Arts

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Thursday 1st February 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Bragg, first for his choice of subject today, secondly for his excellent introduction, and thirdly for inspiring what has been a truly fantastic debate from across the whole House.

I suspect that his career is not one that he ever envisaged as he was growing up. We all remember the “South Bank Show”, but when he joined your Lordships’ House in 1998 it was felt that there could be a conflict of interest so he should be sidelined into a quieter radio slot, with a new programme called “In Our Time”. That worked, did it not? It is a wonderful programme, delightfully curious about everything and anything and, however intellectual the subject, it is never pretentious or boring—just like him. He is not pretentious and boring, I hasten to add. For more than 1,000 episodes, it has gently educated through conversation on the widest range of subjects.

The strength of this debate has been its depth, its breadth and the range of cultural issues that we have debated. I have to confess that I have never enjoyed opera, but that is despite the best efforts of my comprehensive school, which gave us the opportunity to experience the arts, and I retain a love of music, drama, theatre and literature. It was a bit harsh that when I became the culture Minister in Northern Ireland, the Irish Times wrote—and I paraphrase only gently—“What hope was there when her favourite programme was ‘Coronation Street’?”.

This debate is everything I thought it could be, covering everything from music to theatre, TV and film to museums, libraries and galleries, books, poetry, dance and drama. The ability to give expression to emotions, to educate and inform and to reach beyond superficial divisions allows us to unite and bring communities together. Never to be underestimated, these industries give us pleasure and support our well-being.

Also, as my noble friend Lady McIntosh said, they bring power to move us. Why was it that, after years of campaigning—including Questions and speeches in Parliament, some brilliant journalism and an excellent BBC documentary—it took an ITV drama about the Post Office scandal to capture the imagination of the public and force action in a way that the totally committed efforts of others had not? Partly, it was because of the brilliant writing, production and acting. It made us invest our emotions in those characters. We empathised, we were outraged, it gave us insight and it led to action. It was not for the first time, but it was on an extraordinary scale, as was Jimmy McGovern’s “Hillsborough” drama and, as my noble friend Lord Cashman said, “Cathy Come Home”. Telling a true story through drama can breathe life into something we know about but we have not felt.

This debate has raised a wide range of issues; lots of concerns have been raised about both funding and the pipeline of talent. My noble friend Lady Thornton spoke about how young people can be engaged and enthused by museums and theatre. We heard a lot from the noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans and others about the role of music in health—for example, the growth of community choirs and how they are bringing people together. I am one of those people who benefited from school music lessons. I am not sure that my neighbours agreed, as I was allocated the trumpet to play at the time. Those opportunities are fewer and farther between today.

I was really struck by the comments from the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, and my noble friend Lady Rebuck about books and libraries. The figure she gave of £14 million to reinstate school libraries in primary schools is one that we should all heed. I am sure I am not alone and many of us still recall going to the local library from an early age and having to beg the librarian to be able to use the adult library, because we had read all the books in the junior library. Today, one of my great pleasures at weekends is browsing around bookshops. As much as I love my Kindle, nothing replaces that hard copy of a book, and they all contribute. My noble friends Lord Bassam and Lord Grantchester and others commented about the role of the arts in regeneration for our communities. That economic role is vital. How many other industries have this reach across so many other areas of society? It is hard to think of anything else.

As we have heard from many, but we too often underestimate, the arts and culture industry is probably the most highly productive non-financial sector in the economy. Book publishing and artistic creation lead the way, but our museums and galleries and performance arts make a significant contribution.

We have heard that the industry receives some public funding, but it more than pays that back. The Centre for Economics and Business Research calculated that a total of £3.4 billion was paid by the industry in VAT, corporation tax, income tax and national insurance—many times more than the just over £400 million that some cultural organisations received from Arts Council England. Such funding has to be seen as an investment. It is not just a grant, as the noble Lord, Lord Vaizey, and my noble friend Lord Kinnock said.

The TV and film industry certainly plays its part. The 2023 annual census by the Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television revealed that, as they recovered from the pandemic, TV sector revenues increased by more than 20% in 2022 to nearly £4 billion, despite the difficult economic challenges faced. That is largely due to the world-class skills of our production teams.

In celebrating that contribution, which inspires and entertains us, we have a duty to look at how we can support and protect those working in the TV and film industry. There are many issues affecting those who work in the wider creative arts industries. I know from the 10 years when I chaired the Production Exchange charity that few earn large salaries; that self-employed and contractual work can be erratic; and that, for many, there is little job security. There are also serious health and safety issues to be addressed.

I thank the TUC, as well as the trade unions BECTU and Prospect. I am especially grateful to the Mark Milsome Foundation for the information and advice it has provided. Mark Milsome was well known in the film industry as an experienced, inspirational, innovative and talented cinematographer. The films on which he worked—“Little Voice”, “Four Weddings and a Funeral”, “Brassed Off”, “The History Boys”, “The Constant Gardener” and many more—are known to us all. In 2017 he was killed in Ghana when a stunt he was filming went horribly, tragically and fatally wrong. Three years later, in his ruling of this as an accidental death, the coroner declared that

“the risk of Mr Milsome being harmed or fatally injured was not effectively recognised, assessed, communicated or managed”.

That is shocking. It is also devastating as it is clear that this could and should have been prevented. For many in the film and TV industry, their work may also be their passion, but it is still a job and they deserve no less consideration because of that.

Mark’s case is not an isolated one but it is one of the most serious. I pay tribute to his family, his colleagues and his friends, who have set up a foundation in his name to help protect others. Three-quarters of those who work in this industry have said that their safety or that of a colleague had been compromised. Most who had reported incidents wanted to remain anonymous for fear of losing future employment, and too many people who have responsibility for health and safety do not have the necessary qualifications or experience. Yet, because of cuts, the Health and Safety Executive has 500 fewer inspectors today than in 2010, so there are fewer inspections and the issuing of fewer notices that would lead to improvements being made. That has a direct and possibly disproportionate impact on the arts sector, where there is unlikely to be an HR department on specific projects and it is unlikely that producers have the training to be fully competent to do risk assessments. Those who work in this industry, which brings us so much pleasure, deserve better.

Sometimes, small changes can bring about great improvements. We need to ask ourselves some questions; I hope to discuss them further with the Minister. Could this issue be addressed through more effective monitoring and inspections, or are fresh guidance and legislation needed? Are the existing training requirements adequate and how are they assessed? Why can this not apply to UK staff who are employed in the UK but work in other countries? It is not just about money; so much effective work could be done on the above issues. The will, commitment and support from both the industry and government could make a real difference and save lives. I hope that it will be possible for the Minister and I to meet campaigners to discuss this.

This has been an amazing debate, but we expected nothing less. At the beginning, my noble friend Lord Bragg made it clear that our support and the contribution made by the arts are not just the cherry on the cake but are integral and central to all that we do. My noble friend Lord Wood talked about public good, and my noble friend Lord Kinnock warned us against national cultural complacency.

Today we have heard, across the House and from all corners of this Chamber, the ambitions we have for our British artists, our performers, writers and painters—a whole range of areas. I was asked earlier today what I hoped for from today’s debate, and I said that I would like to see us kickstart a new national renewal of commitment to how we use the arts across every part of society, whether it is in regeneration or in drama, ensuring that in every way we contribute to well-being and the economy and moving away from warm words and simply saying that we want an analysis of what is good. We can use this debate to kick-start that, to have a real sense of what we can achieve from the ambition of those who work in our creative arts, with our support. The noble Lord, Lord Bragg, has done this House a great service with this debate today.

Mobile Roaming Charges

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Thursday 7th February 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

Well, my Lords, that sounds extraordinarily complacent and very much, “Not me, guv”. Has the Minister seen the report on the Huffington Post UK website about proposals from his department that pave the way for major increases to mobile phone bills for UK citizens travelling in Europe post Brexit? Our businesses, manufacturing firms, struggling SMEs and new start-ups are already having to prepare for how they will do business in Europe post Brexit. This will be a bitter blow for those companies marketing their products or looking for investment in the EU.

Is this not just another cost to British businesses from the Government’s mishandling of Brexit? In effect, it is a trade tax. Given the similar proposals in the statutory instrument on credit cards forcing higher charges on UK businesses, does the Minister really understand the impact that this double whammy is going to have on UK enterprise? Will he commit today, in the interests of UK plc, to withdraw both of these orders and think again?

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

My Lords, I think that there may be some misunderstanding about this. The Huffington Post commented on an SI that was laid which is a no-deal SI. The best way that noble Lords and Members of the other place can prevent these changes happening is to agree a deal. However, if there is no deal we have to face the inevitable consequences of that. A lot of the issues that have arisen not only with this subject but with other SIs stem from not distinguishing between the effect of the SI itself and the effect of leaving the EU. In this case, it is not fair to say that we have not prepared for that. In fact, the technical notice that outlined all these considerations was issued in September. It is not a question of simply withdrawing the instrument; if we are no longer in the EU, we will not be able to prevent EU operators increasing charges to UK operators. They will then have to accept those higher charges, which inevitably will be passed on to consumers. The issue is that if we leave the EU we will not be able to participate in the harmonised wholesale roaming prices, so I do not accept the analysis of the noble Baroness. That is why it is not possible to withdraw the SI, if we are acting responsibly in the event of no deal.

Broadband: Full-fibre Coverage

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Tuesday 24th July 2018 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord welcomes this ambitious target, because he has been one of the people who have been very critical of where we are at the moment. He is absolutely right that it will cost money. This is an ambitious target to get from where we are now, which is 4%, to nationwide coverage by 2033. We think we will get to about 50% by 2025. It is estimated that it will cost about £30 billion. We estimate that the Government will have to contribute with top-up money to the hardest-to-reach areas in the region of £3 billion to £5 billion.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

Last Thursday, my noble friend Lord Stevenson of Balmacara asked the Minister’s colleague, the noble Viscount, Lord Younger of Leckie, whether he was backing the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s call to switch off every copper phone line in the UK to force telecoms firms to improve their rural broadband speeds. The noble Viscount, Lord Younger, said that he had not heard about it, but I am sure the Minister at the Dispatch Box today has had time to consider the Chancellor’s words. Does he back the Chancellor’s call to switch off every copper phone line in the UK?

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

I think what the Chancellor was referring to was an ambition that in due course—we are saying by 2033—there will be nationwide coverage of fibre to the premises, which I think everyone understands is superior in every way to copper wire. Therefore, if we have nationwide coverage of fibre to the premises, we will not need copper wires.

BBC: Brexit

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Tuesday 30th January 2018 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

There are about 3,000 comments a day—I do not know the details of any complaints.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

My Lords, is it not the case that, when somebody complains about political bias in the media, it is normally because they do not like what the person they are listening to is saying, rather than because of any real bias? In the days of fake news, does the Minister not accept that people have more faith in the BBC and national newspapers than in social media, which is completely unregulated, with anyone saying what they want? The noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, referred to the “Today” programme—some of us rather admire the way presenters on the “Today” programme interrogate people, whatever their views or political persuasion.

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

The noble Baroness is right: trust in media sources is measured each year by a survey, which clearly shows that the public believes radio and television more than it believes social media. Radio and television get a 74% to 77% approval rating, whereas social media gets a mere 15%. Members of the public are not fools.

Youth Orchestras

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Thursday 7th December 2017 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

I agree with the noble Baroness. I think we realise that music has particular relevance to mathematics and science. That is why music is a compulsory subject in the national curriculum and why we continue to invest in music in our schools.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

My Lords, this takes me back to my trumpet-playing days at school, which I will not inflict on your Lordships’ House. The Minister has heard from across the House great pride in our youth orchestras. Not only is our cultural and social life enriched by them but the economic life of the country gains. I have heard the Minister talk about the funding for youth orchestras, but do the notes in his folder tell him that since 2010 this Government have taken £48 million away from the arts councils that support them? I accept that he understands the importance of this. Does he not therefore think it is time to ensure that every primary school in the country has money available so that they can enhance the cultural life of all pupils?

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

I am tempted to bring my trumpet in to have a duet with the noble Baroness, but I am sure she is better at it than I am. I have said that we agree that art and music are important, which is why they are part of the national curriculum. Arts Council England has increased funding for music since 2014-15, so in the difficult choices that have had to be made we think we have sustained our support for the arts. We recognise that the arts, including music, are important as part of an overall education.

Video Games: Domestic Violence and Child Abuse

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Wednesday 6th December 2017 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

That is why we set up an independent body. That is better than giving me or any other Minister the power of censorship over these things.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

My Lords, I think the noble Lord is really missing the point here. He says there is an independent body set up to do this, but the fact is that it is not doing it. It is all very well having a body to do it, and having rules, regulations and legislation, but if they are not acted upon there is a serious problem. He has said several times that it needs looking at and that something needs to be done. May I press him to take this away and, on the specific issue of violence in video games, to come back to this House with a report of what can be done, and how the Government can take some responsibility for this and not leave it to an independent body that is clearly not doing its job?

[Lord Ashton of Hyde]

I do not agree with the noble Baroness and I see no evidence that this body is not doing its job. It classified the age for 146 out of 498 video games in 2016 as 18, meaning that only adults should be allowed to watch them and that it is a criminal offence to allow other people below that age to do so.

BBC: Equal Pay

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Thursday 20th July 2017 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Baroness Smith of Basildon]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions or consultations have taken place between Her Majesty’s Government and the BBC regarding equal pay.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lord Ashton of Hyde) (Con)]

My Lords, the Government have not discussed equal pay with the BBC. However, the Government believe in transparency, which is why we have required the BBC to publish the salary details of its staff and talent. Employers with more than 250 staff, including the BBC, are now required by law to publish their gender pay gap and will do so for the first time at the end of this financial year.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

My Lords, given that it is nearly 50 years—half a century—since the Equal Pay Act, that is quite a disappointing Answer. We should all be immensely proud of the BBC as a standard bearer and a standard setter for high-quality drama, entertainment, factual programmes and news. The publication of salary levels has received considerable comment, some perhaps unfair. As other media outlets are not as open and transparent as the BBC, we do not have any information on the competitive context.

However, on the issue of gender pay equality within the BBC, the criticism appears justified—and while Eddie Mair’s reference to the male anatomy on Radio 4’s “PM” programme last night might be a bit much for your Lordships’ House on the last day of term, it is hard to understand why the male Y chromosome justifies a higher salary. It is significant how many of our most senior, well-qualified and experienced women presenters and journalists are paid so much less than their male counterparts. So I have two questions for the Minister: given that he specifically referred to transparency in his Answer, is it not time for the Government to ensure that all employers publish gender pay audits; and does he share the concerns that the disclosures yesterday could lead to the loss of experienced, talented women from the BBC?