Europe: Youth Mobility

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Thursday 30th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, I start by thanking the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans for securing this debate. I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Moraes, on his maiden speech. I also flag that I greatly enjoyed hearing about the tour of the noble Baroness, Lady Featherstone—from Oxford Polytechnic to travelling in Europe to politics.

I believe all noble Lords would agree that our country’s youth are our future. We have heard much talk this week of the importance of economic growth, but long-term growth will be achieved only if we nurture and cherish those young people who are the future leaders of tomorrow. Educational opportunities, including those for travel and exchange, are vital for Britain’s youth if they are to flourish. The noble Lord, Lord Watson of Invergowrie, mentioned the existing bilateral youth mobility agreements, as did my noble friends Lord Kirkhope and Lord Jackson.

To facilitate such educational exchanges, the UK already has bilateral youth mobility agreements with 12 countries. These are reciprocal arrangements that benefit young people from both countries involved. We also have the Turing and Horizon schemes. However, it is equally important that we ensure that such bilateral schemes are balanced with the needs of the UK. Therefore, these schemes have strict caps on the numbers of people who are able to obtain visas under them and quotas to ensure that the UK retains complete control over the numbers of people entering the country through such visas.

Many noble Lords have raised in the debate the proposal for a new EU-UK youth mobility scheme put forward by the European Commission last year, but His Majesty’s Official Opposition believe that there are several issues with this. First, an EU-UK youth mobility scheme would pose challenges to British universities. The Commission’s proposal included provision for equal treatment between EU and UK citizens in respect of higher education tuition fees. Currently, the level of tuition fees for international students for an undergraduate degree varies between £11,400 and £38,000 per year, and the institutions involved derive approximately 20% of their revenue from international students’ fees. If EU students were to pay home fees, this could place a further strain on the finances of universities, many of which are already struggling.

Jamie Arrowsmith, head of the international arm of Universities UK, told the trade publication Research Professional News that an EU-UK youth mobility scheme would be

“difficult for the Government to agree to”

given the financial situation of British universities. He continued:

“At a time when tuition fees don’t cover the full cost of teaching … it’s difficult to see how this could work without exacerbating concerns over financial sustainability or imposing a significant cost on the government”.


Secondly, there are concerns surrounding numbers. Home Office statistics indicate that, during the year ending June 2024, 24,091 grants were made through the current youth mobility scheme. That would appear manageable, but with the ONS recently stating that the UK population will rise to 72.5 million by 2032, it is important that we take a measured approach to the number of people coming to the UK. The country voted to leave the EU. We must therefore be careful that we do not enter into any arrangement that may lead to freedom of movement being unintentionally implemented. An EU-wide youth mobility scheme, as the European Commission called for, would potentially lead to that.

We have also heard much talk of the Government’s proposed EU reset, which was mentioned by my noble friends Lord Frost and Lord Jackson. The 2024 Labour manifesto stated that Labour is:

“confident in our status outside of the EU, but a leading nation in Europe once again, with an improved and ambitious relationship with our European partners”.

The Prime Minister has stated that the Government do not have plans to introduce such a scheme, but he has not ruled it out completely. Given that they have made so much of their reset with the EU and that the European Union appears to be pushing for a youth mobility scheme to be part of any new deal with the UK, how can we be sure that the Government do not agree to something that may see freedom of movement reintroduced? Can the Minister confirm that His Majesty’s Government will not enter into an agreement with the EU that introduces an open-ended youth mobility scheme?

Finally, we should have a greater focus on domestic opportunities for our young people. There is a plethora of enriching experiences from which they can benefit at home, such as the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award and the cadet force, which I referred to in today’s third Oral Question. As an example, studies have confirmed that being on the cadet force improves school attendance, improves mental and physical well-being and results in enhanced employability. While the report did not make a monetary estimate of the total benefits of being a cadet, it estimated that the cost savings from a reduced use of mental health services and better educational outcomes were worth around £95 million a year. For that reason, we ask the Minister why the Government are removing the National Citizen Service and why the Department for Education is ceasing its funding of the cadet expansion programme.

I hope all noble Lords agree that, if we want our young generation truly to thrive, we should be strengthening these programmes and others like them, not removing them or cutting their funding.

Live Events Ticketing: Resale and Pricing Practices

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Thursday 16th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, we appreciate the Statement from His Majesty’s Government. As the Minister in the other place said, the Department for Business and Trade and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport have launched a consultation on the resale of live event tickets. That consultation will consider a cap on the price of ticket resales, increasing the regulation of ticket resale websites and apps, and strengthening consumer protections.

All noble Lords will be aware that the resale market plays an important role in supporting artists, fans and venues. Authorised resellers can provide a safe and secure way to transfer unwanted or unusable tickets, which ensures that seats are not left empty at venues and that those who cannot attend events any more are not left out of pocket. This is a mechanism which would seem to be sensible and which we can all support.

Indeed, His Majesty’s Official Opposition, when in government, launched a review of secondary ticketing, led by Professor Michael Waterson, in 2016. We passed the Breaching of Limits on Ticket Sales Regulations 2018, which banned ticket touts from using automated software to avoid security measures designed to help fans see their favourite musicians and sports teams at a fair price.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 required resellers to inform buyers of the true price of tickets, which should allow fans to make informed and educated decisions on what they choose to purchase. Much was done to protect fans and supporters from unfair practices in secondary ticket markets. Although protecting consumers from bad practice and exploitation is critically important, we should also remember that secondary ticket markets are not new and are no different from other types of secondary market that exist in many different sectors.

The consultation proposals announced in the Minister’s Statement in the other place consider imposing price caps on secondary ticketing. This may, prima facie, sound like an attractive proposal but His Majesty’s Official Opposition are concerned about this increasing the likelihood of a black market emerging. Price caps in other countries have been known to lead to shortages in the availability of goods subject to them and tickets are no different. That view has been supported by the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which has warned:

“Draconian regulation, targeting only the secondary market, will only mean more tickets changing hands in informal settings without the same protections that exist in proper marketplaces”.


Rob Wilson, a professor of applied sport finance, has said:

“There is little doubt that a cap on resale prices will lead to an explosion of underground activity as punters seek market value for their purchases and the flexibility to buy and sell when and how they wish”.


If the proposal for a cap on secondary ticket prices were introduced, what safeguards and extra precautions would the Government take to prevent a rise in scammers and black market ticket reselling?

Another concern we have is the proposal for a ticket resale cap. The issues with such a policy were very well evident at the Paris Olympics, where the restrictions on the resale of tickets meant that many event venues had empty seats. This not only impacted the Olympic venues themselves but meant that many fans could not participate and enjoy seeing their nation compete in a sport that they love following.

This is not the right time to go back over the national insurance contributions debate, but one has only to read Hansard to see that many noble Lords are greatly concerned about the impact that measure will have on the live music and sporting industries. At a time when these sectors already face potential negative headwinds, many of the proposals in this consultation could have further significant and detrimental effects on the venues, not to mention on the fans.

We very much hope that the Government will proceed with a measured approach and carefully consider how such proposals as outlined in this consultation will affect music, sporting venues and, crucially, those who derive so much fun and enjoyment from attending these events.

[Lord Foster of Bath (LD)]

My Lords, unlike the Conservatives, with their somewhat lukewarm response, we on these Benches very strongly welcome the Statement, not least because it is a clear promise of action. We welcome the words of the Minister in the other place, Chris Bryant, that

“the House should be in no doubt that we intend to act”.

To date, there has been too little action to address concerns that have been raised over very many years. Twenty years ago, in the other place, I asked the then Labour Government what they planned to do about widespread concerns about ticket touting. I waited until 2006 to get an answer, which was to call on the industry to find a voluntary solution to ticket touting. After four so-called summit meetings, very little was achieved.

More recently, the same voluntary approach was adopted by the then Conservative Government, who said in response to the CMA’s report and recommendations in 2021:

“The Government believes in the power of competitive markets to give consumers choice and flexibility”,


and concluded that

“it is too soon to conclude that the only way forward is further legislation focused on this market”.

The voluntary approach has not worked.

There have, of course, been some improvements over the years—measures restricting the use of bots have been referred to already—but overall, Governments of all persuasions have failed to seriously address these issues, despite the growing concerns of fans, artists, event promoters, live venues and many others. With the Government doing little, many in both Houses have pressed for action. I pay particular tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, who, together with my noble friend Lord Clement-Jones, has doggedly raised concerns and, more importantly, offered solutions to the ticketing and touting issues that are now at last being covered in the consultation.

It is no wonder that the Statement—a statement of intended action—is so widely welcomed, including on these Benches. That is, of course, hardly surprising, since we supported amendments covering many of the points in the consultation paper during the passage of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. The FanFair Alliance, which also deserves praise for its dogged campaigning on these issues, has gone so far as to say that the suggested measures “are potentially game-changing”.

The Statement sets out the issues to be addressed very clearly, but while it illustrates the Government’s intended direction of travel, I would have preferred, and wished for, greater clarity about some of the preferred options. I hope the Minister will provide more detail. What is the preferred limit on resale price? Are the Government in favour of a licensing system for resale platforms? Will they prohibit platforms from allowing sellers to list more tickets for an event than the seller can legally procure from the primary market? Will they make platforms strictly liable for incorrect information about tickets listed on their websites?

There are two further issues. Not included in this consultation is dynamic pricing, which is to be consulted on separately. Although I welcome that it is only in relation to the live events sector, I regret that it is not part of the main consultation. Surely it would have been better for implementation if the two were considered alongside each other with the outcomes forming one plan of reform. Can the Minister explain why they are not? Given that we know that the separate consultation is to last 12 months, can she tell us when it will start and how the two consultations will work together?

Finally, it is obvious that there is little point in new legislation unless it is rigorously enforced, but despite existing regulation on bots, for example, we know that there are still cases of them being used. We need tougher enforcement in this area. There are continuing concerns about the black market and even about our ability to deal with touts operating outside the UK. Can the Minister say a little more about plans for enforcement of both existing legislation and the new legislation that will arise following the consultation? Does she accept that a licensing system for resale platforms will be a great help in that enforcement procedure? Is she aware that various bodies, such as the CMA, will be involved? Trading standards departments will certainly be involved, yet in recent years there has been a significant drop in the number of available qualified trading standards officers right across the country.

Trading standards and other enforcement bodies will require additional resources, including to recruit new staff to take on additional responsibilities. What assurances are there that funds will be provided to meet these additional needs? Will the new burdens principle apply, for example?

Our current ticketing market is not working for fans, and voluntary measures will not solve the problems. We have waited too long for action, so we welcome the Statement and the promise of action. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

Social Cohesion and Community during Periods of Change

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Friday 6th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, I thank the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of York for successfully balloting this important debate, and I congratulate my noble friend Lord Sharma on his maiden speech. He not only has a degree in applied physics but qualified as a chartered accountant, and then has a wealth of experience over many years in both the private and public sectors. I can see that he will make many valuable contributions, based on real-life experience, to your Lordships’ House.

His Majesty’s Official Opposition are committed to fostering social cohesion, strong communities and strong local economies. Indeed, our aim is to work tirelessly and constructively with the Government to promote these ideals into real action, not just words. I will first set out where we are today on social cohesion and focus on the work that the previous Government undertook in order to make progress.

The strength of our communities and local economies is shown at its best during difficult times. I think noble Lords will all agree, without exception, that the Covid pandemic remains a powerful example of a time when communities throughout our United Kingdom came together to support each other during an incredibly challenging period. This was referenced by the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of York and the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of London. The noble Lord, Lord Bird, referred to Darning Street, and my noble friend Lord Jackson talked about the vaccine rollout.

Every one of us can remember the amazing efforts that volunteers made to ensure the most vulnerable residents had the food and other essential household goods they needed throughout the pandemic, with volunteer groups taking huge steps to support their neighbours and communities. The Make a Difference campaign saw thousands of laptops donated by men, women and families all over the country, so that as many schoolchildren as possible had the tools that they needed to enable them to continue their education while being confined to their homes. It was an unbelievably difficult period for many.

We are reminded of the vaccination campaign. In January 2022, the chief executive of NHS England paid tribute to the more than 100,000 people across the country who stepped up to the plate and supported the vaccine rollout. Among them were 48,000 volunteer stewards and 17,000 volunteer vaccinators.

More recently, we have seen communities come together in the face of flooding, following severe weather events such as Storm Bert. Just yesterday, it was reported that a volunteer in Northamptonshire has taken two weeks off work to lead a team of volunteers to help residents of the Billing Aquadrome, who have been affected by flooding. On the night of Storm Bert itself, I saw farmers in the local community going out on their tractors to warn drivers in advance of the rising flood-waters, and going further down the road and towing any unfortunate drivers for whom the waters were already too high. These are just two of the hundreds, if not thousands, of stories of the selflessness and bravery that people have shown during challenging times.

A strong community is the foundation stone of where we live and who we interact with. It can be our identity and essence; it can be a driving force for good deeds and doing the right thing. We know what we can achieve when we work together—it can be ground-breaking. That is precisely why strong communities matter.

However, we know that social cohesion can be challenged. The most reverend Primate the Archbishop of York, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of London, and the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan, all mentioned the riots we saw this summer. The riots were entirely wrong, not to mention unlawful. There are elements in our society who fall short of the values that we aspire to, and we must join together and speak with one voice in condemning violence. Whatever the purported motivation, violence of any form, whether on our streets, in our shops or in our homes, is never acceptable and is an affront to everything that we stand for.

It is critical that we seek to understand what went wrong, not just this summer but in previous events. We must establish the root causes of these crises and address them head-on. We have to bring those who committed criminal acts to justice, while at the same time seek to heal divisions wherever they appear. The riots showed that there is clearly much work to be done to bring our society together.

His Majesty’s Official Opposition will work constructively with the Government to build kinder and stronger communities, rooted in our core national values of tolerance and mutual respect. Let me repeat that: tolerance and mutual respect can be the only way forward, as was well referenced by my noble friend Lord Sandhurst.

When in government, we made a conscious and consistent effort to boost support for communities across the country through our landmark levelling-up program. Between 2019 and 2024, we put left-behind communities first, injecting cash directly into local authorities and community-led projects to revitalise our high streets, local pubs, community amenities and local schools. Through three rounds of our levelling up fund, we awarded £3.8 billion to 216 projects, including the restoration of community-owned assets, from Haigh Hall in Lancashire to Alford Manor House in the Lincolnshire Wolds. Both these assets are now set to be restored for the benefit of local people, bringing residents together and strengthening the community.

Community pubs up and down the country also play a vital role in bringing people together. Our £150 million community ownership fund supported hundreds of local groups to buy assets, such as community pubs and leisure centres. Our landmark school rebuilding fund is delivering major rebuilding and refurbishment projects at school and sixth-form college buildings across England, with buildings prioritised according to their condition. Since 2021, 518 projects have been announced under the scheme, delivering school buildings that communities can be proud of.

The most reverend Primate the Archbishop of York mentioned that difference is a gift. My noble friend Lady Bottomley talked about diversity. My noble friend Lady Helic talked about anti-Semitism. My noble friend Lord Leigh of Hurley gave an incredibly powerful insight into the frightening challenges that the Jewish community in the UK currently faces. The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Lichfield talked about attacks on mosques.

We took action against the fear of anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hate by delivering £70 million for the Community Security Trust over four years and £29 million in support of mosques last year alone to keep them safe and secure. We supported places of worship of all religions, through the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme, helping to restore places of worship in every part of the UK. The Government must look at our efforts to stamp out religious hatred and foster mutual respect within the UK, and build on that work. We hold our heads high on the record of the previous Government and our work to restore the high streets, pubs, leisure centres, community facilities and schools that are at the centre of community life in so many parts of our amazing country.

The current Government have now taken up the challenge of supporting community cohesion, and I would like to put a number of important questions to the Minister. Can he confirm that all the projects focused on strengthening our communities and our local economies announced under the previous Government will be honoured? Can he confirm that the Government will deliver the funding allocated through the third round of the levelling up fund, on time and in full? Finally, the Government have scrapped the future operation of the levelling-up agenda. Can the Minister set out what additional support left-behind communities can hope for under this Government?

In conclusion, the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of York flagged the importance of neighbours. My noble friend Lady Helic talked about integration and my noble friend Lady Porter talked about well-being and health. Social cohesion makes for a strong community; it makes a local economy; it drives prosperity; it drives success; it drives health and well-being for everyone in that community.

Industrial Strategy

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Thursday 1st February 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Watson, for raising this debate and congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Rosenfield, on his maiden speech.

I spent 20 years advising and winning business from over a third of the companies in the FTSE 100, and I now try to help SMEs. I refer the House to my entry in the register of interests. During my time with the multinational corporates, I enjoyed many trips to Derby to see Rolls-Royce, Farnborough to see BAE and Coventry to see Jaguar Land Rover. I now travel to different parts of the country to see SMEs, but whether it is Lichfield, Exeter or Portsmouth, it is striking that wherever I go, the enthusiasm and the commitment of the workforce is the rock that allows these companies to thrive. All over this country, we have a truly amazing industrial and manufacturing sector. We should be doing everything that we can to help it.

I will therefore focus on SMEs and exports as part of a wider industrial strategy. I will give noble Lords a crucially important statistic. If you were to go to Companies House today, you would find around 5.4 million firms registered. However, of those, only 8.8% export at all. UK exports are now at the highest level we have seen in our history, and it is clear that we have a very experienced and successful team at UK Export Finance. None of that is in doubt but, taking a purely objective view, 8.8% appears to be at the low end of expectations. Will the Minister say why he believes that number to be where it is and how he believes we can help it to flourish and grow? Is it a case of allocating more resource to UK Export Finance so it can visit more companies? Do we need more material to deliver the message that exporters are more productive, diversify their risk and drive their own growth? Should the Government be working with the big banks to laser focus on promoting the benefits of exporting to those companies which are best placed to benefit from an export strategy?

Another of the companies I did business with was ARM, the chip maker and one of our great UK success stories. However, it is listed in the US, not the UK. When our brilliant companies grow and think about raising capital they should, one would think, look to list in London. However, the FTSE Small Cap index is seeing its constituents decline as well as its market capitalisation, which materially impacts the investor funds available to support our businesses which want to borrow money to expand. What steps are the Government taking as part of an industrial strategy to encourage investment in UK small caps and make the sector great again?