Music Streaming: Label-led Principles

Julian Lewis Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris Bryant]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what she said about Dickon. He was really very helpful at Universal in the process of getting us to this place, particularly on the issue of per diems—the £75 a day—which was one of the major asks of the Ivors Academy, and I am really pleased we were able to do that. She is right that we need to look at session musicians, and of one of the undertakings I have made is that I will be getting the BPI and the Musicians’ Union together to discuss that matter again this autumn. I hope that will be in the first couple of weeks of September.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

Given the Minister’s helpful references of a sartorial nature to his opposite number, may I congratulate him on his carefully understated choice of necktie today? I shall certainly remember to bring my dark glasses next time he is on parade. Can he explain to me—as an ardent Swiftie myself—what protection performers, such as the son of the hon. Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh), have against their tracks being uploaded by anyone to a service such as YouTube, whereby it is possible for people to enjoy their music without apparently paying them any royalties at all?

[Chris Bryant]

I am grateful for the comments about my tie. I would say that it is understated compared to some of the other ties I have worn, so I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his commendation on my sartorial elegance. But he is wrong about YouTube. YouTube is one of the streaming services and people are remunerated. One could argue that they should be remunerated more, but if people are breaching copyright, that is an offence and it needs to be pursued. Record labels are pretty keen on doing so on behalf of their artists, but, as I say, YouTube is one of the streaming outlets.