the 2012 games, if I am not mistaken, which were won under a Labour Government but delivered under the hon. Gentleman’s Government.
The point I wanted to make was about the development of a long-term vision. Certainly in Nottingham and Nottinghamshire, we are doing a lot of work on something called the Trent Sports District, which is taking our excellent venues and painting a long-term vision of what they can do for our city and area. That is exactly what he is saying about individual events, so does he agree that using sport as a regeneration and visioning tool is an excellent way to bring everybody together in a cross-party way to secure long-term benefits for an area?
I do indeed agree with the hon. Gentleman. The other point he makes is that, when we do these events, it is often one individual city or one particular location that gets a lot of the focus. There seems to be a trend at the moment, which I quite like, of having multiple venues and often multiple countries, even when hosting major international events—we saw that this year with the world cup. We have often bid on a four-nations basis, which can be beneficial, and we will continue to do so. That goes back to the point that the economic benefit can be so considerable that it is great if we can spread it outside the M25. It is important that we do that. I do not want to be negative about London—we have amazing sports venues in London—but we always need to think about London-plus, if London is the anchor.
As the former Sport Minister who oversaw the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth games, I am familiar with, and therefore welcome, many of the framework provisions that go deep into the weeds of event organisation on matters such as ticket sales, unauthorised advertising, brand protection, transport logistics and so on. Previously, they had to be considered in discreet Bills for each and every event, which clearly does not make sense. The basic logic for this Bill is therefore sensible.
Although I am broadly supportive of the Bill, there are some changes that we would like to see, along the lines of what the shadow Secretary of State said earlier. In particular, many in the Lords expressed a concern that the definition of “events” used in the Bill initially seemed to cover way too narrow a group. I therefore appreciate the Secretary of State’s comments. Indeed, I remember us having a conversation about the matter at Silverstone and how there is some logic to including many of the important domestic events.
As the shadow Secretary of State pointed out, that does not necessarily mean everything all the time, but we can pick and choose elements of the Bill. That always causes complexities in such Bills, because it can cause some challenges, so we probably need to build in some flexibility. I am sure that, later on, as we go through the Bill’s stages, we will be able to work that out. There is a clear and strong feeling on behalf of the major domestic sporting events that were mentioned—Wimbledon, the grand prix and so on—that we do right by them and, quite frankly, make it easier for Government in dealing with those things. Again, let us just use a hefty dose of common sense.
There are a couple of other sport-related matters, which I would like to raise, that should be considered in the wider context of the Bill, and I would genuinely appreciate the Minister’s views on those in her closing comments. She will be aware of speculation about allowing alcohol sales at football games. The Conservatives introduced an amendment to the Football Governance Act 2025—I say “the Conservatives”, but it was my hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup, who is sitting on the Front Bench—for a consultation on lifting the alcohol ban in top-tier football. Unfortunately, despite a lot of agreement cross-party, that amendment was shot down by the then Labour Government. Will the Minister now reconsider that, and is the Bill an appropriate vehicle or opportunity for that consideration? For example, would alcohol sales be restricted at some of the events that we talk about in the Bill? Similarly, are the Government reconsidering the 3 pm blackout rule? That is nothing to do with the Bill, but I just wanted to take the opportunity to put the Minister on the spot.
I also want to touch on something that has been mentioned before, which is the listed events regime. Is that being reviewed, particularly in the context of the events being considered in the Bill? If there is Government support for hosting an event and taxpayers’ money is being put into it, there is a reasonable expectation that attendance and viewing of that event should be maximised in-country to maximise the overall benefit and inspiration that these things can provide. Is this therefore a good time to reconsider the listed events regime, particularly for events supported with taxpayers’ money and held in the home nations?
BBC Sport’s fantastic coverage of the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth games achieved record-breaking audiences on TV, streaming and online. I was fortunate, as the Ministers were, to attend the Glasgow Commonwealth games this year. The city and the organisers put on a fantastic show, particularly given the circumstances of how the games came about, which I think most people are familiar with. It was a deliberately smaller-scale event than the Birmingham games, and although the coverage on TNT Sports and Channel 5 was good, it did not get the breadth of coverage and therefore achieve the level of awareness in-country that we would have had, for example, had the BBC or another major broadcaster secured those rights. That raises questions about what the BBC is bidding for and how much it is bidding. That is definitely a debate for another day, though an important one.
I will end there by confirming that I broadly support the Bill and I certainly look forward to engaging constructively with Ministers as it goes through its remaining stages. I hope we will see some amendments supported by all parties.
It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston) in welcoming our hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) to her role—I know that she will be excellent. I also want to pay tribute to him as her predecessor. He was an exceptional Minister and shadow Secretary of State. He has always been an exceptional champion for the sectors that DCMS represents, and I know that he will be a formidable and quite terrifying Back Bencher as well, so it was a pleasure to hear from him.
At the risk of universal agreement breaking out from all corners of the room, I too widely support the Bill. Sport is one of our country’s greatest strengths and most successful worldwide exports. Major sporting occasions represent such a huge source of national pride and inspiration, as the Secretary of State said. They are a massive driver of tourism, investment and jobs, and when they are done correctly, their legacy can have tentacles that go on forever. We are world class at delivering them.
We know that British athletes and sportsmen are representing us on the world stage with the most phenomenal success. I was exceptionally proud of the UK deaf athletes who claimed 12 medals, including five gold, at the Tokyo 2025 Deaflympics, despite the fact that they received no public funding. They are elite athletes who make our country very proud. I say this as a gentle reminder to the Minister, given that sports is the theme today, to look again at their eligibility for UK Sport funding.
Our strength is reflected not only in our participation and elite performance, but in our ability to host and showcase some of the world’s most significant sporting events. This small island gave the world some of our best-loved sports—from football to cricket, lawn tennis to boxing, rugby to snooker. We may not always lead the world as we did in those halcyon days of the 1700s, when the small village of Hambledon in Hampshire, known as the cradle of cricket, took on the rest of the world and won, but iconic British fixtures, from the premier league to Wimbledon, the British grand prix to the grand national, are globally synonymous with their sports. They bring people to our shores, generate economic growth, inspire participation and project the United Kingdom’s reputation around the world.
That reputation is under pressure. The gap in soft power between the UK and our competitor nations is closing. Brand Finance has said that the UK has recorded a “sharper-than-average” drop in soft power, and the British Council says that the lead that western nations, including the UK, hold over our competitors is “narrowing”. That is why—I gently say to the Front Bench—it is disappointing that the Government’s action on soft power has failed to keep pace with their rhetoric. I really welcomed the creation of the UK Soft Power Council, but it cannot even claim to be a talking shop when it has met only four times in the last 18 months and the Culture Secretary, whom I admire enormously and who chairs it, has attended only twice. It needs to put together a coherent strategy, and if it did, major events would play a significant role.
Our DCMS Committee will shortly report back on our recent inquiry into major events. The UK’s events sector is an engine for so much growth, but it has received limited attention from the Government until now. They could be doing so much more to unleash its potential and ease some of its constraints, so this Bill is a good place to start to redress that balance. In particular, given that when done well the ratio of investment to return on these kinds of things is so high, it makes sense for the Government to do all they can to attract opportunities to hold all kinds of major events, particularly sporting events.
The Sport and Recreation Alliance told our Committee, as part of our inquiry:
“Dedicated major events legislation would strengthen the UK’s global position as a key destination for major sporting events”,
so I really support the principle of the Bill. Bespoke legislation for individual events creates uncertainty and is unwieldly and impractical. The framework introduced by this new legislation is welcomed by everybody—organisers, rights holders, sponsors and hosts.
Our noble colleagues in the other place made such important improvements by widening the legislation to include other substantial annual events. To be honest, that is something our Committee would have introduced, had it not already been done—I suppose we should not be at all surprised that amendments proposed by the Paralympic medallist Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson have won that race. As she said, legislation in this area does not come along often, so we must take advantage of the opportunity.
When Parliament has the chance to establish the framework, we should ensure that it is robust enough to support not only the next tournament but the ecosystem that exists all year. The benefits of the Bill in its amended form—creating offences on ticket touting, ambush marketing, and unauthorised trading and association—will be felt not just by the one-off totemic events, but by the stalwarts. That is why I am so grateful to the Secretary of State for her signal today that the Government do not intend to remove the amendments made in the House of Lords.
Throughout our Committee’s inquiry, the evidence we received underlined a few wider concerns. The major events sector does not always feel recognised as a strategic national asset. Particularly organisers outside the world of sport often feel excluded from national planning and policymaking. The flower shows, cultural festivals, music festivals and military tattoos attract tourists, create jobs and bring people together, yet many witnesses told us that they do not feel recognised in the same way as their sporting counterparts. Across the board, the events sector is asking for better co-ordination and the removal of barriers that prevent it from reaching its economic potential. Witness after witness called for better cross-Government working, clearer points of contact, streamlined approvals and a more coherent long-term strategy.
I appreciate that the Bill aims to make the United Kingdom more competitive in winning bids to host international sporting events, but it does not do much to alleviate the concerns that we have heard from other event organisers across the country about things such as the weight of bureaucracy, the cost of policing and the integration of events with transport plans, to name just a few. During the passage of the Bill in the other place, I was grateful to hear that the Government have promised a major events strategy, which we welcome. We hope that the Government will lean heavily on the conclusions and recommendations in our Committee’s report when it is published.
I want to say one final thing about the contribution of business events. They really should not be forgotten. Conferences, exhibitions and trade fairs generate huge economic value for the UK and bring in massive inward investment. More than a million conferences and business meetings take place in the UK every year, generating £33.6 billion for the UK economy. Given its firepower, it is almost laughable that there is not an industrial strategy for the sector alone. The business events sector means business. We will shortly be releasing a stand-alone report on the topic, which I hope the Government are minded to take note of.
In conclusion, this Bill is a welcome step. It has the potential to strengthen the UK’s ability to compete for and host major sporting events. It provides a more consistent framework and reflects the importance of sport to our economies, communities and international standing, but it needs to be the starting point of the conversation. For those reasons, I support the Bill’s objectives, welcome the improvements made in the other place and encourage the Government to see it as the beginning of a wider and more ambitious vision for the future.
Without wanting to make this some sort of grand, “Kumbaya” and “let’s all hold hands” moment, I also very much support the Bill. I am pretty certain that the Secretary of State will secure the necessary legislative consent motion from the Scottish Parliament, given the devolved nature of so much of what is included. She will get very few opportunities to have such buy-in from everybody here, so I hope she enjoys that moment. I can say with a great deal of confidence that it will not last all that long.
It is surely in everybody’s interests to create a legislative approach that can better equip the UK to attract and deliver the biggest international sporting events. We are fortunate in the UK because we have a great global reputation for being able to produce those events. We have put on some stunning sporting events throughout the decades, and we will be able to build on that with this legislation. This Bill will hopefully bolster that reputation and ensure that we are one of the top contenders for major international sporting events in the future.
The hon. Gentleman just came into the Chamber, but given that we probably have the necessary time, I will give way to him.
Alan Gemmell
It was very nice to hear the hon. Member being so positive about the UK, and I wanted to underscore that. I also wanted to say, as a former diplomat, that it was great to see the role that these events play in our soft power. I wonder if he might comment on how important these events are for Scotland and the whole UK in promoting who we are in the world.
Absolutely—I think we all appreciate the efforts that are being made to ensure that all parts of the United Kingdom are promoted adequately. I am sure that, like me, the hon. Gentleman will be watching very carefully to see that Scotland gets promoted in events in the future.
I think it is fair to say that nothing enthuses and unites the whole of the UK more than sporting success and seeing people who are representing our nations become prized athletes winning medals. It was great to see that happening in the last few months in both the European championship and the Commonwealth games. We even got to the world cup this year for the first time in 28 years! The tartan army charmed all of Boston and Miami with its usual antics, which thrilled, excited and impressed so many of our American colleagues. Unfortunately, that did not translate to activities on the football field—I will leave it at that—but it was a huge unifying force. The hon. Member for Hamilton and Clyde Valley (Imogen Walker) is quite right that it united all of us, whatever our political persuasion and whatever side of constitutional debates we are on, in support of our national side.
As the Secretary of State referenced, this year Scotland stepped in at the last moment to host the Commonwealth games in Glasgow. I will not go over the reasons for that, but we should all be grateful that Glasgow did what Glasgow does, which is to step in at the last moment. I think we can safely say that Glasgow rescued the Commonwealth games. I think the model that was adopted in Glasgow for what was described as a more scaled-down version of the games will be the blueprint, and I have heard other nations that are interested in bidding in the future saying that they will look closely at that model. The Commonwealth games were an overwhelming success and perfectly showcased Glasgow, while allowing Scots and those from the rest of the UK to see at first hand a range of sports that caught the imagination, including sports that we might not normally watch, which is only available with the Commonwealth games.
Where Glasgow stepped up to host the games, the BBC most definitely did not. This was the first Commonwealth games in 72 years that the BBC did not fully cover, and that was because it offered what could only be described as a derisory bid for the rights, which it lost to the subscription service TNT. Because that is a subscription service, people had to pay to watch the games, and many sporting fans lost the opportunity to follow the games. That was so bad.
If we contrast that with the European athletics championships only a few weeks later in Birmingham, the BBC appropriately bid, secured the rights and even went as far as to change its week’s scheduling so that people could see the games. In Scotland, we feel that we lost out a little bit there. I hope the Secretary of State will raise that with the BBC, to find out why that was allowed to happen and ensure that it never happens again. Wherever the games are held, the BBC should be covering something as significant and popular as the Commonwealth games.
Although there is no provision in the Bill about broadcasting rights, I support some of the things that have been said about free-to-air coverage of what we call the crown jewels of events. We in Scotland lost free-to-air coverage of the national men’s football team’s games for something like six years—we went without any opportunity to see those games for free, like everybody else across the United Kingdom, which meant that a lot of fans could not follow our national team. That has now been put right, and we were able to see the Scotland games and qualifiers on the BBC, but we have to ensure that everybody has the right to see the national men’s football team qualifying and appearing in major championships.
I want to spend a few minutes focusing on the clauses that relate to ticket touting. For the many of us who care passionately about live music and the whole music fan experience, this Bill feels like a little bit of a disappointment. It is a lost opportunity to ensure that the scourge of ticket touting is tackled right across the sporting and entertainment environment. We are grateful that the Government are tackling ticket touting at sports events, but music fans have been let down by what they see as a lack of action on this issue. Although the Government are prepared to act on behalf of the sports sector, music fans will again have to wait before having their issues properly resolved.
Clauses 5 and 6 are good clauses, and they set out regulations on ticket touting for sporting events. This fast-tracked, heavy-duty legislation goes further than what the live music sector is asking for, as it makes all unauthorised ticket resale a criminal offence for major sporting events, full stop. The Government have rightly recognised the urgency, found parliamentary time and the necessary legislation, and acted decisively to shield sports fans and official sports rights holders—and quite right too, but surely music fans deserve the same attention.
The millions of people who form the backbone of our world-leading £8 billion music industry are to remain exposed to the touts, spivs and profiteers. For music, the Government have offered the promise of a draft ticket tout ban Bill. But let us be clear: until we see the draft Bill and work starts on it, it is pretty much just an aspiration, and it exposes the issue to a host of pre-legislative scrutiny, consultations, delays, and a long and winding road through this House.
I listened carefully to the Secretary of State’s response when I intervened on her, and I think I heard her say that action was going to be imminent, and that we would see something relating to music quickly. I really hope that is the case, because music fans are having to pay through the nose to see their favourite bands, and it is costing something like £145 million a year according to the sector. The UK music industry is asking not for a total ban on resale; it is asking for a resale price cap that prohibits someone from reselling a ticket for more than the original cost, with service fee limits to ensure that the price cap cannot be undermined by inflated fees or hidden charges placed on consumers, and with volume limits to make it unlawful for someone to buy more tickets for an event than one individual is permitted to buy on the primary market.
We have heard the Secretary of State say this before, and the Government roughly support all those endeavours and issues, but now we need to get it done—please. What we have is great for sports—I think everybody welcomes this, and I am sure it will go a long way to ensuring that sports fans are protected—but we need the same type of action and legislation for music fans. I do not want to end on a sour note, although I think the Secretary of State would expect me to say these things to her. I am encouraged by what she has said; as we go forward, let us all work together and get this issue fixed for music too.
I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I also put on record, because the Secretary of State has not, my delight that my old club, the London Broncos, won silverware at the weekend. London beating the north at their own sport—it was a fantastic sight to watch—[Interruption.] The Secretary of State is really enjoying that! But let me start seriously by saying that the Bill is a welcome step in the right direction for major sporting events across the UK. I thank hon. Members from across both Houses for their contributions to the debates on the Bill so far, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston) for his fantastic championing of DCMS over many years—I know he will continue to do that—and for putting up with me for the past 12 months.
As we all know, major sporting events make a substantial social and economic contribution to our country and, more often than not, the journey from bidding stage to delivery spans across Governments, so it is vital that we get this right and seek to work constructively wherever possible. It is notable that the turquoise goal hangers have not even turned up for this major debate, despite making references in the press about hosting events in the future—it is not the first time that has happened, Madam Deputy Speaker.
In an increasingly competitive international bidding environment, the Bill should help the UK to attract more events and allow those we already stage to be more successful. I am therefore pleased that the Government have accepted some of the amendments made in the other place, particularly by expanding the scope of the Bill to a wider range of major sporting events, including those taking place on a regular basis. The objective of the Bill should be to streamline the bidding and delivery aspects of hosting major sporting events. That is a principle that we can support, because as Conservatives we believe fundamentally that Britain succeeds when the Government get out of the way. I could provide many sporting examples to highlight that point, but in the interests of time I will highlight just three.
First, although football is not without its issues—we have discussed that on many occasions—our domestic football competitions such as the premier league and the English football league continue to lead the world in attracting investment and fans from across the world. We should never apologise for that success, nor forget why British football continues to deliver billions of inward investment and champion our soft power across the world. The success of football across the UK, but particularly in England, also means that we are well placed for future bids with our stadiums and supporting infrastructure such as training bases. The recent example of the Barcelona men’s team training at St George’s Park highlights again what a fantastic facility it is. It will continue to support new and existing coaches and, I hope, further success on the pitch for England’s national teams.
I would also like to put on record my thanks to our football associations for their ongoing leadership work both at home and overseas in very challenging circumstances, as we have sadly seen again this summer with the ongoing FIFA saga. Such diplomatic skills will continue to be vital for any future bids to host competitions, and I thank officials for their ongoing work.
Secondly, I will briefly mention Formula 1, and the commercial vision and leadership that, like the premier league, continues to put the UK at the top of the international podium. Formula 1’s success embodies the very best of international competition and sports science, creating fantastic jobs and investment across Britain that stretches far beyond the grand prix weekend, as I saw again on a recent visit to the Formula 1 media centre in Biggin Hill.
The third example is the national lottery, one of the greatest Conservative legacies, which has allowed UK Sport, with the support of lottery players, to transform our athletic success across multiple sports. Gone are the days when a more state-controlled approach to sport saw us languish in the middle tables. This is another area where we will seek to continue to work constructively with the Government to ensure that funding for sport is maximised.
From the premier league to Formula 1, the Open, the London marathon, Wimbledon and beyond, our nation’s sporting heritage is rich and continues to lead the world. In fact, I cannot see why events like the British grand prix at Silverstone, the Open or the London marathon were excluded from the remit of the Bill in the first place. These events provide an incredible return on investment for this country, with independent assessments already anticipating that Euro 2028 will generate over £3.2 billion of social economic benefits for the UK and Ireland between 2028 and 2031. That is the equivalent of approximately £5.74 of benefit for every £1 invested.
It is therefore welcome that the Government have accepted the amendments in the other place to allow the benefits of the Bill and the subsequent framework to be extended to events that already benefit this country. However, as the shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) set out, and many noble Lords made clear throughout the passage of the Bill in the other place, there are still serious questions that need to be addressed on the Government’s approach to major events.
First, why have the Government tabled a Bill to support hosting major sporting events when their own major events strategy, which has been promised, is still unpublished? Does the Minister not see that the Bill should be part of that strategy and that they are at risk of putting the cart before the horse?
Secondly, the Bill fails to address major fiscal and regulatory concerns outlined by organisers of major events. They include proposals by the Home Office to charge for policing services, the implementation of Martyn’s law, increasing employment costs, higher business rates and the Care Quality Commission’s new regulations.
On CQC regulation, I know the sporting events sector has already had discussions with the Department of Health and Social Care and the CQC on an exemption for those who provide medical services for athletes, performers and officials, but, as we have seen for the past two years, Ministers have failed to grasp the nettle and provide urgent clarity to the sector. Will the Secretary of State or the Minister please now make sure that they or their ministerial colleagues provide confirmation and clarity on the introduction of the exemption as soon as possible, so that major sporting events are not negatively delayed or impacted by unintended consequences?
We have also heard from our constituents about the increased costs for businesses under successive Labour Governments. That is no different for those who host major sporting events. The Prime Minister might be able to afford his Everton season ticket, but there are many out there who will no longer be able to afford to watch their beloved teams thanks to the increased costs being piled on to clubs across the country. We have heard already about the impact of changes to events that are televised on national TV for free. This is an ongoing challenge that sports are facing; it is having direct consequences for fans across the country, whether they seek to watch sport in person or at home.
Not only have the Government saddled organisers with more costs in the form of minimum wage increases, national insurance increases, business rates increases and energy costs; now the Home Office is threatening to increase the cost of policing these kinds of events. A joined-up Government approach would see a guarantee that our major sporting events benefit from policing services in the same way as every other sector of the economy, and ensure that they are not forced to pay again for public services that they have already paid for through high levels of taxation. Will the Secretary of State commit to making sure that no extra police charges will be imposed on sporting events, and to making sure that if the Government proceed in this way, an impact assessment of the ability of those events to swallow such costs is published as soon as possible?
More broadly, this Government’s words on sports are not being matched by their actions, as we have seen and heard today. I hope that the new Prime Minister changes direction on this, because we all know that having a good strategy is one thing—and this Bill will make it easier to deliver such events—but the country will miss out if we do not address some of the sporting cuts that have been made over the past two years, particularly at the grassroots. It is future generations that will miss out on being inspired if we do not host such events. Since this Labour Government came in two years ago, they have cut £57 million from the opening school facilities fund, £127 million a year from the primary school PE and sport premium, £35 million from investment in grassroots cricket, £11 million from the multi-sport grassroots facilities programme, and £25 million in real terms from grassroots sports investment, compared with the previous Conservative Government. This is not a good record, and it is our sports and our grassroots facilities that are paying the price.
While in government, the Conservative party invested more than £1.5 billion in grassroots, school and elite sports, including an unprecedented £400 million investment in grassroots sport and £300 million of emergency funding to support community sports clubs and grassroots organisations. Perhaps the programme we Conservatives should be most proud of is the PE and sport premium; introduced to help inspire a generation after the London Olympics, it was worth £600 million between 2023 and 2025 alone, and has totalled almost £3.5 billion, directly for schools, since we introduced it in 2013. This summer of sport was built on the legacy of the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics, the 2014 Glasgow Commonwealth games, the 2015 rugby world cup, the 2019 cricket world cup, the 2020 men’s Euro final and the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth games, to name just a few of the incredible events that have taken place. However, if the Government continue down this path of not funding sport properly, I am afraid there will be less money for future generations and the future stars we so need. As I have said, I sincerely hope that the Government help this Department to change the direction that we have seen it take over the past two years.
To conclude, this Bill is a welcome move for elite sport and major international events, and we will work constructively to try to improve it as it passes through the Commons. However, this Labour Government must change direction. They must reduce costs for all levels of sport; otherwise, we will lose our seat at the top table of international sport, and the next generation will not benefit from hosting such major, incredible events.
I am grateful to all hon. Members across the House who have contributed to today’s debate, which has shown cross-party recognition of the importance of major sporting events and their ability to showcase the very best of our country. I will speak about the Bill, its importance and its provisions, and will address some of the wider points raised in the debate.
The UK is an undisputed world leader when it comes to hosting major sporting events, and the benefits of these occasions are felt right across the country. We all fondly remember the London 2012 Olympics, as the Secretary of State and many others have said in this debate. Events such as these bring huge benefits and opportunities. The London Olympics and Paralympics brought £14 billion of trade and investment benefit to the UK, alongside the regeneration of 500 acres of east London, and 400,000 Londoners participated in grassroots sports in the three years following the games. In my area of South Yorkshire, the Olympic legacy park in Sheffield is another testament to the transformative power these international events can have. It stands as the only Olympic legacy park in a city that has not hosted the games.
More recently, the 2022 Birmingham Commonwealth games contributed over £1 billion to the UK economy, and events such as the 2025 women’s rugby world cup, the 2026 women’s cricket world cup and the recent outdoor European athletics championships—it was the first time the UK had hosted the championships—have brought, and will bring, their own legacy benefits. Of course, we note the huge success of the Glasgow Commonwealth games, and the fact that Glasgow really stepped up to host those games at the last minute.
Looking ahead, the grand départ of the Tour de France and the Tour de France Femmes in 2027, and a potential world athletics championships in 2029, will inspire the next generation and bring live sport to communities across the country. Indeed, we expect the Tour de France stages to be the most accessible major sporting event Great Britain has ever hosted, bringing £150 million in economic benefits across the country.
This Government are committed to not only hosting major sporting events, but making sure that the benefits are felt far beyond the field of play. As I have said in this House before, inactivity is the story of inequality, and that is why this Government are investing at least £400 million in community sports facilities across the country over the next four years, and it is why we are determined that major events should support greater grassroots participation. I understand the power of sport to inspire in every postcode. That point was made powerfully by my hon. Friends the Members for Hamilton and Clyde Valley (Imogen Walker), and for Dartford (Jim Dickson).
This legislation will strengthen our ability to bid successfully for major sporting events, and it will ensure that we are ready to create more moments like London 2012 or Birmingham 2022. France and Australia already have similar legislative frameworks, and France’s recent success in hosting the Olympic and Paralympic games and the rugby world cup demonstrates the value of having these protections in place. I will briefly run through the Bill’s provisions and how they will be enforced, but before I do, it is worth noting that this legislation is only one component of our broader national ambition.
As I recently announced to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, we are developing a major event strategy, to be published in the near future. For the first time, we will have a comprehensive strategy that unites sport, culture, arts and business events under a single strategic framework designed to simplify and drive growth. I recognise the points that the Chair of the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage), has raised, and the work her Committee has done. In particular, I have heard her calls on business events. Since I appeared in front of her Select Committee, I have convened more than one cross-Government meeting, and I am committed to ensuring that the Government do better in this area.
The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French), asked why we were, in his words, putting the cart before the horse and not publishing the strategy before this Bill. That is because we have legal deadlines to meet for Euro 2028. If we were not debating this ambitious Bill, we would be debating a Euro 2028 Bill, similar to the one for the Commonwealth games that he took through the House.
Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)
I am privileged to represent Hampden Park in Glasgow, which will be one of the stadiums that hosts Euro 2028. It is a huge opportunity, and it attracts investment, as the Minister has said. Does she agree that when we have these major sporting events, it is important that the right legislation is in place for the communities around the stadium, and that the Government work with the council and police to ensure that there is no antisocial behaviour, littering or other disruption to those communities?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and his point goes to the heart of this Bill. The process should be collaborative and should work for local people. That speaks to the point I was going to come on to make, which is that event-specific regulations—they will set out which provisions will be applied to an event, including information such as the time period and how the provisions apply to the local area—will be subject to parliamentary debate and scrutiny through the statutory instrument process.
Moving on to some of the specifics in the Bill, the ticketing provisions are designed to ensure that tickets can be resold only with the authorisation of the event owner or organiser. This measure will clamp down on ticket touts who seek to exploit sports fans and profiteer from major sporting moments. We saw such legislation work effectively at London 2012, and this Bill will make that the baseline for major sporting events. Where needed, local trading standards authorities and the Competition and Markets Authority will be able to enforce the Bill. While it does not prohibit official reselling of tickets at above face value, we will bring in further legislation in this area. The Secretary of State was clear in her remarks about the draft legislation being there so that we can get this right, but she was also clear that the issue should be a high priority for this Session.
The Bill will introduce time-limited restricted zones around competition venues, fan zones and transport hubs to prevent aggressive ambush marketing and unauthorised street trading. Without those protections, the women’s Euros in 2022 faced persistent street trading and unauthorised advertising blimps. In contrast, the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth games used these powers to swiftly resolve more than 50 advertising and trading infringements, protecting official sponsors and keeping spectator routes safe. The Bill will empower local authorities to undertake enforcement at future events.
The Bill ensures that the interests of those with an existing trading licence are taken into account when a determination is made on an application to trade in a restricted zone, but we are absolutely determined to make sure that the Bill is as strong as possible on protecting small businesses. We will work across the House to make sure that it delivers on that.
The Bill will prohibit unauthorised association. That will prevent businesses from falsely suggesting to the public that they have an official connection with an event in order to gain exposure. Weak controls around unauthorised association make sponsoring an event less appealing and allow businesses to benefit without giving financial support. The Bill sets out controls to prevent that from happening; it gives the power to enforce the provisions to designated enforcers, which are likely to be event owners or organisers. Protections will have been built in to ensure proportionality, and to help ensure that small businesses can once again benefit from major events on their doorstep. It is our intention to make sure that small businesses benefit from major events, and I am very keen to work with Members across the House to deliver this.
We are willing to work constructively on this issue. Can we also ensure that there is significant flexibility for events such as Wimbledon, just to name one? A lot of residents who live nearby suffer the parking stress that we heard about from colleagues. During such events, people normally hire out driveways, which helps with parking capacity. Will there be enough flexibility in the legislation to allow that kind of thing to carry on?
The hon. Gentleman makes a really important and valid point, and I look forward to continuing the conversation with him in Bill Committee, when we can pick up on that point. I will touch on recurrent events in a moment, but first I will touch briefly on transport.
The Bill enables integrated, cross-boundary transport plans and temporary traffic powers in England for local traffic authorities. My hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) raised this important point. I assure him that plans will be collaborative, and will have to work with local people. A good example is the games route network used in Birmingham 2022, which ensured that spectators could move safely and efficiently, while minimising disruption to local residents and businesses.
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
The Minister will know that Peel Land is hoping to support a bid for the Ryder cup to come to the Hulton Park site in my Bolton West constituency. I have serious reservations about the infrastructure at that site, and many of my constituents have grave concerns, predominantly about road traffic. In particular, the Westhoughton Chequerbent roundabout is chock-a-block with traffic at all times of the day. Will the Minister meet me to hear our concerns, and make sure that any putative bid at a future date addresses the infrastructure concerns that I raised with the Prime Minister earlier in the year ,when he was in his previous role as Mayor of Greater Manchester?
My hon. Friend makes a really important point on behalf of the people he represents, and I would be absolutely delighted to meet him to discuss it further.
As the Secretary of State mentioned, we are well aware of the concerns about recurrent domestic events, and we recognise the opportunities available. We will seek to address this issue during the passage of the Bill, and I welcome the comments from those on the Opposition Front Bench. The hon. Member for South Northamptonshire (Sarah Bool) made an important point regarding Silverstone, and I can assure her that both the Secretary of State and I are passionate about it too, having been there with the hon. Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston). The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul), made an important point on this issue too, and I welcome the comments from the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam), about working with us on recurrent events. I look forward to doing that in Committee.
I welcome the fact that the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), broadly supports the Bill. I appreciate her point about music events, and she asks why they were not included. The Bill was originally designed for biddable events, which is why music events were not included. Indeed, that is why some of the recurrent events were not initially included. However, we have heard the points made in this House and the other place, and we will work with people to get this right.
The whole of the UK stands to benefit from major sporting events, and we are committed to seeing the reward shared across the four nations. From the inception of the Bill, we have worked closely with devolved partners to ensure that it serves the whole Union, and we will continue to work with each devolved Government to ensure that, where appropriate, legislative consent motions are secured.
I would like to cover some of the broader points, which were mainly put to me by the hon. Member for Droitwich and Evesham. I do not want to overstate it, but I pay tribute to him for all the work that he has done, both on the Opposition Front Bench and as a Minister before that. He put various questions to me, and I will touch briefly on some of them. He mentioned the 3 pm blackout, which exists to protect ticket sales for lower leagues in the football pyramid. As a former Minister for Sport, he will know that it is an issue for the Football Association, but we support the current situation, as we recognise the importance of this for the lower leagues. He raised a point about alcohol, and he is absolutely right. We debated this during the passage of the Football Governance Bill, and there are of course different views. The ban was originally introduced to protect fans, but I recognise the debate that is taking place. It is an issue for the Home Office, so I will reflect the points he makes to the relevant Minister.
Both the hon. Gentleman and the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) mentioned the Commonwealth games coverage. Ultimately, the hon. Member for Droitwich and Evesham will know, as a former Minister, that this was a decision for Commonwealth Sport as the rights holder, and there is a balance between accessibility and commercial considerations. I know he was in attendance at the Commonwealth games, and I think that TNT did a very good job of making it accessible. There was also work on radio, with S4C and the BBC, and free-to-air highlights on Channel 5. However, I do acknowledge the point that the fact the BBC did not cover it means there was not so much wider awareness, but he will appreciate that that issue is independent of Government.
The Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee made a point about deaf athletes and the deaf Olympics. UK Sport has met those involved, as have I as the Minister, and I would like to assure both the Select Committee and the House, as well as anyone watching our proceedings, that we absolutely have not forgotten the issue. I wrote to the Select Committee earlier this year, and this is something that I and the Secretary of State care very much about. I will update both the House and the Select Committee on that issue.
Major sporting events can change lives, transform communities and inspire people to get involved in sport. This Bill will make sure we are ready to secure more of these incredibly important global events and bring their power to communities across the UK. We will champion fans, protect commercial rights and give organisers the reassurance they need to come to our country and cement the UK as a world leader in this space, so I commend this Bill to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a Second time.