National Arts Bank

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Grand Committee

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

My Lords, I join other noble Lords in congratulating my noble friend Lord John of Southwark—if anybody was in any doubt as to why he took the place designation of Southwark, I think we are clear on it today—on securing this really important debate and thank all noble Lords for their thoughtful and constructive contributions today. I share the view of the noble Baroness, Lady Bonham-Carter, that it has been quite inspiring. It is a really nice end to my week of parliamentary engagement to have something on which I can actually say, with huge enthusiasm, that I will have a lot of things to think about over coming days, and I will take some of those points back to the department.

Our theatres, galleries, performance venues and arts colleges are the bedrock of our national story. They drive local growth and expand opportunity. The Government are acutely conscious of the severe financial and physical pressures these institutions face, particularly as they navigate historical underinvestment and inflation. Like the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson, I congratulate my noble friend on his own track record of delivering in this area. As his opening contribution made clear, during his tenure leading Southwark Council, he championed many pioneering local partnerships to fund major capital developments, including the Central School of Ballet, Mountview and the Old Vic. These projects show how creative local collaboration and—in my noble friend’s own words—inspired leadership can deliver truly world-class cultural spaces.

It is particularly inspiring to hear of how that can open up arts venues to young people throughout local communities. My noble friend Lady Gill highlighted the contribution that such venues and investment can make to employment. I was pleased that my noble friend Lady Hyde highlighted the benefits to local communities, and it was also useful to hear of northern councils following suit from my noble friend Lady Warwick of Undercliffe. As she said, this shows that it can be done. It was also inspiring—in a very inspiring debate—to hear from the noble Baroness, Lady Bonham-Carter, on the work of the Lowry and its contribution in Salford. It shows how rich a vein of cultural contribution we have across the country.

My noble friend Lord John’s proposal of a national arts bank is thought-provoking. I can see that a guarantor lender for the arts could have some strong hypothetical benefits, namely unlocking favourable loan rates where commercial lending is not viable. However, it was welcome to hear about new commercial theatres in London from the noble Baroness, Lady Wheatcroft, reminding us that, occasionally, commercial loans can be a good way forward. As my noble friend Lady Hyde said, most arts organisations—I think she cited theatres—need a mixed model of finance.

I appreciate that the debate has focused on guaranteeing capital, so I want to speak briefly on how the Government are directly investing in the arts. By focusing on direct, non-repayable capital grants rather than debt, we are taking the most direct route to tackling the critical maintenance backlogs that threaten the long-term viability of our cultural estate. As my noble friend Lady Hyde highlighted and others mentioned, this Government are delivering up to £1.5 billion in capital investment over this Parliament to secure and revitalise England’s cultural infrastructure. This historic package is designed to protect more than 1,000 cherished arts venues, museums, libraries and heritage buildings from damage and, in some cases, even closure.

We agree, however, that public funding can be only part of the solution. Our creative and cultural sectors depend upon a mixed funding model, in which private philanthropy, corporate support and individual giving play a vital role alongside earned income. I was pleased to hear the noble Baroness, Lady Wheatcroft, highlight the role of philanthropy in investment in the arts. This Government’s vision is to build an ambitious, long-term partnership with philanthropists to deliver tangible national renewal within our communities.

In relation to whether cultural institutions should accept sponsorship from companies on a case-by-case basis, I share the Secretary of State’s view that boycotting sponsors serves only to damage the cultural sector. Philanthropy and corporate sponsorship are long and valuable traditions in our country’s history of support for culture, and we undermine that at our peril. I would say, however, that decisions on commercial and philanthropic donations are rightly for the staff and trustees of those organisations, which typically have policies in place for donations and ethics.

In April, we launched Our Place to Give, our new plan for growing place-based philanthropy. This represents a fundamental shift towards a partnership model that treats philanthropy as a strategic partner in innovation. Key initiatives from the plan include investing £1 million to strengthen fundraising capacity in places, convening regional philanthropic ambassadors to broker better links between donors and communities and adopting a “think philanthropy” approach across government to ensure that public investment acts as a catalyst for wider giving. I was pleased, as Gambling Minister, that the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson, mentioned the contributions made by lotto players through the lottery. It all counts towards that mixed model.

While direct grant funding is our primary tool, the Government are actively exploring how to build a modern, resilient funding model for the arts that goes beyond traditional subsidised structures. We have already seen excellent proofs of concept in this space, such as the Arts Council’s Incentivising Touring scheme, which offers repayable grants and has demonstrated how public capital can be recycled to support more productions and wider audiences.

My noble friend Lady Gill, like most noble Lords, highlighted the work by my noble friend Lady Hodge of Barking in her review of Arts Council England. It focused particularly on exploring new ways to bring more funding into our cultural sector through a variety of innovative solutions. The Government confirmed in our response, published earlier this year, that we will consider all these recommendations. This work is being explored with the Arts Council through targeted engagement with financial experts and relevant sector stakeholders to ensure we identify viable high-quality options that fill policy gaps. I would be very happy to talk to noble Lords in greater detail about this in person, if not in a debate in your Lordship’ House—so let us have more debates on DCMS matters.

As we look into these innovative ideas, we will of course proceed responsibly. Any successful new model must satisfy a number of essential conditions. For example, it will require robust governance and sufficient sector capacity to manage repayable instruments. Fundamentally, any future approach must be affordable within our current fiscal constraints and wider budgeting decisions. We must also recognise that a robust financial ecosystem already exists. This includes deploying a portion of the £4 billion secured for priority sectors and exploring how businesses, including those in the creative industries, can secure loans using their intellectual properties, such as copyrights and designs, as collateral. This would give commercial lenders the confidence to back asset-light creative firms, providing an important pathway to finance for creative founders.

Today’s debate has illustrated the depth of expertise and passion for this in your Lordships’ Committee and the passion that I share for making sure that our arts and cultural organisations have the capital funding that they need to succeed and for finding creative solutions to do this. I hope I have demonstrated that this is a passion that the Government share. It is a debate I would be more than happy to continue. I look forward to future discussions, both with my noble friend Lord John and others, to work collaboratively for the shared goal. I have not answered all the questions; I will write to those noble Lords to whom I have not had a chance to respond.

EU-UK Cultural Exchange Arrangements

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Caine of Kentish Town]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress they have made in securing better cultural exchange arrangements between the creative sectors of the EU and the UK.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

The Government recognise the importance of strong cultural exchange between the UK and the EU. On 24 March, the Minister for Creative Industries co-led the first UK-European Commission high-level meeting on culture, with Commissioner Glenn Micallef, building on commitments made at the inaugural UK-EU summit in May 2025 to deepen cultural exchange. We continue to work closely with European partners and industry, including through engagement with the Cultural Exchange Coalition, to support our creative sectors.

[Baroness Caine of Kentish Town (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend the Minister for her reply. The Brexit deal delivered complex, costly arrangements for touring artists, now made even worse by the recent introduction of digital passports, or carnets, for equipment. In a recent UK Music creators survey, 43% of those who previously toured the EU stated that it is no longer viable for them to do so—a hit to our growing economy and our soft power, repeated across other art forms. Can my noble friend reassure the House that, in keeping with the Government’s manifesto commitment to seek to resolve this issue, it remains a top priority in the current UK-EU reset negotiations, and update the House on what considerations Ministers are giving to stepping up now to help subsidise the cost of the equipment carnets, until a permanent solution is found?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

As my noble friend Lord Hanson made clear, the creative industries are a key sector for this Government. Supporting touring artists is a government manifesto commitment and we deeply value and promote the importance of cultural exchange across Europe. We recognise, as I think my noble friend does, that this is a highly complex issue and we continue to work with our European partners to make progress on practical, mutually beneficial solutions. I can assure my noble friend that the department remains committed, as do the Government more widely, to securing improvements for our musicians and artists, and their support staff, working closely with the creative and cultural sectors as we do so.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, can the Minister give us some idea of what the Government have done about looking into the amount of red tape created by the Brexit deal and whether they have a strategy for cutting through? At the moment, we seem to be benefiting lawyers and administrators, and stopping everybody else doing their jobs.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I think your Lordships’ House will be clear from the previous times we have debated this issue that it is complex. We are working hard on continuing the reset of our relations with European partners. We are fully aware of this and talk regularly to both the creative sector and EU partners about some of the ways we can simplify things. We want to make sure that we have a strong creative sector and that we continue the exchange with the EU. I remind noble Lords that the EU accounted for 44% of UK services exports in the music, performing and visual arts sector, but this is something that we want to promote and encourage further.

[Baroness MacLeod of Camusdarach (Lab)]

My Lords, this matters economically and culturally. Scotland and the wider UK have an internationally respected music sector, but that reputation depends on the development pipeline. If the artist cannot tour, cannot earn and cannot reach audiences beyond their immediate locality, the sector will lose future headliners, future exports and future cultural ambassadors. Can the Minister give an indication of when these obstacles might be removed?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

These are complex negotiations, but we will continue to engage with the EU and member states to explore solutions that improve mobility arrangements for touring across Europe. We welcome the constructive tone of recent UK-EU engagement on cultural mobility, including references in the EU visa strategy to practical flexibilities for touring professionals. We recognise that the 90-day and 180-day limits continue to pose a significant challenge for touring professionals working across multiple EU member states so, as well as working with individual states, we continue to work with partners at a more European-wide level.

[Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall (Lab)]

My Lords, I hope I am not stepping on anyone’s toes but, to pick up the point that my noble friend Lady MacLeod just made, the focus of this discussion tends to be on touring. In fact, as my noble friend indicated, the lives of many musicians depend on their being able to take up employment in the EU—for example, in orchestras or opera companies—and 90 days is simply not enough to fulfil a contract which goes to build the reputations of those musicians and then, as my noble friend said, enhances the reputation of our creative industries overall. Can the Minister be clear about what efforts are being made to make it easier for people to take up contracts overseas, particularly in the EU?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

As I mentioned in an earlier response, Minister Murray co-chaired the first UK-European Commission high-level meeting on culture. One priority for his work in this area is ensuring that, working closely with music and arts industry stakeholders, we engage with European counterparts to work through some of the clear obstacles that we would be keen to address in relation to our creative sector being able to access EU countries. The previous question on visas shows that we are actively looking at this, but there are issues that we need to work through.

[Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)]

My Lords, we all want to see better cultural exchange, not just with the 27 members of the EU but with 200 countries around the world. Issues of visas, cabotage and carnets are not restricted to the European Union. What work are the Government doing on the broader international stage to make it easier for artists, musicians and others to travel the world, not just to those countries immediately on our doorstep?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The UK has made a number of arrangements with non-EU countries that are possible because we have been outside the EU, as part of our work on that since Brexit, so there are opportunities for broader cultural exchange. One of the successes of this Government’s work on culture is in some of the delegations that have taken place to non-EU countries. There has been huge enthusiasm from our sectors here for that, but also from the countries to which UK delegations have travelled.

[Baroness Wilcox of Newport (Lab)]

My Lords, I declare an interest as the chair of trustees of the Council for Dance, Drama and Musical Theatre. Following on from the noble Lord’s question, can my noble friend give a slightly wider view? What are we going to do to support Ukraine from a cultural perspective, after it has had so many years of dealing with a dreadful war?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

My noble friend makes a valid and topical point, because in the past week there has been some publicity around some of the destruction wrought on Ukraine’s cultural landmarks. Recently, the UK and the European Commission each committed £250,000 to support cultural heritage protection in Ukraine, aimed at protecting and restoring Ukraine’s cultural landmarks. We have also discussed collaborating on the impact of artificial intelligence in the creative industries with Ukraine, facilitating international cultural collaboration and improving working conditions for creative and cultural professionals. I met the Ukrainian Culture Minister recently and discussed with her how we could work more closely to support them in their cultural recovery.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

Why are the Government opposed to a full creative industries mobility scheme with the EU?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

We are working through negotiations. I am not going to give a running commentary on negotiations from the Dispatch Box, not least as they are not ones that I am leading myself. We are continuing to engage constructively with EU member states. We are not looking, as I think we made clear in our manifesto, to re-enter a situation where we would have free movement. We committed to that in the manifesto. I am quite clear that in our manifesto we stood on clear red lines in relation to Europe, and those are ones that remain this Government’s policy.

Sporting Events Bill [HL]

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 3rd June 2026 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Baroness Twycross]

That the Bill be now read a second time.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

My Lords, major sporting events matter. They matter to the fans who fill our stadiums and line our streets; they matter to the athletes who train for years for the chance to compete for our country on the world’s biggest stage; they matter to our communities, our local economies and our national story; and they matter because, at their best, they bring people together in a way that few other things can. These events play a unique role in fostering a shared sense of belonging. They generate moments of collective experience that contribute directly to social cohesion and national pride, uniting diverse communities and showcasing the best of our nation on a global stage.

Hosting these events here opens the country as a whole. They serve as a powerful platform to showcase the best of the UK, from sporting prowess to arts and culture, and even the diverse food that defines British cuisine. These world-class occasions become a unique shared celebration of belonging, demonstrating that the UK’s excellence is not confined to sport but encompasses its deep and varied cultural life.

I was privileged enough to be successful in the public ballot to get tickets for a couple of events at the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The excitement of my god-daughters and my niece and nephew in seeing elite sport for the first time and their pride in our country was infectious. It remains one of their strongest memories of their childhoods. The whole country embraced the Olympics. The Games lifted the mood of communities up and down the country and provided an economic boost. It remains one of the lasting legacies of my noble friend the late Baroness Jowell and the type of event we would like to see more of in the UK.

The UK’s record of hosting world-class, major sporting events is one we should all be proud of. Last summer alone, we smashed records, delivering the biggest ever Women’s Rugby World Cup, with unprecedented crowd numbers watching on as the Red Roses lifted the trophy as champions.

As we set out in our manifesto, this Government are committed to continuing to deliver international events like these with pride, seeking new opportunities where we can, to create a legacy to inspire the next generation of talent while promoting exercise and healthy living. We have already secured a fantastic pipeline of events over the coming years. This summer alone will see the Glasgow Commonwealth Games, the European Athletics Championships and the Women’s T20 Cricket World Cup. Next year brings the grand départ for the Tour de France and Tour de France Femmes, and then, together with Ireland, we host the UEFA European Championship in 2028. Last month, we announced that we have commissioned our expert arm’s-length body, UK Sport, to carry out an initial assessment to consider the feasibility of hosting a future Olympic and Paralympic Games in the north in the 2040s.

Major sporting events are an economic success story. They drive economic growth and job creation, acting as a catalyst for inward investment, improving transport connections, and playing a key role in the regeneration of world-class facilities for communities up and down the country to enjoy. For example, this Government are investing up to £557 million into hosting Euro 2028. This investment alone is predicted to deliver £3.2 billion of socioeconomic benefits across the UK, which is a nearly sixfold direct return on investment.

Such landmark occasions leave a lasting legacy, creating unparalleled pathways for people to engage in physical activity and find their own place in the sporting life of the UK. Impact ‘25, the Women’s Rugby World Cup legacy programme, has reached 850 clubs up and down the country since its inception in 2024, and 37,000 women and girls in the last year alone. It has trained more than 3,000 new female coaches and match officials.

The purpose of this Bill is therefore simple but important: to better equip the UK to attract and deliver the biggest international sporting events and ensure that we can continue to deliver these benefits in the years to come. The UK already has a global reputation for excellence in hosting major sporting events. This Bill will bolster that reputation and send a clear message: the UK is event-ready.

Global competition to host major sporting events is fierce and increasing. The UK is a strong player in this field but this Bill gives further confidence that we are ready to uphold our commitments and stay competitive. It will set in statute a framework that enables certain sporting events to benefit from the enhanced commercial protections needed to preserve the integrity of events and, importantly, offset cost to taxpayers. This Bill is built on our foundational principle of a UK-wide approach, co-designed with devolved partners to serve the entire union. Most immediately, these provisions underpin the successful delivery of Euro 2028 and, should the UK’s bid be successful—as I am sure all noble Lords hope it will be—the FIFA Women’s World Cup in 2035.

At its core, the Bill sets out a framework that allows a standard set of measures to be applied to sporting events that meet certain conditions. Ministers here or in each of the devolved Governments will consider which of the measures set out in the Bill are appropriate for any given qualifying event and apply them through regulations. These regulations will set out event-specific details, such as where and when the measures apply.

For an event to be in scope, it must meet three conditions: first, it must take place, at least in part, in the UK; secondly, it must not regularly be held here; and, thirdly, it must either be an event of significant international interest, with the potential to deliver social or economic benefits, or an event of strategic importance in facilitating other such events being held in the UK in the future. In practice, this means those one-off bids for major sporting events that move from host to host, such as the Euros, world cups or Olympic and Paralympic Games—events where enhanced commercial protections are needed to meet the conditions of hosting and where every effort should unashamedly be made to enhance the UK’s competitive advantage. The Bill provides a framework of time-limited provisions that can be applied by the UK and the devolved Governments to events meeting these criteria.

It will put fans first by criminalising the unauthorised resale of tickets for qualifying sporting events. This will help ensure that event organisers have greater control over the onward sale of tickets and that more tickets go directly to genuine supporters rather than to touts seeking to profit from events in the UK that are subsidised by the public purse. Your Lordships will be aware of the Government’s commitment and separate plans to introduce a price cap on the resale of tickets for live events more generally to prevent fans being ripped off by touts. Those measures will preserve a thriving resale market while cracking down on exploitative touts, so that fans do not feel forced into paying vastly inflated prices. I emphasise that we are fully committed to these wider and separate measures and will publish a draft Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny in this parliamentary Session.

To ensure that the wider secondary ticketing provisions operate effectively, we want to listen to the live events sector and fans before formally introducing them to Parliament. Doing so will ensure that the legislation is enforceable and future-proof. The tightly drawn ticketing provisions in the Bill are designed to deliver on the specific requirements of major sporting event owners when we are bidding for events that do not normally take place in the UK. These requirements are made clear during bidding processes and involve limiting the sale and resale of tickets to authorised bodies and platforms only.

The Bill also covers powers on advertising and trading. This second aspect will enable the prohibition of unauthorised advertising and trading around event locations by bringing forward time-limited criminal offences. In practice, this means that the Government will be able to put in place restricted advertising and trading zones around places such as competition venues, official fan zones, transport hubs and any areas surrounding them, provided these places are being used for or in connection with the sporting event in question. These provisions are designed to protect commercial investment while minimising the impact on existing businesses. They will also help support the safe movement of spectators.

Thirdly, the Bill will prohibit unauthorised association with a qualifying sporting event through a general prohibition enforceable through the civil courts. Sponsorship is a critical revenue stream for event organisers and owners. If sponsors believe their rights can or will be undermined by rival businesses creating an unauthorised association with the event, the commercial value of sponsoring UK-hosted events diminishes. This provision will help create an attractive offer for sponsors by protecting their investment and commercial rights, helping to shield the taxpayer from increased hosting costs.

Fourthly, the Bill includes provision to manage transport and traffic in relation to a sporting event in England. Effective transport and traffic management is essential to the safe and smooth operation of any major event, and the Bill will ensure that those arrangements can be properly supported.

Separate from these framework powers, the Bill will also create a bespoke funding power to enable the efficient and successful delivery of sporting events across England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. This means, for the Secretary of State, a single, dedicated power for the future funding of sporting events in England. It will also provide Scottish Ministers and Northern Ireland departments with the power to support sporting events in Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively. Financial assistance provided through this provision will be subject to ministerial discretion, alongside the usual processes to ensure that it aligns with the general principles for managing public money. Sufficient funding powers already exist in Wales, so this provision will not apply there.

Taken together, these provisions will help ensure that the United Kingdom remains an attractive host for major sporting events and continues to build on its world-leading reputation in this field. If we get this right, the benefits will be felt far beyond the field of play. They will be felt not just in host towns and cities but across the country—in the businesses and communities that benefit from them, in the young people inspired by them and in our communities across the UK unified by them. I hope your Lordships’ House will welcome this Bill and I look forward to the debate. I beg to move.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am grateful to all noble Lords for sharing such well-considered views. I agree with my noble friend Lord Wood of Anfield that it is an honour to speak in a debate with so many sporting stars, a point made by several others. Today’s debate has shown the knowledge and passion in your Lordships’ House for hosting major sporting events in the UK and recognising the many benefits they bring, not least including my noble friend Lady Shah, who spoke passionately about Wembley and the benefits it brings to Brent and the surrounding area. These can be transformative, as my noble friend Lord Barker—sorry, I cannot read my own writing.

[Noble Lords]

Barber.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Yes. Thank you. Huge apologies. They can be transformative, as my noble friend Lord Barber of Chittlehampton said, although, unlike him, I was not alive to see England in the World Cup in 1966. I think the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, mentioned that he was there as well.

As the noble Lord, Lord Rogan, said, sport can and does bridge divides. As my noble friend Lady Paul of Shepherd’s Bush said, this is a small but mighty Bill that will establish a framework that enables certain sporting events—I will give a bit more definition on that in due course—to benefit from the enhanced commercial protections needed to preserve the integrity of events and, importantly, offset costs to taxpayers. As the noble Lord, Lord Addington, said, having a framework is a good thing. As noble Lords will be aware, we have taken a UK-wide approach, working closely with the devolved Governments.

I will respond to as many of the questions and points raised as I can, and, where I cannot, I will write to noble Lords and place a copy in the Library. I am also happy to meet noble Lords with an interest in the Bill.

Today’s debate has been far wider than the scope of the Bill. I want to recap on the scope of the Bill and remind noble Lords that an event must meet each of the three conditions set out in it. This legislation is designed to enhance our ability to track one-off bids for sporting events that move from host to host, such as the Euros, the Olympics, the Paralympic Games and—to the delight of my noble friend Lady Nye; I think there were other golf fans as well—the Ryder Cup.

The noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson, asked about the impact the Bill could have on events, such as the Tour de France, that cross borders. The legislation has been specifically designed to enhance our ability to attract one-off bids for sporting events that move from host to host. That includes those that cross borders as well as those held wholly or partly in the UK.

Without wanting to pre-empt the outcome of the initial assessment being carried out by UK Sport, which is at an early stage of consideration, in response to the question from the noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson, on what is meant by “the north”, I reassure her and the House that UK Sport is engaging across the north of England in particular.

A number of the UK’s competitor nations, such as Australia, New Zealand and France, have comparable legislation—I hope that gives some reassurance to noble Lords who doubt the value of a framework such as this—and have seen considerable success in securing hosting rights recently. For example, France secured and hosted the men’s Rugby World Cup in 2023 and the Olympics in 2024.

In defence of the framework approach, which I think was questioned by the noble Lord, Lord Fuller, and to some extent by the noble Lord, Lord Markham, we are clear that this is the right approach. It is a forward-looking framework designed to attract the best sporting events for years to come. We do not know in advance the relevant event-specific details such as dates and places, or what exceptions might be proportionate for that event, so those event-specific operational details will be set out in the regulations and provisions relating to the event. Our guiding principle has always been to fix as much policy detail in the Bill as possible and to limit secondary legislation to adding event-specific details.

The noble Baronesses, Lady Grey-Thompson and Lady Bonham-Carter, asked about the definition of major and mega events and bid transparency. On the question of what is a major or mega sporting event, the Gold Framework, which is a joint DCMS and UK Sport document, already sets out how we work jointly to support the feasibility assessment process for the bidding for and staging of major and mega sporting events at a UK level, and it provides definitions of mega and major events. I can make sure that a link to that document is sent through to the relevant noble Lords.

Delegated powers—and how they are going to be applied and whether they are justified and proportionate —were raised by, among others, my noble friends Lady Paul, Lady Dacres and Lord Wood of Anfield. The noble Lord, Lord Markham, also raised concerns. The delegated powers in the Bill are tightly drafted. As I said, we fix as much policy as possible on the face of the Bill. Secondary legislation will be limited to applying the provisions to events and overlaying the event-specific operational details required. The affirmative procedure will apply to the first use of the powers by each Government in relation to an event, providing appropriate opportunity for scrutiny, particularly over the types of events to which the provisions are being applied. I have no doubt that we will come back to that in Committee.

The noble Baroness, Lady Bonham-Carter, made a clear point about the role of culture alongside major sporting events. London 2012 clearly showed the UK at its best, both in terms of sporting events and the wider cultural offer. The noble Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle, also highlighted that. I will not go through my detailed glowing comments about the events, because I think those were covered. In relation to the question from the noble Baroness, Lady Bonham-Carter, about whether cultural events which are part of a major sporting event, such as the 2012 Cultural Olympiad, will be within the scope of the Bill, the Bill does not define a sporting event but does make it clear that this includes any opening or closing ceremony. Regulations applying the Bill’s provisions to a sporting event can specify events which should be treated as forming part of the event where they are held in connection with it. That would bring in scope cultural events officially connected to a sporting event, such as the 2012 Cultural Olympiad.

I thank a number of noble Lords, not least the noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson, and the noble Lord, Lord Holmes of Richmond, for their track record over many years of working to support the UK’s efforts to win bids. The noble Baroness raised the important point of legacy programmes. We work closely with our partners to maximise the potential of these sporting events, leaving behind positive legacies, inspiring the next generation of talent while promoting exercise and healthy living. I had not noticed the acronym drawn to our attention by the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, but I agree that it is probably appropriate.

So many noble Lords mentioned secondary ticketing that I will not list all those concerned, but it is clear that, understandably, this is of great interest to your Lordships’ House. I reassure noble Lords that this Government are fully committed to addressing ticket touting and issues with the secondary ticketing market which prevent so many people attending events. My noble friend Lady Gill said—and I agree—that “predatory” is an appropriate term. My noble friends Lord Mann and Lady Taylor mentioned that this often involves organised crime. However, this is not the right legislative vehicle for all wider secondary ticketing reforms. The time-limited ticketing measures will ensure that tickets can be resold only with authorisation from the event owner or organiser, satisfying the requirements of event owners.

In response to the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Young of Acton, we do not intend for the offences in the Bill to be ones for which football banning orders can be imposed. Our wider plans will preserve a robust ticket resale market by directly targeting the operating model of ticket touts. They will ensure that genuine fans can resell their tickets safely and securely and recoup their costs when they can no longer attend a live event. This Government are committed to ensuring that the UK is an excellent host and partner. The noble Lord, Lord Markham, portrayed the UK as quite an unattractive destination for sporting events. I do not recognise that. We will meet our commitments while protecting the interests of fans. We are a country that is open for business and for sporting events.

Going back to the point about the transfer of tickets to friends and families, I reassure noble Lords that we are not criminalising the private transfer of tickets between friends, family and associates at face value. I will now—

[Lord Mann (Lab)]

The Bill as worded does do that, because it requires the permission of the initial seller to do so. If the initial seller refuses to allow that to happen and requires the tickets to be returned to them, which is an increasing trend, then, as currently worded, the Bill does do that. That perhaps should be looked at.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Maybe we can come back to that in Committee, as we do not think it does. It is more like the normal practice of people reselling them through, which I have done. I will not mention the brand of theatre, but I regularly end up not being able to attend theatres—I do not know whether the Chief Whip has anything to do with that. It is possible to resell tickets through a variety of means without being prohibited by that, but we will come back to this.

The topic of recurrent sporting events is also something we are going to need to come back to. I am happy to talk to people about it individually. The noble Baroness, Lady Evans of Bowes Park, and my noble friend Lord Foulkes raised this—like others, I am delighted to see him back in his place—as did my noble friend Lord Bassam and the noble Lord, Lord Markham. The time-limited provisions in the Bill are designed to attract specific, one-off events which require the Government to make commitments to event owners during the bidding process. We do not think that regular events have the same requirements as events which hold competitive international bid processes. I reassure noble Lords that, as the Bill was developed, we worked with some of the biggest recurrent sporting events to understand whether there was a demand for such provisions, and that included the London Marathon.

There was some interest, understandably, in the advertising and trading provisions. I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Evans, about some of the issues faced by people on ambush marketing, but we did not find a clear or consistent evidence base for their inclusion, and there was insufficient appetite from the sector to fund the enforcement action required of local authorities. We are clear that, if we are establishing criminal offences, enforcement by any organisation other than a public body would not be appropriate or proportionate. However, I am very happy to meet the noble Baroness to discuss that further and I will ask my office to sort that out.

We will continue to support our domestic sport sector and the UK sporting calendar, building on pre-existing relationships and frameworks. The noble Baroness, Lady Bonham-Carter, noted the work being done on a UK-wide major events strategy, as I think did a couple of other noble Lords. My department intends to publish it within the next 12 months—apologies, but I am not able to give a more precise timeline for that. This will set out our priorities for major events taking place across the UK, covering major events in all sectors, including cultural, sporting and business. Like others, I am delighted that my noble friend Lord McConnell will be working with DCMS on this area.

The noble Lord, Lord Holmes, raised a really helpful point on inclusivity. He is absolutely right about the need to ensure that our major events remain inclusive. We intend the major events strategy to support this work but, again, I am happy to talk to the noble Lord in more detail about that.

The noble Lord, Lord Hayward, talked about something in his contribution which I find really sad: that gay male footballers do not feel able to be honest and open about that. I also welcome his observation about whether young gay men would feel able to play professional football. We welcome the great strides in the environment on inclusiveness at football matches over many years, but we acknowledge that we cannot be complacent in ensuring that our national game is for everyone.

The noble Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle, made a point about the Soft Power Council. It has met multiple times, and its working groups have actively contributed to activity across a range of areas. We look forward to this continuing over the years and months to come. On the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Markham, we recognise that the financial landscape for delivering major events across the country can be challenging and we are committed to working with stakeholders from every sector to ensure that events are safe, secure, sustainable and attractive.

The noble Lord, Lord Holmes, is right about our need to ensure that our major events are inclusive and affordable. I have already made that point, but I do not think we have covered affordability, which was spoken to by the noble Baroness, Lady Davies, and by my noble friend Lady Dacres. We anticipate that this too will be included in the major events strategy. We are not clear, however, that we need legislate on that point in this Bill. I look forward, however, to further discussion as the Bill progresses.

There is clearly a range of views across your Lordships’ House on gambling as it relates to sport. In response to the noble Lord, Lord Fuller, we do not think that this will prevent customers cashing out on bets on gambling mobile apps while they are in restricted trading zones. I appreciate that my noble friend Lady Taylor of Bolton and the noble Lord, Lord Foster of Bath, raised wider concerns about having a less permissive tone on gambling. Outside this Bill, there are existing measures to limit gambling advertising at sporting venues. We have also announced our intention to consult this year on the banning of sports sponsorship by unlicensed gambling operators. I do not share the scepticism of the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, on the front-of-shirt ban. I think it is significant although, in response to my noble friend Lady Taylor’s point, I do not think it is a panacea. As the noble Lord, Lord Foster of Bath, is already aware, the Government do not intend to ban gambling advertising at this time. As ever, I would be happy to discuss this topic further with the noble Lord and with any other interested noble Lords from across the House.

Noble Lords, including the noble Lord, Lord Fuller and the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, raised the issue of how these provisions will affect small businesses and street traders. The Government will always look to ensure that the Bill’s provisions are implemented proportionately, with a view to minimising disruption to existing businesses, in particular street traders. We also fully recognise that people need support in understanding whether they are impacted by the advertising trading provisions and, if that is the case, what options are available to them. In response to the point from the noble Lord, Lord Addington, on making sure that people understand the measures, regulations under the Bill must ensure that guidance is made available on the application of the advertising and trading provisions, and we will be able to require that this is shared with those most likely to be affected, such as street traders.

The prohibition on unauthorised associations is not intended to crack down on local businesses—the example of a B&B was given—showing their support for major events. It applies only to activity that is likely to suggest to the public that there is an official association with an event. By this, we mean that there is a realistic chance that everyday members of the public will consider that such an association exists.

I am coming to the end. I want to talk about proportionate enforcement, because noble Lords are concerned about it. The Bill’s focus is on activity that undermines the integrity of a sporting event and the interests of its commercial partners, or that could disrupt the safe movement of spectators. As with the Birmingham Commonwealth Games, we will work with event organisers and local authorities to ensure that enforcement action is proportionate. The enforcement powers in the Bill will provide a sufficient deterrent while ensuring that effective action can be taken when needed.

I will write to my noble friend Lady Nye and others on the way in which we could increase the fine, and I will also write to my noble friend Lady Taylor and the noble Lord, Lord Addington, on the transport plan. I will definitely write to the noble Baroness, Lady Evans, on the Finance Act, because I do not have that detail to hand, and I will need to write to the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, on her point about sponsorship and fossil fuels.

The provisions in this Bill will further reinforce our world-leading reputation for hosting major sporting events. With it, we are sending a clear message that the UK is not just a home for sport but a prepared, professional and fan-focused host, ready to both host and take on the world. In response to the point from the noble Lord, Lord Wood, on Committee timings, such matters are dealt with through the usual channels, but he can always talk to the Chief Whip. I am grateful to all noble Lords for a varied and interesting debate, and I urge them to support the Bill.

Bill read a second time.

Moved by

[Baroness Twycross]

That the bill be committed to a Committee of the Whole House, and that it be an instruction to the Committee of the Whole House that they consider the bill in the following order:

Clauses 1 to 7, Schedule 1, Clauses 8 to 10, Schedule 2, Clauses 11 to 13, Schedule 3, Clauses 14 to 16, Schedule 4, Clause 17, Schedule 5, Clause 18, Schedule 6, Clauses 19 to 30, Title.

Motion agreed.

World Cup Ticket Prices

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bassam of Brighton]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with football’s governing bodies about the price of World Cup tickets.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

My Lords, I would like to take the opportunity of a sporting-related Question to congratulate the Ladies of your Lordships’ House on a very impressive victory in yesterday’s tug-of-war with the other place. I understand that there was another team available, but I am going to move swiftly on.

The Government fully understand fans’ frustrations regarding the cost of tickets for the 2026 World Cup, particularly given current cost of living pressures. However, FIFA and the tournament organisers alone determine ticket pricing and allocation, as these are strictly commercial decisions. While Ministers regularly engage with the domestic football associations on a number of issues, including fan welfare, we expect these national bodies to formally represent the ticketing concerns of British supporters directly to FIFA. We are not party to these discussions, but we were pleased to see a number of lower-price tickets available through national federation fan groups.

[Lord Bassam of Brighton (Lab)]

My Lords, some tickets for this year’s World Cup will cost as much as $6,500, and I am told $10,000 for the final, pricing football fans out of watching games. I remind the House that, in 1966, watching the final cost you just 10 bob. This is an absolute outrage. Given that we have the Sporting Events Bill before us today, will the Government consider taking extra powers, alongside those protecting fans from touts, to ensure that events like the GB-wide Euro 2028 do not become another opportunity for football’s governing bodies to indulge in rampant profiteering at fans’ expense?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The Government do and will always work with event owners to ensure that the UK is an excellent host and partner, and that we can meet our commitments at the same time as protecting the interests of fans. We have worked closely with UEFA on its approach to Euro 2028, which seeks to put fans first with transparent ticketing prices. There will not be dynamic pricing for the Euro 2028 games. These principles followed a meeting between the Prime Minister, the DCMS Secretary of State and the UEFA president last November, which discussed the vital importance of ensuring that tickets for the tournament are accessible and affordable.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, the current situation in the United States is that individual states are trying to have legal redress on this. The Government are saying that they are quite friendly, but will they make sure that everybody involved in politics is singing from the same hymn sheet? If we bid for something in the future, who knows who will be in power then.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I would like to think that, in this country, whichever Government are in power—obviously, I would hope that they were this Government —would put the fans at the heart of everything they do in relation to sport. Looking at the Benches opposite, I remind your Lordships’ House that not all sides of your Lordships’ House supported the Independent Football Regulator Bill, and I am grateful to all noble Lords, including the noble Lord, Lord Addington, for their support in making sure that fans are at the heart of everything relating to football.

[Lord Moynihan of Chelsea (Con)]

My Lords, I was heartened to hear the Minister at least partially endorse the fact that the price mechanism is a far better way of valuing goods than government diktat. However, does she also agree that the politics of envy, while it may on occasion attract some votes, rarely has good outcomes? Does she also accept that, despite the blandishments of the noble Lord, not everybody can always go to everything? In the words of the immortal Sir Michael Jagger:

“You can’t always get what you want”.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am slightly incredulous. We have a situation where resale tickets are being priced at $2 million. I am not convinced that anybody would buy them at that price, but these are outrageous prices. It goes beyond envy when even the President of the United States is calling the tickets out as overly priced for a major sporting event.

[Lord Watts (Lab)]

My Lords, people who are actually fans are going to America for the World Cup and are being ripped off with their flights, ripped off—and sometimes gazumped—with their hotels, and ripped off with their tickets. Can we do all we can, both internally and internationally, to stop these practices and give the football fans a decent deal?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

As I mentioned in response to my noble friend’s questions, representations regarding the interests of fans fall to the respective football associations. My understanding is that the home nations’ football associations are raising matters. We are keen to make sure that all our fans travelling to the World Cup, which noble Lords will be aware goes across three host countries, have a good experience. But, above all, we hope that our home teams do well, and our wish is that they compete against each other in the final.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, the World Cup brings together communities and breaks down barriers, but the reality is that not all UK football fans have reliable broadband or smart TVs for streaming. So will the Government act to fund libraries, community centres and jobcentres, which could be free streaming hubs, particularly in deprived areas of the country, and may encourage other beneficial engagement?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

My noble friend Lady Hayman suggested that I get up and just repeat her response to the noble Earl, which was “Yes”, but I will not do that. As well as the World Cup being free to air on terrestrial channels—the BBC and ITV have agreed which matches will be screened and those are free to air, so not reliant on good broadband—there will be a number of fan zones up and down the country if people want that more communal approach. I suggest that it might be a distraction for an organisation such as a jobcentre, even if we want people to get through the door, to screen programmes when their staff are trying to work hard to get people back into work.

[Baroness O'Grady of Upper Holloway (Lab)]

My Lords, the magnificent parade through Highbury and Holloway on Sunday proved that football can and should be a sport for everyone from every background. But, as we have heard, not just ticket prices but accommodation and travel are pricing out ordinary fans. Will my noble friend the Minister consider encouraging employers to ensure that there is flexibility at work so that, when World Cup matches are held during work time, people have the chance to watch them?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I agree with my noble friend about the parades and, across your Lordships’ House, we all want to congratulate Arsenal on winning the Premier League and offer commiserations on its loss in the Champions League final. Although it is possible for some employers to exercise discretion, it would be a tall order for the Government to say to everyone, including your Lordships’ House, that we should down tools and watch every single match instead of working. But I know that, across the country and across both home countries involved, people are hugely looking forward to the World Cup.

[Baroness Goudie (Lab)]

My Lords, not only is there the expense of buying the tickets and paying the fares, but there is also the issue of getting visas. Can the Minister see whether we can sort out the visas to America in particular, because it takes time to get those?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am not aware of any particular issues with visas. That falls firmly within the FCDO’s parameters, and it does most of the liaison with overseas countries on major sporting events. I presume that most people had to buy their flights some time ago, so I assume that most of them would already have gone through that process.

[Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall (Lab)]

My Lords, while wishing the very best success to all the teams from the UK competing in the World Cup, will my noble friend accept that other forms of entertainment are available over the summer?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

In response, and echoing my noble friend Lady Hayman from earlier, absolutely: yes.

[Lord Sikka (Lab)]

My Lords, will the Government set up fast courts to prosecute price-gouging and profiteering from the sale of football World Cup tickets?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I have to be clear to my noble friend that this year’s World Cup tickets are allowed to be resold in the US. This year, we are celebrating quite a big anniversary in relation to the independence of the US, and we are not currently able to legislate on ticket resale in the US.

2026 FIFA World Cup: Replica Kit Pricing

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Wednesday 20th May 2026 Lords Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

This summer’s World Cup is a brilliant opportunity to unite communities across the country, and we know just how much wearing the team colours means to fans. Unfortunately, while we recognise and share concerns over costs, setting prices remains a matter for manufacturers and the respective football associations. We do encourage them to ensure that kits are affordable, particularly for children. As an independent authority, it is for the Competition and Markets Authority to determine which cases to investigate according to its prioritisation principles, but it has a track record of taking action.

[Lord Walker of Broxton (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend the Minister. Many families are now being forced to turn to counterfeit kits because the official versions have become completely unaffordable. This raises serious issues, not only of consumer protection because of poor quality but with many investigations having shown that knock-off kits are produced in unregulated sweatshops where workers face severe exploitation. Therefore, will she consider whether the Government should pressure both the FA and big brand manufacturers to work with them to develop clearer guidance and protocols on supply and profit margins?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

We strongly condemn the sale of counterfeit merchandise, which fuels organised crime and bypasses critical safety standards. Buying fake kits directly funds serious criminal networks and deprives grass-roots football of vital investment. Furthermore, fake kit may not be subject to UK safety regulations, with very concerning reports of counterfeit shirts aimed at children being highly flammable. The Intellectual Property Office and the police work tirelessly to disrupt this trade.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, kits always seem to be too expensive for everybody. They have done for a long time, and the club game has suffered from this for a long time as well. It would help if national teams were to publish what revenue they get from this and where it is spent to make sure that people know, because if they are doing something good with that money, at least that is some mitigation.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I hope the noble Lord will be reassured that I asked that specific question as part of my preparation. I was told that the FA puts money from the sale of such kits back into grass-roots football, which I am sure all noble Lords will appreciate. However, that does not detract from the fact that they are prohibitively expensive, which excludes some people from having them. The pricing is part of a multi-year deal between the FA and manufacturers, and the prices reflect consistently high prices internationally. I will ensure through officials at DCMS that the FA has noted the points raised in this debate in your Lordships’ House.

[Lord Ranger of Northwood (Con)]

My Lords, I speak as a football fan with two small boys who I continually have to provide kits for, even though they are Spurs kits and this season has not been the best. The problem we have is the naked commercialisation of clubs when it comes to not just one kit but multiple kits, plastered with sponsorship from multinational companies, so there is vast revenue coming in from these kits anyway. It is a challenge for spectators and fans to belong to the club, and the clubs like to make the link that they are for the fans. What is the Independent Football Regulator’s view on the price of kits and the multitude of kits?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am not privy to the Independent Football Regulator’s precise views on this, but the Government established the Independent Football Regulator specifically to put hearts back at the centre of how clubs operate. This will include issues around pricing and consultation about a whole range of things. I look forward to seeing how the Independent Football Regulator works in practice, both with the football clubs and leagues, but also representing the interests of fans in this way.

[Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)]

My Lords, with no disrespect to my noble friend Lord Walker, England is not the only national team at the World Cup. If my noble friend the Minister is making representations, will she make representations also to the Scottish FA in relation to kits? While she is doing that, will she also ask it to investigate how Celtic managed to steal the Scottish Premier League?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I have really missed responding to my noble friend Lord Foulkes’ questions. It is always good to have a question from him. I did ask how the kits and strips for other home nations compared in pricing with the England kit. I understand, without promoting them specifically, that the adult Adidas strips for other home nations come in at a much more reasonable price. Clearly, it is still a concern when people are outpriced in this way, so I will pass on his comments through the Scotland Office in the same way. I know all noble Lords will wish both home teams all the best in the World Cup.

[Baroness Northover (LD)]

My Lords, is the Minister aware that I have been instructed by my ecstatic kids that I need some updated Arsenal kit? Should I go along with what they suggest?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Absolutely. Whichever club noble Lords support—I support a club that has, sadly, been relegated—the joy that was apparent from all supporters, including the Prime Minister, at Arsenal’s victory is just uplifting. Congratulations to them and to all their supporters.

[Lord Vaizey of Didcot (Con)]

My Lords, as a Chelsea fan, I take this opportunity to congratulate Arsenal on winning the Premier League and to commiserate with Spurs on their imminent relegation.

I have to say that I am confused by these exchanges— a retailer inviting government interference on prices, a Conservative doing the same and a Scotchman inviting English interference in Scottish sport. I do not know which way to turn. However, while I appreciate the sentiment of regulating sports shirts, where does this end? We know that the Government are apparently planning to regulate prices in supermarkets on eggs and milk, which has been roundly condemned by retailers. Will that extend to season tickets and Sky Sports subscriptions? It is a dangerous road that the Minister is being invited to travel down.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

It is also a road that is full of mythology and misunderstandings about where the Government are going. The Exchequer Secretary was emphatically clear this morning that capping supermarket prices is not something that the Government are considering, although clearly the price of food is of deep concern to many people, given the rising cost of living, and is something that the Government share their concerns on.

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

As a West Ham fan, I have absolutely nothing to say about football. Following on from my noble friend’s question, does the Minister agree that, rather than inviting the Competition and Markets Authority into ever more marginal consumer pricing questions, the Government’s priority should be serious reform of the competition regime itself? In particular, will the forthcoming competition reform legislation ensure that the CMA supports innovation, investment and growth and does not become a brake on British business?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The CMA does not come under DCMS, as people will understand, but we are keen to make sure that it has the teeth to take action. I have a line somewhere in my brief about the additional powers that we are giving it, and I know that those are intended specifically to give it the teeth to act decisively and provide the challenge as part of the regulatory regime that it operates.

[Lord Sikka (Lab)]

My Lords, the production cost of a typical replica football kit is less than 10% of the selling price. Companies such as Nike and Adidas use an opaque network of offshore entities to inflate costs by adding royalty, licensing, marketing and other payments through intragroup transactions—in short, they shift profits. Does the Minister agree that profiteering cannot be tackled without an investigation of profit shifting by companies? If so, when will the Government commission that investigation?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

My noble friend has raised a number of issues. We are keen, to go back to the initial Question, to urge manufacturers to keep kits affordable. We want to make sure that football remains accessible, but pricing is ultimately a matter for the relevant football association and its manufacturing partners. We are not intending to dictate pricing in this respect, but we urge manufacturers to keep kits affordable to make sure that everyone can enjoy supporting our teams domestically and internationally and that we continue to share the highs and lows of our national sport.

National Museums and Galleries

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Monday 27th April 2026 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Clancarty]

To ask His Majesty’s Government whether they intend to retain universal free entry to the UK’s national museums and galleries.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

I am sure all noble Lords will agree that our national museums are truly exceptional. I can confirm that we are not considering any changes to free entry for UK nationals and residents. In response to the independent review of the Arts Council by my noble friend Lady Hodge, DCMS is working with the museum sector to explore potential opportunities for charging international visitors at national museums and galleries. This is a highly complex issue that requires detailed work with the sector before any evidence-based decisions are taken.

[The Earl of Clancarty (CB)]

My Lords, it is disappointing that the Government are even considering this. They do not seem to realise what a precious, globally recognised brand universal free entry is. Apart from the negative logistical and financial implications of applying a selective charge, including the lack of universal ID, as the noble Baroness, Lady Hodge, has pointed out, would the Government not rather restore the grant in aid to its real-terms 2010 level? The 18% drop in money since then represents frankly peanuts in the overall economy, yet that funding is vital for the success of our national museums.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

We are committed to supporting our national museums and to ensuring that art and culture are accessible, representative and shared across the country. Our £1.5 billion Arts Everywhere package ensures everyone has access to world-class culture. There are no current plans to reduce grant in aid, although I will say that we cannot prejudge spending reviews. We want to enable new income generation for our national museums, and we are going to be working with the museums to explore ideas for how this income could be used.

[Baroness Sater (Con)]

My Lords, as the co-chair of the Arts and Heritage All-Party Parliamentary Group, I will say that several institutions have expressed to me their many and varied concerns about how the introduction of the charging of international visitors might negatively affect not just them but the wider tourism and hospitality economy. I ask the Minister, what assessment are the Government going to make—or have they made any assessment—to allay the concerns about the wider economic consequences that this might have?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

We are making sure that we work with the museums on this, not in isolation from them. Last week, for example, officials at DCMS sat down with representatives from all the national museums to talk through how the process might work, in terms of having a working group with the national museums. We are clear that it is a complex matter. It is not, “It’s right to, or it’s wrong to, or we should do this as a point of principle”: we just want to work through the issues with the museums. At the moment, we have been working through the terms of reference for what that working group would be looking at, and we are not planning to come to any conclusions before the autumn.

[Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury (LD)]

My Lords, the much-anticipated return of the Bayeux Tapestry to the UK, to be exhibited at the British Museum, reminds us of the value of sponsorship, philanthropy, cultural diplomacy, soft power and, on a more practical level, the need for conservation skills, and indeed curatorial ones. How do the Government intend to support such skills going forward? We welcome their curriculum review, but when are we going to see actual action that reverses the years of arts education and these skills being marginalised?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am delighted, as I know the noble Baroness is, that the UK has been able to agree the loan with France of the Bayeux Tapestry. The noble Baroness correctly identified that skills are at the heart of any future policy. Every single conversation I have at every single institution I visit focuses on skills, and I have done a number of round tables around this. This particular area of curatorial skills is one that I know the museums are keen to explore. Getting our young children into museums is the first step in them stepping off on the journey of a career in the sector.

[Lord Freyberg (CB)]

My Lords, HMRC’s own definition of free admission requires that the public can enter without pre-booking. Has the department taken legal advice on whether any charging scheme, even a partial one for foreigners, would disqualify museums from Section 33A of VAT relief entirely?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his really constructive engagement with me over the months I have been the Minister for this area. In terms of Section 33A, we are working across government and with the museums to understand the impacts. We will look to find solutions to any operational issues as the discussions take place over the coming weeks and months, and my officials are working with their counterparts in the Treasury.

[Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall (Lab)]

My Lords, I am sure my noble friend would agree with me that the introduction of the free entry scheme by the Labour Government in 1997 was one of the glories of that Government’s achievements. It would be an enormous pity if that were to be diluted at this stage—although, of course, we all understand that the income streams museums are able to draw on are diminishing, and that the real-terms value of what they get in public funding has diminished since 2010. Can she expand a little on what other ways of increasing income streams she and her department are discussing with the museum sector to avoid having to put charging back on the agenda?

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I agree that it has been an iconic policy. We are just at the very early stages of exploring this. However, we are clear that we should be looking at ways to increase access for all young people from underrepresented groups from the UK. Unfortunately, the most recent DCMS participation survey demonstrated that there are still geographical and economic disparities in terms of who visits our museums.

In terms of other income streams, we had a very interesting debate last week on philanthropy and I think we are going to see some major developments at the National Gallery as a result of that. Most museums are diversifying their economic and events work, and they are all exploring a whole range of ways. The Government have invested considerable amounts of money through our Arts Everywhere funding and schemes such as the museum renewal fund, which we delivered last year and was specifically around bringing resilience to some of our regional and civic museums.

[Lord Grade of Yarmouth (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, I think we all know that money is very tight and getting tighter. I am trying to understand why the very distinguished trustees, who are charged with governing these great institutions, cannot be trusted to decide themselves on the charging or non-charging policy.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

This has been a national scheme, so we are working with the museums. Most museums would charge for special exhibitions. We are working with the museums to identify how this might work in practice. Clearly, one of the ways would be for museums to take a decision through their trustees.

[The Earl of Devon (CB)]

My Lords, I note my interest as a steward of a modestly successful but long-standing private heritage enterprise in Devon. We compete with three national museums and galleries, as well as with well-heeled charities such as the National Trust, for tourists’ visits, both domestic and foreign. Do His Majesty’s Government agree that those institutions should not fear fair competition with privately owned heritage, which is a globally recognised strength of our national culture and identity?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am not sure that there is fear baked into their concerns, but I recognise that there are a large number of museums out there that do charge. Where museums charge, they tend to be quite modestly priced. The issues that we are exploring are broader than that. We will look at the whole range of things and could look at whether there is an issue around competition with other institutions.

[Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)]

My Lords, I am sorry to hear that this is a policy under active consideration in Whitehall. As the Minister said, it is a complex matter. As the Government look at this, will she ensure that they look at all the implications and practicalities, such as how we actually identify the nationality of people in a nation without ID cards and the impact on British people of ethnic minority backgrounds and, of course, on the many generous donors and benefactors who have given money, grants and gifts to museums and galleries down the ages on the understanding that they would remain free for everybody, as was the policy that the last Labour Government brought in?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Absolutely: we will be looking at all those things. Indeed, when I spoke to the national museums directly, these were some of the issues that came up.

Charity Giving

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Monday 20th April 2026 Lords Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

This Government are proud of our incredible culture of giving in the UK and are committed to doing what we can to promote and foster it. While the CAF research shows a fall in overall donations, charitable giving has broadly kept up with inflation over the last decade and the proportion of those who give is the same as the previous year. Published last week, the Government’s plan for growing place-based philanthropy, Our Place to Give, will create stronger enabling conditions to strengthen links between donors and places, build better partnerships, and unlock further philanthropy and giving.

[Baroness Pitkeathley (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for that response. The road map that she mentions is indeed an excellent and most welcome initiative to boost place-based philanthropy, and it is much appreciated by the voluntary and community sector. However, the fall in the amount donated is of great concern to charities, which are under increasing pressure to meet growing demands while their incomes are falling. Will His Majesty’s Government consider introducing policies that promote giving, both from corporates and individuals? Examples might be simplifying gift aid, encouraging payroll giving, or indeed anything that might renew the culture of giving, which, as my noble friend said, has always been so central to life in the United Kingdom.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

It is important that we focus on how we can support an already incredibly generous public, without playing down the reasons why people might be reluctant to give. We are putting in place measures to tackle the cost of living issues affecting people currently. As for some of the ways that my noble friend mentions, HMRC is providing over £2.5 billion of relief through gift aid and higher rate relief, and reviewing current gift aid claiming processes to try to help charities gain as much as they can through that route. I know my noble friend is interested in payroll giving, which 4,000 UK businesses offer. We are actively supporting ways to encourage more people to give. We will continue to work with the sector to ensure that we maximise funding through personal, public and corporate giving.

[Baroness Sater (Con)]

My Lords, according to the Charities Aid Foundation report, nearly one in three non-donors indicated that they were not engaged with or interested in charities, with an even higher figure for young people. Initiatives such as the Family Volunteering Club show how young people can engage in building relationships with charities through volunteering. Does the Minister agree that more needs to be done, particularly in our schools, to encourage and support a culture of engagement with charities among young people?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The first time I was asked to volunteer was through school, so I know that the noble Baroness makes a valuable point. Volunteers are critical to civil society. We are committed to enabling more people to get involved in working with the voluntary sector and to modernising volunteering through the civil society covenant, which will promote flexible working for modern work-life commitments. The noble Baroness focused on children and young people, and I thought the CAF report made an interesting point. Through our youth strategy, which intersects with this and, helpfully, is led by the same Minister, we are looking at ways to get more young people involved.

[Baroness Bull (CB)]

My Lords, I am sure the Minister will recognise the role of trustees, not just in helping to raise funds but in undertaking the statutory and regulatory functions within charities—all unpaid and in the spirit of public service. An NCVO report found that 85% of charities are struggling to recruit high-quality trustees. Can the Minister say what the Government can do to support charities in recruiting, training and retaining high-quality trustees? Will she join me in acknowledging the important role of trustees in running charities? I declare an interest as, like many of us, I am a trustee of charities.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Unfortunately, when those of us on the Front Bench took up our roles, we had to give up our trustee roles. I know that noble Lords across the House are committed to working directly with charities and giving their expertise. One of the first things that the Government committed to was the civil society covenant. The civil society council, to be chaired by the NCVO’s chief executive, will meet quarterly in Downing Street to drive forward the covenant’s implementation. I have no doubt that this will be one of the big issues it discusses, but, like everyone in your Lordships’ House, I encourage more people to get involved where they can.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, to turn to the micro level of this, we do not carry change in our pockets now so many charity collections are not going to work. What are the Government doing to make sure people can feel confident about using a card to make payments and making sure with the banks that we are secure when we give spontaneously?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

A huge number of charities now use card readers, and it is shifting quite rapidly. The noble Lord is correct that a lot of people would not necessarily have change. I am not clear, but I will go back and check whether the department has seen a corelation between people not carrying cash and the reported fall in personal donations. It is an interesting point and one made well.

[The Lord Bishop of Manchester]

My Lords, I particularly welcome the Minister’s earlier response referring to place-based donations. Many local charities are quite small, and small charities are the most vulnerable. Can the Minister give us more of an indication as to how small charities can be supported? They are the ones which are most in touch with their local communities and most likely to go to the wall if donations are falling.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

There are two things to say in relation to smaller charities. Some of the measures put in place last year mean that smaller organisations pay less employer contributions. That was done to support smaller organisations. I am happy to arrange a briefing for the right reverend Prelate on the place-based approach to philanthropy, which is around making sure that you can leverage large amounts of money. It is entirely intended to make sure that smaller organisations, as well as larger ones, can benefit from the huge generosity and opportunities that philanthropy offers.

[Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)]

My Lords, as the report makes clear, this is the first reduction in giving for five years. If the British public were still giving at the level they were a decade ago, another £12.5 billion would be available to charities across the country. The Minister is right that the British people are a generous lot. However, does she agree that part of the problem is that they balk at paying the extra tax bills that charities are facing through additional employment costs and national insurance contributions? For the National Trust alone, this costs £10 million per year.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The noble Lord will be entirely aware of the difficult decisions this Government had to make on winning the election in 2024. My noble friend Lord Livermore is not here, but I think he would probably refer that back to the Benches opposite. If the noble Lord has not read the report—it is a really interesting read—that was not one of the specific things I recall coming up in it. We would prefer to look at it in a much more positive way and to make the case for people giving. We will continue to do that as a government.

[Baroness Nargund (Lab)]

My Lords, the new Queen Elizabeth Trust has been established to regenerate shared community spaces, reflecting Her late Majesty’s commitment to public service. These spaces could be of enormous benefit to young people, who, according to the Charities Aid Foundation, have the lowest level of charitable engagement of any age group at the moment. Do the Government have any plans to promote youth volunteering, particularly as a means of skills development? If so, does my noble friend the Minister agree that organisations such as the Queen Elizabeth Trust, as well as the King’s Trust, could help mobilise that youth involvement?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Like other noble Lords and my noble friend, I was very pleased to see the announcement of the launch of the Queen Elizabeth Trust over the weekend. Her late Majesty, whose 100th birthday it would have been tomorrow, was exceptional at bringing people together. In response to my noble friend’s question around youth engagement and social action, we recognise that participation in youth social action, including volunteering, builds young people’s skills and increases their confidence. We are supporting the #iwill movement, which aims to increase the scale, sustainability and impact of youth social action and volunteering. I have already referenced the national youth strategy, and this is part of what we are trying to encourage through that.

Class Inequality in the Arts

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Thursday 5th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Clancarty]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the University of Manchester report Class Ceiling, published in January; and what steps they are taking to address class inequality in the arts.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

As the report highlights, it is considerably harder for someone from a working-class background to access the arts and pursue an artistic career. This is clearly not acceptable. Our £1.5 billion Arts Everywhere fund will prioritise areas previously undersupported, ensuring the arts should be for everyone, whatever their background. It is also why we are investing £132.5 million of dormant asset funding to increase disadvantaged young people’s access to enrichment and delivering a £9 million creative careers service, which will focus on tackling the greatest barriers facing young people.

[The Earl of Clancarty (CB)]

My Lords, my takeaway from a report that makes many crucial points is how much the starving of arts funding over many years has contributed to the neglect of a particular part of the workforce. Does the Minister agree that, if there is fiscal headroom, there should be major reinvestment not just in Manchester but across the whole country? Two examples from the report are, first, creative infrastructure, such as rehearsal and studio spaces, which has been largely ignored by successive Governments, and, secondly, the paucity of apprenticeships, which need to be far more flexible and tailored to the arts. Will the Government take action on these things?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The Government are already investing in arts and culture, and over the course of this Parliament they will invest £1.5 billion in capital funding for arts and culture. We are also investing in making sure that opportunities should never depend on background or schooling, and we are committed to ensuring that everyone can succeed in the arts. This includes looking at how we can encourage people to offer and take up apprenticeships. More importantly, it is about making sure the right people are in the room and that everyone knows that that room even exists.

[Baroness Keeley (Lab)]

My Lords, the Music and Dance Scheme schools, such as Chetham’s in Manchester and the Hammond school in Chester, give talented children from disadvantaged backgrounds access to world-class training. These eight schools are a success story, yet their future is endangered after funding was frozen or cut in real terms from 2010 to 2024. Without renewed investment, this pathway will disappear, reinforcing the class ceiling we are discussing. Can the Minister confirm whether additional funding will be found so that these schools can continue their vital specialist educational work?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

We are working with the DWP and Skills England to define and develop the growth and skills offer, and that also includes working with the DfE on how we make sure that as many children as possible can access specialist and general music and dance education. We recognise it is important to revitalise arts education, which is why there was a focus on this in the reformed national curriculum.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, the report suggests that something that sounds like institutionalised snobbery exists and that we should deal with things such as apprenticeships. Does the Minister have any idea how, in a sector dominated by freelancers and micro-businesses, we can make apprenticeships, or anything like them, more attractive to those employers?

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The apprenticeship piece is a critical part of making sure that it is not just who you know but what your future potential is. We are doing this by focusing on making sure that we get world-class vocational training. As well as apprenticeships, we are doing things such as making sure we have a BRIT School in Bradford, which is opening in 2028. It will provide 500 free places for 16 to 19 year-olds, which will break down the barriers to elite art education.

One of the things that comes through the report—which I agree was an interesting, if sobering, read—and some of the narrative around it was that too many children do not know that these careers are open to them, so we are also investing in making sure that there are careers opportunities and advice for young people that get them to know that these careers are open to them. That is the first step to breaking down the barriers we should be breaking down, even before we start looking at increasing the apprenticeship offer. It is no use offering careers if people do not know they exist and do not take them up.

[Lord Sherbourne of Didsbury (Con)]

The Minister just talked about the barriers that are denying access to the arts for disadvantaged pupils and students. For our information, can she helpfully spell out exactly what those barriers are and what precisely the Government are doing to remove them?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I would probably far exceed the 75-word response we are supposed to give if I went through all the barriers. However, they include lack of access to parental networks, not knowing about the opportunities in the first place and schools not having creative education, which is why I referred to the fact that the curriculum review is focused on arts and why the Secretary of State for Culture is focused on increasing access to music opportunities, including through music in libraries. I could go on, but I hope that some of the other issues that we are trying to deal with will come through in other responses.

[Lord Watts (Lab)]

My Lords, many musicians and artists struggle in the first few years when they are leaning their trade. Has the Minister seen what Ireland has done in introducing benefits systems that take into account the low earnings of these musicians and artists?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

We are aware of the basic income scheme for artists in Ireland. We are not considering a basic income scheme for artists at this time. However, we believe that British creators are second to none and we are committed to giving them security and a regulatory and fiscal environment where creativity can flourish. This is exemplified by our recent Employment Rights Act, our commitment to appoint a freelance champion and our 5% uplift to national portfolio organisations, as well as our commitment to addressing some of the unfair practices in the grass-roots music industry, such as pay-to-play.

[Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)]

My Lords, in January, Exeter Cathedral School announced it would be closing its doors at the end of this academic year, after eight and a half centuries of training talented singers from all backgrounds who provide solace and tranquillity to those who need it. Parents and staff have said the Government’s imposition of VAT on their fees and scholarships was the “final nail in the coffin”. The headmaster of Wells Cathedral Choir School has similarly warned that, “VAT is of huge concern. Access to choristerships should be open to everyone. It is getting harder and harder to do that”. Will the Government think again, so that this important part of our living heritage can be open to everybody, not just those whose parents can afford it?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

One of the issues with private schools is that, in principle, they have not been open to everyone. Ending the tax breaks on VAT and business rates for private schools was a tough but necessary decision that will secure additional funding to help deliver the commitments by this Government relating to education and young people. The schools that focus on the performing arts are in scope of the policy, in order to ensure fairness and consistency. However, we are pushing forward with making sure that there is better, revitalised arts education more generally, and that includes continuing some of the bursaries that are available to young people.

[Lord Pannick (CB)]

Would the Minister acknowledge the contribution made by many independent schools to breaking down the barriers that she referred to, by the partnerships that those schools have with state schools by which they open their facilities to children who are not being educated there?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

When you look at that, it all sounds great in practice, but there is a massive regional difference. For example, it might work in London, but it is not going to work in some parts of the north of England. It does not work in every single part. The best thing the Government can do is to make sure that all state schools, which together educate around 93-94% of children, have a good offer for those children in terms of access to arts education.

[Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate (Con)]

My Lords, over many centuries, some of the finest artists in all the various forms of art have come from poorer communities and have relied very largely on private patronage to develop their artistic skills, and so on. Therefore, does the Minister think that the Government are doing enough to encourage people to provide private patronage and support to those who have these talents, which are so important?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am a big fan of philanthropy, but, if noble Lords read the report the original Question referred to, they will see that, in essence, our approach is about making sure that young people are aware of the opportunities and breaking down the systemic, widespread barriers to young people accessing the information and knowledge to get on in this area in the first place. We want to make sure that renumeration across the board and low or no pay early on in people’s careers do not stop those without parental income, or access to private financing, getting on.

UK Streaming and Cinema Sector

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Black of Brentwood (Con)]

My Lords, in begging leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper, I declare my interest as deputy chairman of the Telegraph Media Group.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

The way we consume entertainment is changing rapidly, driving greater consolidation in the streaming and entertainment markets. Cinemas and independent British content play a vital role in our communities, and DCMS works closely with the BFI and the UK Cinema Association to ensure that they continue to thrive. Given legal and commercial sensitivities, it would not be appropriate to comment on any live or potential merger involving Warner Bros. Discovery; should any transaction by any company progress, it would be up to the CMA to examine its implications for competition and consumers.

[Lord Black of Brentwood (Con)]

My Lords, noble Lords will be aware that on Friday, Netflix, doubtless terrified of the prospect of this Oral Question and the ferocious scrutiny of your Lordships’ House, withdrew its bid for Warner Bros. Discovery in favour of Paramount Skydance. Will the Minister join me in welcoming the news, which is good for British consumers, who will continue to benefit from choice in the streaming market, good for our world-class content creators and good for the British cinema industry, which is vital to our high streets? Will she also agree that the bid highlighted the importance of intellectual property and the strength of the UK’s copyright regime and confirm that the Government will continue to protect UK rights holders by ruling out any new copyright exemptions that would allow big tech to scrape UK content with impunity?

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

While I do not necessarily agree with the noble Lord’s analysis of the reason Netflix withdrew its bid, the Government recognise the importance of a competitive and diverse streaming market for consumers, creators and the wider screen sector. We also recognise the vital role of intellectual property in a strong copyright regime. That is why the Secretaries of State for DSIT and DCMS are working closely with the creative and AI sectors to consider all potential options and get to the right solution. We have convened expert working groups and parliamentarians, including a number of noble Lords, to inform our approach and will continue to engage stakeholders to ensure that our copyright framework values and protects human creativity. We will publish a comprehensive report and economic impact assessment by 18 March this year.

[Viscount Colville of Culross (CB)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Viscount Colville of Culross (CB)]

My Lords, I declare an interest as a television producer. The Media Act set up prominence for public service broadcasters in the digital space, but it does not cover video-sharing platforms such as YouTube, which is where increasing numbers of young people are watching their content. Now that the BBC has announced a partnership with YouTube, does the Minister agree that the prominence regime should be extended to amplify discoverability of public service broadcasting content on these services?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Public service broadcasters are vital, and it is important for us to recognise how central YouTube is to a number of young people’s access to content. We welcome Ofcom’s recommendation that public service broadcasters and platforms such as YouTube work together urgently to ensure that public service media content is made prominent on fair terms. We are considering Ofcom’s recommendation for legislation to support this. However, we want to see the outcome of these discussions in the first instance and encourage YouTube and PSBs to work together to try to achieve a deeper partnership that could benefit them and audiences. If I have not quite answered the noble Viscount’s question, I am happy to pick that up with him afterwards.

[Baroness Keeley (Lab)]

My Lords, I join the noble Lord, Lord Black, in welcoming the news that he mentioned and highlighting the importance of intellectual property and the UK’s copyright regime. Other jurisdictions are now moving away from weakening copyright. Australia has ruled out new exceptions, creators are prevailing in cases in the US courts and EU policymakers are exploring stronger rights. Does my noble friend the Minister accept that weakening UK copyright law now would be economically and strategically misguided, just as the value of high-quality creative content is becoming clearer to AI developers and legislators worldwide?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The Government want a copyright regime that values and protects human creativity, can be trusted and unlocks innovation. As I mentioned, expert working groups and a parliamentary working group have been convened and stakeholders will continue to be engaged as Ministers consider all options. I have been told that I can confidently say that we will publish a full report, economic impact assessment and consultation response by 18 March. I look forward to future debates covering the outcome of that process.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, will the Government accept that if we as a nation are to continue to be as successful in this area as we have been, we must look to the training set-up for those who are creating the content? How are the Government encouraging people to take up careers in this, especially at level 4 and 5 qualifications? Will the higher education sector actually take part in providing these services?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Is that related to AI or content generally?

[Lord Addington (LD)]

Content.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

In relation to the screen workforce and skills, we are investing across the skills pipeline: there is £10 million for the National Film and Television School expansion, and we are scaling up the British Film Institute Film Academy and delivering short stories through the growth and skills levy. We are keen that young people and people throughout their careers can access opportunities to be part of what we consider to be one of the jewels in Britain’s creative crown.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, the Government are considering a commercial research exception that would deny streamers the right to withhold consent for use of content when it is used in research and development, but all AI pretraining is technically R&D. Does the Minister accept that this would fatally undermine licensing markets, with payment only at a point of market entry after a leverage is lost? The best thing the Government could do is to rule out any such exception.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

It would be a bit pre-emptive of me to rule out any exception before the reports I have mentioned are published. I would be very happy to return to your Lordships’ House to discuss this matter further once that has taken place.

[The Earl of Clancarty (CB)]

My Lords, with regard to the original Question, decisions such as this have the potential to significantly affect our creative workforce in this area, particularly the freelance workforce, in terms of size and rates of pay. Will these concerns be a significant part of the new freelance champion’s remit, and when will we hear more about this new role?

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Anticipating that this question might come up, I asked whether I was able to give a definitive date for when the freelance champion will be appointed. Unfortunately, my wording is still just “as swiftly as possible”. I can report to your Lordships’ House that the Minister for Creative Industries, my colleague in the other place, Ian Murray, has held a round table with the sector to work through a number of the issues around the remit of this role. I genuinely hope, for a whole host of reasons, to be able to report back to your Lordships’ House on the next occasion I am asked that question. At the moment, unfortunately, my answer is “as swiftly as possible”.

[Lord Brennan of Canton (Lab)]

My Lords, can I encourage my noble friend the Minister to regard these questions as a sort of canary in the coal mine? The Government’s original opt-out proposals on AI exemptions obviously caused a great deal of consternation in the House, and I think the idea of a commercial research exemption would be similarly difficult if it were the proposal the Government eventually came forward with. Even if the Minister cannot rule something out at this stage, can she at least acknowledge the fact that many of us in the House regard that as little more than a smokescreen for mass copyright theft?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I have heard that loud and clear, and I will convey the sentiment of the House back to colleagues in DCMS.

[Lord Clement-Jones (LD)]

My Lords, I declare an interest as chair of the Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Society. The Minister said that she cannot at this stage rule out certain aspects of what might be contained in the paper due from the Secretary of State this March, but can she rule in the importance of making sure that AI developers must license UK content for the training and grounding of their models?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Our priority is to ensure that the UK is ready for AI-related risks while supporting responsible innovation and long-term growth. We are considering all potential options to deliver on the UK’s ambition. It would be a very foolish and brave Minister to pre-empt a report that has yet to be published, but I look forward to future debates on this matter.

[Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Con)]

Even if the Minister cannot rule out specific measures, can she perhaps agree that weakening UK copyright law now would be misguided?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The only thing I am very clear on is that, like noble Lords, we want a copyright regime that values and protects human creativity, can be trusted and unlocks innovation. As I said, I cannot pre-empt the report, but I look forward to future debates on this matter.

Uniformed youth groups: Promoting Skills and Resilience in Young People

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Monday 26th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Morgan of Drefelin]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of uniformed youth groups on promoting skills and resilience in young people.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

We recognise the excellent contribution and impact of uniformed youth organisations. The Government have directly funded their work since 2022. There is a range of existing research that shows the positive impact of uniformed youth organisations on young people and their lives. Ipsos independently evaluated the DCMS-funded uniformed youth fund from 2022 to 2025. The evaluation found evidence supporting the positive impact of uniformed youth organisation membership on young people’s well-being, social and emotional development, skills and community connectedness.

[Baroness Morgan of Drefelin (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend the Minister for that fabulous reply. I could not agree with her more. We know that uniformed youth groups will play a vital role in delivering the Government’s new youth strategy. Groups such as the Scouts, the Girl Guides, all our cadets, the Jewish Lads’ and Girls’ Brigade and of course the Girls Brigade and Boys’ Brigade do an amazing job. Will the Minister encourage her department to look again at the funding arrangements so that these groups can retain staff during the transition from the uniformed youth fund, which is coming to an end in March, to the new funding arrangements that will come into place with the new youth strategy? It is great to put the contribution of these groups on the record here today.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I pay tribute to all those supporting uniformed youth organisations, including my noble friend. Our new national youth strategy has been co-designed with young people. We are engaging further with young people in youth groups, including uniformed youth organisations, to ensure that their perspectives, needs and proven outcomes are incorporated. As for transitional funding and funding arrangements, I will take my noble friend’s points back to the department ahead of her meeting with Minister Peacock, which I understand is taking place early next month.

[Lord Bailey of Paddington (Con)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Bailey of Paddington (Con)]

My Lords, I declare my interest as the chair of the cadet health check team. The value of the uniformed services to our young people throughout the country is beyond doubt, particularly in the poorest communities in the country. The real challenge now is adult volunteers. The entire service is based on adult volunteers, so what work are the Government doing to improve recruitment and retention of those very valuable volunteers?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I agree with the points the noble Lord raised around the value of uniformed youth groups. One of the things our new funding arrangements will do is support the development of volunteers. I will be very happy to share some examples and discuss that further with him.

[Lord Mohammed of Tinsley (LD)]

My Lords, I echo comments made earlier in your Lordships’ Chamber about the invaluable service that uniformed youth services provide, particularly when it comes to life skills and experiences. How can the Government change policies to get more young people involved in these organisations so that more young people benefit from this and stand a better chance in the world of employment?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The new national youth strategy has been developed with young people precisely to make sure that the Government are directing funding towards areas that young people themselves have identified. One of the most difficult findings from some of the work done in the run-up to the launch of the national youth strategy was around the isolation and loneliness faced by so many young people. The strategy is a 10-year plan to make sure that every young person across the country has somewhere to go, somewhere that cares for them and a community they feel part of.

[Lord Mountevans (CB)]

My Lords, I draw attention to my interests as a vice-president of the Sea Cadets and president of the successful City of London Sea Cadets. The Minister kindly discussed the new arrangements of DCMS, but the strategic defence review just six or seven months ago called for a 30% increase in the offer of the cadet organisations. What additional funding, if any, can the Minister point to that is going to facilitate this growth?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

This is Ministry of Defence funding. My understanding is that the Government plan to have increased military cadet forces by 30% by 2030; this is an investment of over £70 million of new funding, as set out in the strategic defence review, which the noble Lord rightly points out was published last year.

[Lord West of Spithead (Lab)]

My Lords, I declare an interest as president of the Bollington and Macclesfield Sea Cadets—there is a northern aspect to me, as you can see. Whenever I have been involved with the uniformed cadet forces, I have been amazed how they have changed the lives of many of our young people. Can the Minister confirm that sea cadets will now carry rifles when members of a guard and that they will do range-firing practices like the other cadet units?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I have absolutely no idea. I am not going to come up with a fudged answer, but I will write to my noble friend to outline whether or not that is the case.

[Baroness Foster of Aghadrumsee (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, as a former Brownie, Guide and Guide leader, I absolutely agree with all that has been said about the worth of belonging to uniformed organisations, particularly in relation to self-esteem for our young people and the resilience that is built up. I visited my local Guide unit two weeks ago during Parliament Week, and I was very concerned to learn that a number of units have closed recently because of the lack of volunteers. Is there more that the Government can do to help with the lack of volunteers? I am working with the devolved Administrations to help highlight that.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The noble Baroness makes a valuable point, as previous speakers have done, in relation to the vital role of volunteers. You cannot have these uniformed youth groups without volunteers. Most of the funding that is outlined within the national youth strategy is focused on England, but I will take back the noble Baroness’s points, because it is a national organisation. I thank her and everyone else in your Lordships’ House who have contributed through volunteering for these groups.

[Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab)]

My Lords, I refer to my interest as chair of the National Preparedness Commission. In 1908, Scouting for Boys—and, in 1912, the companion edition called How Girls Can Help to Build Up the Empire—was very explicit about the importance of being prepared. That remains very much at the heart of the work that those two uniformed organisations, and all the others that have been mentioned, do. This is going to be increasingly important for the nation, given all the threats and hazards that we face. Can my noble friend indicate whether or not that philosophy is going to be supported in relation to those organisations, other youth organisations and, more generally, in schools, to ensure that young people are equipped with the personal resilience skills and the skills that may be necessary to support the country in terms of the threats and hazards that we face?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I think “Be prepared” could usefully be used as a motto for Ministers standing at the Dispatch Box in your Lordships’ House as well. There is clearly a role played by cadet forces and other uniformed youth organisations in the broader resilience piece. However, a thread that goes through all our policies on youth is around that resilience that young people so desperately need. All noble Lords from across the House will be aware of the crisis that so many people are feeling, and we want to make sure they feel equipped for the challenges they may face in the future.

[Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)]

The Minister said in her initial Answer that the last Conservative Government set up the uniformed youth fund to give young people these life-changing skills and opportunities, and I was glad to hear about the evaluation she mentioned. It is sad, therefore, that the fund is ending in March. In the transition to the new funding arrangements, can she guarantee—as she said in response to her noble friend—that all of the organisations, including the Sea Cadets, St John Ambulance, the Guides, the Scouts and others, will continue to receive funding support so that young people can continue to have these life-changing opportunities?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I have committed to my noble friend to take the point about transitional funding back to the department. However, as the noble Lord will be aware, the uniformed youth fund was announced in the immediate aftermath of Covid and was intended to allow the groups to set up additional units. It was only ever intended to run until 2025. Therefore, the additional year has been while we have been setting up the programmes and funds under the new national youth strategy, which we are proud to say we have co-produced with young people. That is why the focus has shifted to a different way of rolling out funds.