(5 days, 22 hours ago)
Grand CommitteeIt might be helpful to the Committee if I explain that we are considering only the first Motion on the agenda at this time. I shall call the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, to move his Motion when we have concluded this debate. We are debating them both, but we can take only one at a time. The one that we are taking now is the first Motion from the noble Lord, Lord Livermore, but the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, has been in order by speaking to his Motion, because it has been grouped with the government Motion.
My Lords, I am very pleased that the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, has called this debate, which is so important for the arts. He has summarised the arguments extremely well. I am grateful, too, to the noble Lord, Lord Livermore, for his introduction.
I am grateful for the briefings from both the Music Producers Guild and UK Music. I am particularly grateful for the conversation I had last week with Gaby Grafftey-Smith, who runs the prestigious Angelic Studios in Northamptonshire. Angelic was founded by musician Toby Smith of Jamiroquai—
“by a musician for musicians”,
as its website eloquently puts it. Since 2017, when Toby Smith sadly died, the studio has been run by Gaby. One of the first things that she told me was that no one runs a studio to make money; they do so out of a passion for music. It is less a business and much more a vocation. The artists and technicians themselves build up the heritage. A studio develops organically in a creative manner. In terms of business, the margins are tight, as the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, said, and there is a ceiling on income, because only so many artists can be booked. The space itself often has to be for the desired sound, which may be created by choirs or a grand piano—a big space.
It is also precious. Gaby talks about the precise mix of cultural and technical specification that make up her recording studio and others. Trust is built up over time between the studio recording engineer and artist. Each recording studio will have a different character and a different sound; they are all individual. She told me about a drummer for a well-known band, who, having tried different studios across the country, has said that her studio is the only one that provides the right environment for the particular sound that the drummer is trying to achieve.
Angelic is also one of a few key residential studios, which further cements the crucial relationship between artist and studio. In particular, for major stars such as Harry Styles or Black Sabbath, it means, as Gaby puts it,
“a unique, rural, isolated space to work”.
If such artists cannot find such spaces in the UK, we will lose these stars to America. By their very nature, they are not spaces where public access is appropriate, but, as the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, said, they can nevertheless be used by anyone.
Like other studios, Angelic also has an apprenticeship scheme, but Gaby points out that, if recording studios cannot afford to take on those who are learning what is a key craft in the music recording industry, those who come into the industry in the future are much more likely to be from a moneyed background. That is an effect that the Government ought to think hard about. The major effect would of course be on the artists themselves, with artists turning to studios in other countries, such as in New York or Paris, in the event of studios closing or booking charges increasing. Just as worrying is the possibility that new British artists would not get a rung on the ladder or be able to record in a professional environment alongside established musicians.
Like all recording studios, Angelic is extremely worried about the increase in business rates. The Music Producers Guild reports that, for Angelic, that increase would be 48%—slightly higher than the average predicted increase of 45%, itself a massive increase. On business rates, Gaby believes that, for the reasons that I have laid out, studios should have their own category and be linked to yearly turnover, rather than a square-footage rateable value. I have described the character of one recording studio to show how much creative effort goes into the provision of one important specialist facility that cannot be expected to grow and diversify like an ordinary office-based business—it grows in a different way.
It ought to be pointed out here that Abbey Road, with its mixed portfolio, is, for obvious reasons, an outlier. Abbey Road is far and away the most famous recording studios in the world and a tourist attraction, so identified is it globally with the Beatles—although, of course, those studios also have a remarkable classical legacy that stretches back to Elgar, as the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley of Knighton, will well know.
I hope that this debate will make it very clear how much our recording studios are as much critical creative infrastructure for the music industry as film studios are for the film industry. Yet film studios receive 40% relief on business rates without, of course, needing any public access. The loss of a single recording studio would be tragic, but the loss of possibly up to half of our recording studios would be catastrophic—a tragedy that would be writ large on the music industry.
My Lords, I, too, add my thanks to the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, for setting out the issues surrounding these regulations with such clarity. Like the noble Earl and the noble Lord, I wish to express my gratitude to the Music Venue Trust, UK Music and the Music Producers Guild for their helpful briefings and for joining several Members of this House —the noble Lords, Lord Clement-Jones, Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay and Lord Bassam, and my noble friend Lord Clancarty—before Christmas to brief the Arts Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Twycross, on the consequences of these measures for grass-roots music venues, recording studios and artists’ studios. Let me briefly set out how I see the key issues facing each of the sectors affected by these regulations.
For grass-roots music venues, the picture is stark. Despite contributing over £500 million to the UK economy in 2025, the sector remains structurally fragile, with an average profit margin of just 2.5% and over half of venues showing no profit at all. These venues face a collective £7.2 million increase in their tax base from the 2026 revaluation. Hundreds will see rateable values rise by over 50%, with some experiencing increases of 100% or more. The Music Venue Trust projects that between 200 and 300 venues could close over the next four to five years. For venues already operating on razor-thin margins, these are not merely bills; they are closure notices.
For recording studios, the situation is equally perilous. Around 250 studios—roughly half the UK’s commercial studio base—are at risk of closure without mitigation by April 2026. Studios are facing an average business rates increase of 45%, with some experiencing rises of up to 100%.
These are not marginal businesses. Dean Street Studios, created by Tony Visconti and used by artists from David Bowie to Adele, has already closed three of its commercial studios, sold equipment and cut staff by 80%. The Motor Museum in Liverpool, which has supported artists from Oasis to Arctic Monkeys, is fully booked seven days a week, yet it tells us that a mere £50 increase in daily rates would drive away the emerging artists it exists to support. The studio is on track to becoming unviable.
More than 75% of recording studios are outside London, in Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham and beyond. This is not a London-centric problem; it is a crisis affecting local economies, regional talent development and cultural infrastructure across the entire country.
As the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, highlighted, the visual arts sector faces the same structural vulnerability. Artists’ studios operate on extremely low margins, keeping rents deliberately below market rates to remain affordable. Like grass-roots music venues, they function as public-benefit cultural infrastructure, not commercial property. The removal of retail, hospitality and leisure relief, combined with the new multiplier, will force rent increases that artists already at breaking point cannot absorb—or it will trigger studio closures. We have already seen this pattern in major cities across the country.
As the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, has also highlighted, the 40th report of the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee drew attention to a notable contrast in the Government’s approach. It observed that film studios benefit from a specific business rates relief: a 40% reduction on gross bills until 2034, worth some £470 million over 10 years. Yet recording studios, which are equally critical creative infrastructure for the music industry, receive no equivalent support. Indeed, the regulations before us specifically exclude premises used for the production or recording of music. This makes little sense.
I do not know whether the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, is going to leap up to ask some questions as well, but the Minister did not mention film studios. A number of us talked about the possibility that recording studios could be treated in the same way as film studios and have that exemption. Is that something the Government are prepared to look at, please?
Lord Livermore (Lab)
As I said, I cannot commit to introducing any specific targeted relief, but we keep all taxes under review.
(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, there is plenty of time. We will hear from the Lib Dems next, then the Conservative Benches.
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I do not think so. I shall repeat what my right honourable friend Ian Murray, the Culture Minister, said on the industry levy:
“My ambition is to see the voluntary levy in place for as many concerts as possible and, as a milestone in that progress, for at least 50% of tickets on sale for stadium and arena shows in 2026”
to have adopted the levy by 31 December.
“Following this, I would like to see this target brought as close to 100% as possible”.
My Lords, further to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, is the Minister aware that as well as the possibility of closures, there is the danger that our recording studios may up sticks and move abroad? With the continuing effect of Brexit on the music industry, unfortunately, they will not need a great deal of encouragement.
Lord Livermore (Lab)
As noble Lords will know, I am very happy to agree with the noble Earl on the last point he raises: the incredibly damaging effect of Brexit on that sector in particular. He will like to know that, along with the EU, we have jointly recognised the value of travel and cultural artistic exchanges, including the activities of touring artists, and we will continue our efforts to support travel and cultural exchange. We will explore how best to improve arrangements for touring across the European continent with the EU and other EU member states.
(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I am grateful to the noble Lord for that. As he knows, I am not going to comment on specific measures or any speculation ahead of the Budget. I have set out clearly what our priorities are for tomorrow’s Budget; he will just have to wait a few more hours until he finds out for himself.
My Lords, how much do the Government now blame Brexit for the black hole?
Lord Livermore (Lab)
As the noble Earl knows, alongside the Budget tomorrow, the Office for Budget Responsibility will set out the conclusions of its review of the supply side of the UK economy. I will not pre-empt those conclusions, but it is likely that the OBR will downgrade its historic assessment of the UK’s productivity and find that the productivity performance we inherited from the last Government is weaker than previously thought. The causes of this economic under- performance are well understood: austerity, Brexit and the Liz Truss mini-Budget have left deep scars on the British economy that are still felt today.
(7 months ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I cannot give the noble Viscount assurances on something we are not actually considering doing, so I am afraid I cannot give him what he wants. As he says, different places in different countries choose to raise revenue from overnight visitors in different ways, depending on whether they are seeking to attract them, accommodate the results of their visit, or deter them from coming—different scheme designs do different things. We have no present plans to introduce such a levy.
My Lords, the tourist levy initiative is not just about seaside towns, important though those are. Manchester has introduced a voluntary charge; others are following. Are the Government at least looking at the recommendations of the Cultural Policy Unit’s report on this levy, which argues that it could provide an additional but potentially significant regional funding stream for arts and culture, but that to maximise impact and revenues, it would need to be legislated for?
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I am grateful to the noble Earl for his question but, at the risk of repeating myself, we have been engaging with stakeholders to understand their proposals, and we will continue to do so, but we have no present plans to introduce visitor levy powers in England. The noble Earl will be aware that councils and local businesses can choose to raise revenue by setting up business improvement districts; for example, Bournemouth has a coastal business improvement district with the objective of attracting visitors, improving and developing the visitor experience, and building prosperity. That levy will raise over £2 million over five years.
(8 months ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I am grateful to my noble friend for her kind words and her good wishes. I absolutely agree with her. One of the central themes of this spending review is making sure that growth is both created in all parts of the country and felt in all parts of the country. For too long, we have been reliant on just one or two regions of our country to generate that growth. Clearly, given our growth mission and the importance of raising sustainably the level of growth in this country, making sure that every part of the country contributes to that economic growth is absolutely vital.
On the regional investment that my noble friend talks about—in particular the transport investment that the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, referred to—the previous Government made lots of grand plans but never funded any of those grand plans. What we are doing here is setting out a very careful strategic plan to connect our cities, connect our towns to our cities, and funding that fully, so that those transport connections are made and people are able to get around cities and regions, which is absolutely vital to economic growth. It is no good having the jobs, the skills, the towns and the housing if they are not connected and people cannot travel around to them. I think that is an absolutely vital part of getting growth throughout the country.
My Lords, notwithstanding the welcome moneys for the repair of cultural venues, the cuts overall to the arts are hugely disappointing. This will affect most the individual freelancer, who really had high hopes that finally there would be reinvestment in their sector. Of course, small and large organisations will be affected, too. So I ask the Minister, would he agree with me that these cuts make no sense, considering the Government have earmarked the creative industries as the linchpin of growth? They do not seem to grasp the vital role—a role in innovation—that the subsidised arts sector plays in the ecology of the creative industries as a whole. Neither is the 15% cut to staffing within the DCMS, while such cuts are not happening everywhere, a vote of confidence in the sector, so the Government do need to rethink these cuts.
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I am grateful to the noble Lord for his question. I know that he is a passionate and long-standing campaigner for the cultural sector. As outlined in the spending review yesterday, the DCMS will invest more than £2.9 billion across its entire capital programme to safeguard and modernise cultural and heritage institutions in towns and cities. I hear very much what he says about the wider cultural sector and I ask him to wait for the creative industries industrial strategy sector plan, which will be coming out shortly and which I hope will address many of the issues that he is talking about. As he says, we absolutely recognise the enormous value, both cultural and economic, that the creative industries offer. We will be setting that out in the sector plan for the industrial strategy in the coming weeks and I hope that we can discuss it at that point.
(11 months ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Livermore (Lab)
As always, I agree with everything that my noble friend says. All the comments that we have heard to date about the Government’s assessments being incorrect have been proven to be wrong. On the number of pupils who would move from one sector to another, that is absolutely in line with what the Government’s assessment said. On the amount of VAT that would pass through to the fees that parents pay, that is absolutely in line with what the Government said. On the number of schools that would close, that is absolutely in line with what the Government said. As my noble friend said, many councils now say that there has been no obvious impact from the addition of VAT on private school fees, and more pupils are receiving their first choice of school than they did last year.
We have plenty of time. We will hear from the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, and then we will go to the Conservatives.
My Lords, while I welcome any relief for the music and dance schools, does the Minister accept that the £45,000 cut-off point for a whole family is too low? When will that be reviewed? Should not the Government do everything possible to encourage UK students into our creative schools, including the Yehudi Menuhin School, whose remarkable students we had the privilege of hearing in the Lords last week?
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I am grateful to the noble Earl for his question. I agree with the second part of it that we should encourage people into those schools. In terms of what the Government can do, the Department for Education has already acted and adjusted its scheme, and it will continue to maintain that for the rest of the academic year.
(1 year, 2 months ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I agree with much of what the noble Lord says and agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment behind his question.
My Lords, what is the timetable is for addressing these concerns? The creative industries have been hit particularly hard by Brexit, losing revenue in trade with Europe on daily basis. There is, or should be, a real urgency about this.
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I completely agree with the noble Earl. The creative industries, along with many others in our country, have been hit particularly hard by Brexit. We have identified the creative industries as part of the EU reset, identifying touring visas in particular as one of the priorities. The Prime Minister met with the President of the European Commission in Brussels on 2 October, and they have agreed to strengthen the relationship between the EU and the UK, putting it on a more solid and stable footing. We will now work with the EU to identify areas where we can strengthen co-operation for mutual benefit. Obviously, we recognise that delivering new agreements will take time, but we are ambitious, have clear priorities and want to move forward at pace.
(1 year, 3 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I, too, congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Booth-Smith, on his excellent maiden speech. I will speak on the arts and creative industries. I thank the Campaign for the Arts and the Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Society for their briefings. There is, of course, a one-hour debate on the effect of the Budget on this sector on Thursday, but this area is certainly important enough that both the Treasury and the DCMS should be addressed on the concerns that this sector has, not least because the Budget is a mixed bag for the arts and creative industries. Perhaps worse than that, the areas where funding is most urgently needed after so many years of underfunding have not been addressed and indeed could go backwards, which is disappointing for a Government who say they will support the arts.
There is good news, hopefully, for the national museums and galleries, but questions remain: how much additional funding will be made available and when will this happen? Will the Government further help other struggling arts and cultural organisations— the plight of Welsh National Opera immediately springs to mind—through the Arts Council and other funding bodies? I thank the Government for listening to concerns about VAT on specialist performing arts schools and confirming that courses covering the Music and Dance Scheme and the Dance and Drama Awards scheme will not attract VAT. I think that will be music to the ears of the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley.
Literally—yes, indeed. However, as the Campaign for the Arts says:
“Realising the full ambition and potential of”
Labour’s growth plan, including for the creative industries,
“will take a level of resourcing and commitment beyond that which we have seen at this Budget”.
Starting with the noble Lord, Lord Fox, earlier in this debate, we have had numerous references to concerns about the survival of SMEs. Will the Government promise to keep an eye on, or even formally assess, the effects of their measures on SMEs? This is hugely important for the creative industries after being hit so hard by both Brexit and Covid.
The director of the Museums Association, Sharon Heal, said that
“the urgent needs of local and regional museums and galleries have not been addressed in this budget”,
and the Minister should be aware that the situation for civic museums is sufficiently urgent that a programme of emergency funding was asked for before the Budget. Birmingham Museums Trust said that
“this budget leaves us worse off and we are already in a dire financial situation in Birmingham”.
Similar arguments can be made about our libraries across the country, as the noble Lord, Lord Shipley, referred to, and I agree with everything that the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, said about a new basis for local authority funding. For authors, there is disappointment that the public lending right has not been addressed, seeing that there has been no increase in PLR in the last 10 years. Our own £6 million fund pales in comparison to Germany’s £14 million annual pot. Will the Government increase the fund to ameliorate these significant discrepancies?
The Government intend to cancel levelling up culture projects affecting the International Slavery Museum, the National Railway Museum, V&A Dundee and Venue Cymru. Why do the Government not consider these investments to be sufficiently, in their own words, “focused on the growth mission”? Have they assessed the impact of cancelling these investments?
The reduction in business rates relief will adversely affect the arts. The Music Venue Trust has calculated that this reduction will place an additional £7 million burden on 350 grass-roots music venues, put at risk more than 12,000 jobs and cost more than £250 million in economic activity. I understand there will be a consultation on business rates reform in 2026, but this will not help the hundreds of already struggling music venues that will undoubtedly be lost unless the Government rethink their decision or intervene with a ticket levy on big arena gigs that can help the small venues. While of course it is good news that the arts tax reliefs remain unchanged, it is disappointing that this has not been extended to choirs. Will the Government look again at this?
Finally, Creative Europe was a huge help to our arts and culture, yet we have never had any proper replacement for that funding; indeed, we ought to rejoin Creative Europe, which the rules allow us to do. On top of that, we now hear that the UK shared prosperity fund is to be reduced and phased out. Have the Government assessed the impact of this? Why is it happening before reforms have been completed?
(1 year, 4 months ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I know that the noble Lord has genuine concern for, and a great deal of expertise and experience in, the arts and culture sector. As I said, the Government are committed to supporting the creative industries, and to creating good jobs and accelerating growth in film, music, gaming and the other creative sectors that the noble Lord mentioned. That is why we have ensured that the creative sector is a key part of our industrial strategy. As the noble Lord said, I cannot comment on any specific taxes, but he will know that the Government face a very challenging fiscal situation. He will know that the previous Government left a £22 billion black hole in the public finances, which they concealed from the public, Parliament and the OBR. Addressing that will involve very difficult decisions on spending, welfare and tax.
My Lords, given that there are regional museums that are currently facing insolvency, does the Minister agree with me that, while tax relief is useful—indeed, necessary—the real concern for the arts is the wider one of inadequate funding levels?
Lord Livermore (Lab)
Clearly, the Government recognise the importance of the arts to our public life and support the funding of the arts at the appropriate level. Unfortunately, I will have to say that the Government will set out their plans for supporting the arts in the coming spending review.