Online Safety

Debate between Lisa Nandy and Judith Cummins

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the next steps that this Government will be taking to protect children online. This Government’s ambition is to be the world leader in shaping an online environment that works for us. We intend to be an active Government that will help to create an online environment that is not just safe, but enabling and empowering. That starts with fixing the fundamentals, and this House can expect to see us acting more quickly and more decisively from now on to keep us safe online.

In December last year, the Government published their action plan to tackle violence against women and girls. I would like to put on record my gratitude to my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), who are here today, for their clear ambition and determination that the UK would become the first country in the world where it would be impossible for children to take, share or view nude images online. In June, the Government challenged industry on a three-month timeline to work with us and set out road maps for how they would strengthen device-level protections for children with a view to preventing children from taking, sharing or viewing nude images on phones and tablets.

Today I can update the House on the progress that has been made and the next steps that this Government will take to protect children. Since June, officials from my Department and the Home Office have overseen an unprecedented work programme with Apple and Google, working with senior leaders and engineers to explore new ways of preventing child sexual abuse and strengthening protections for children online. I can report that, following this engagement, Apple and Google have provided the Government with significant commitments. Both companies have developed meaningful changes at operating level to make it harder for children to share nude imagery. We have seen progress in the blocking, not blurring, of nude imagery on underage devices, and this builds on significant milestones already in implementation, including Apple’s roll-out earlier this year of operating system-level age assurance and tighter safety features preventing a child from receiving or sharing nude imagery on iMessage or FaceTime. These proposals are a step in the right direction. However, the truth is that they do not meet the scale of this crisis.

Children are facing unacceptable levels of sexual harm online. They are being groomed, coerced and manipulated into creating and sharing intimate images across online services. The Internet Watch Foundation believes that 91% of these images are self-generated by children. They are used for blackmail and sexual extortion. Each year, around 9,000 child sexual abuse offences involve an online element, with under-18s the subject of almost a quarter of online blackmail. I challenge anyone to listen to those statistics and come to the conclusion that the internet is a safe place for kids or that the Government should not get involved.

This is not the first time in history that new forms of technology have up-ended society, but what is unique to this moment is that the technology has been developed almost exclusively in the private sphere. I am clear that there is a central role for Government in shaping that technology for good, not just to protect from harm—although that is a basic obligation of any Government—but to enable and empower.

When it comes to the development of technology that affects our lives, we are not neutral. In no other walk of life would we tolerate this crisis harming our children, and we will not tolerate it online. For too long, technology companies have failed to protect children from some of the worst harms. To be frank, I am not prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt that progress will continue at the pace we need it to, while harm is being done now.

For that reason, I make the following announcements to the House. First, the Government today commit to introducing primary legislation to require major tech platforms to build in device-level protections for children. We will introduce the legislation to Parliament as soon as we can, recognising the urgency of the issue while ensuring that we work with colleagues across the House to get it right. We want to see movement on this quickly. If platforms in scope of the draft legislation develop and implement technical solutions while our work is ongoing, we will of course reassess whether legislation is necessary. We know that this is a sector that can, when required, innovate at an extraordinary pace when the chips are down.

Alongside the measures on devices, the Government will, as soon as possible, require that apps used by children prevent children from accessing or sharing nudity. We will explore what legislation is needed to implement that commitment, with a view to moving as quickly as possible. This will ensure that the whole ecosystem changes, tackling the means by which children are most often abused or groomed online. Put simply, we will give tech companies the chance to lead; we will not give them the chance to lag.

These measures, taken together, will make Britain the first country in the world to go this far, and a world leader in online safety. The message we are sending to tech companies is clear: planning must now become implementation, and progress must translate into protections that make a real difference to children’s lives. I give my commitment to all Members of this House, and to anybody listening out there in the country who has been desperately worried about what is happening to our children online, that when it comes to children’s safety, we are not, and never will be, bystanders. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

Once again, I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend and thank her so much for all her support both when we worked together in government and since; she really is a class act.

I am not in a position to give a firm timetable for the measures that my right hon. Friend mentioned, but I will commit to coming back to her with one, because I understand that Members across the House will want to know that there will be no delay in taking action on those things. We are also looking at a more comprehensive system, very much in the spirit of the reforms that she set out earlier this year, and we intend to move quickly on that without delay. I do not think we will be in a position to do the whole package by the end of the year, but I would be very disappointed if we had not made enormous progress by then, including meeting the commitments that she set out. I would be particularly disappointed if, by this time next year, we did not have a much more robust and comprehensive package of measures in place.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

When the last Prime Minister gave tech giants three months to voluntarily implement technology that would prevent children from taking and sharing nude images, the Lib Dems were clear that we should not rely on the good will of companies that have repeatedly put profit before children’s safety, and I am pleased to see today that the Government agree with us. The need for action cannot be clearer. In 2024, 91% of online child sexual abuse reports involved self-generated content from children online, and last year there was an 8% rise in child sexual abuse image offences across the UK. These are not just statistics; they are real children being exploited online.

This is a serious problem that urgently demands serious legislation. That is why the Lib Dems welcome today’s announcement of primary legislation that will require device-level and app-level protections for children online. However, this House has heard the phrase “as soon as possible” many times before. I hear what the Secretary of State is saying about a timetable for legislation, but what she said earlier slightly hinted that what the tech giants were doing might affect the progress of the legislation, so I seek reassurance that legislation will be ploughing forward regardless of what those companies are doing.

The Lib Dems are supportive of legislation to protect children from abuse online, but protection cannot come at the expense of privacy. Any legislation that is brought in must be accompanied by guarantees that technology will be highly effective and preserve privacy. Can the Secretary of State confirm that that will be the case?

Too often, the Government have left tech companies to mark their own homework. I am glad that today they have decided enough is enough, but this announcement could have been made three months ago. If we truly want to protect our children, we need a Government who act before harm is done, not a Government who wait until it is too late. I hope that will be the case going forward, as the Secretary of State has intimated.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

My hon. Friend makes a typically well informed and well thought-out point. I thank her not just for her support, but for all the work she has done to ensure that we have got here. I know that she is appreciated not just by me, but by many of the incredible, brave families who I have had the privilege to get to know over the last few weeks and who have wanted to see action in this space for a very long time. I pay tribute to those families as well as to her. She has made an important point about working with Governments and other partners across the world to keep children safe. That is the promise of the UN convention on the rights of the child. A child harmed anywhere means that children can be harmed everywhere, and we have to take that really seriously.

My hon. Friend should be encouraged—and I suspect that she is—by the fact that many Governments are now acting more decisively. They are stepping up and recognising that the development and regulation of new forms of technology cannot be left to the private sector alone. There is a clear role for active, empowering Governments working in this space, and my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) and I have not hesitated to reach out to like-minded Governments across the world to see what more we can do together.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Chair of the Select Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank my hon. Friend for that point. I think the views of his constituents in Harlow are probably mirrored in every constituency across the country. I want to be really clear about our message today to parents who have been struggling with this matter for so long: you are not on your own. We believe that we are as responsible for keeping their children safe as they are, and we are stepping up to take the necessary action, whether that is through support, advice and training for parents and children, or through the reforms and measures that I have outlined today—we are the first country in the world to do so, and I strongly suspect that we will not be the last.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

For the final question, I call Tom Hayes.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

Democracies face a choice between allowing the online world to be a wild west or stepping in, so I really welcome this Government’s decision to regulate the tech titans that have been putting profit before protection. I have families in my constituency who have been deeply affected by traumas online that have repeated what has been experienced in the real world, and they would really welcome the chance to meet the Secretary of State at the Department. Would she meet them with me so that they can share their experiences and help to shape the legislation as it goes forward?

Independent Football Regulator

Debate between Lisa Nandy and Judith Cummins

Wednesday 12th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Lisa Nandy]

As always, my hon. Friend has taken this debate back to focusing on the people who matter most: the fans. They have been through hell over recent years as the last Government committed to act, then dragged their feet, and then refused to fulfil that promise to those fans. It was shameful to see Conservative Members go through the Lobby to vote against their own Bill, but I put on record my thanks to Dame Tracey Crouch for all the work she did and continues to do to uphold that promise. I also sincerely thank my hon. Friend; he and I have had numerous conversations over the course of the saga that has developed at Sheffield Wednesday, and I know how active he has been. That is the approach that this Government will always take. We will not stand by and let football fans pay the price when bad owners take over their clubs; we are putting those fans back at the heart of the game, where they belong.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

The Lib Dems have welcomed the introduction of the new Independent Football Regulator. Our football clubs are huge, historic institutions that unite generations, bring local economies to life and inspire millions, both at home and abroad. As such, the Secretary of State carries a significant responsibility to earn the confidence of our world-leading football clubs and guide them through the introduction of these vital regulatory reforms.

The news that the Secretary of State broke the governance code by failing to declare in a timely manner donations received from the newly appointed head of the regulator, David Kogan, has undermined trust at a crucial moment. This regulator is about securing the future of our national game, ensuring that clubs remain sustainable, rooted in their communities and capable of thriving for generations to come. She cannot shy away from the potential conflict of interest involved in the breaches of the code that have emerged in recent days. This oversight requires genuine accountability from the Government in order to restore confidence in the new regulator. Will the Secretary of State therefore commit to order an independent investigation into the appointment of David Kogan and, if necessary, rerun the selection process for the IFR chair?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank my hon. Friend for the years of work that he put into ensuring that we reached this point. I thank him personally as well, because when my club, Wigan Athletic, was in trouble, not once but twice, he and other members of the Select Committee could not have been more supportive in making sure that we got the right outcome and saved our club.

I also thank the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup, because even though he has latterly decided that this is a terrible appointment and that the Football Governance Act is a terrible thing, a couple of years ago he said this to the then Sports Minister, the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew):

“Following years of misery and uncertainty for fans at local clubs such as Charlton Athletic, I welcome the news on an independent football regulator. Will the Minister assure my constituents that the regulator will have sufficient powers to deal with regulatory breaches and strengthen those ownership tests?”—[Official Report, 23 February 2023; Vol. 728, c. 343.]

I am not sure whether the then Minister could give an answer at that time, but I am happy to say that we certainly will.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

I want the independent regulator to succeed—not least because of clubs like mine, Portsmouth football club, whose fans had to step in and buy it after it had gone into administration twice—but we need transparency and trust in public appointments. The Secretary of State has said repeatedly that the Culture, Media and Sport Committee found Mr Kogan appointable, and that is correct; we did so under the remit with which we were asked to work. However, we did so taking the unprecedented step of including a recommendation for him to take

“concrete steps to reassure the football community”

of his neutrality, because it was Mr Kogan—not the Department, and not the Secretary of State—who told the Committee about the donations, at the very meeting that was held to decide whether or not he was appointable.

The commissioner’s report points to a wider issue relating to the Department’s public appointments process. All but one of the last 10 public appointments involving parliamentary scrutiny have featured problems with the candidate or the process at some point, which are undermining the organisations concerned and the people who are picked to lead them. Does the Secretary of State accept that the Department must do better when it comes to public appointments, and may I ask her what concrete steps it is taking to achieve that?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank my hon. Friend for what he has said, and I am pleased that he has joined the Select Committee. He has extensive knowledge of football and has been a consistent champion of football fans, and I very much support what he has said. This Government are absolutely determined to appoint the right people to the right positions, so that when fans go through the difficulties caused by poor owners, as they did at Charlton, they do not feel that they have nowhere to turn.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

It is not my style to attack the integrity of any Member of Parliament, so may I just ask a general question about the whole process of securing public confidence? Can we now consider tightening the ministerial code, and indeed the whole process, so that at the beginning of the process civil servants check on whether a Minister has received any donations, and if that is the case, the Minister recuses himself or herself at the very start?

Points of Order

Debate between Lisa Nandy and Judith Cummins

Wednesday 12th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

Does the Secretary of State wish to respond?

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am very happy to clarify that point for the hon. Gentleman. The request that I made to officials in my Department was relayed to Mr Kogan. It was, of course, his choice whether to take that advice, but he did. I have to be clear with the hon. Gentleman: from the moment I discovered that donations had been made to my campaign, I did not have any discussions with Mr Kogan about this or any other matter, and I recused myself from the process. I took that seriously. It was for the Minister for Sport to make the final decision, which she did, but from that point, I did not have direct conversations with Mr Kogan until the independent Commissioner for Public Appointments had been able to do his work. I hope that clarifies the matter.

BBC Leadership

Debate between Lisa Nandy and Judith Cummins

Tuesday 11th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)]

With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement about the BBC.

As the House will be aware, this weekend, the director general and the chief executive officer of BBC News tendered their resignations, following concerns about accuracy and impartiality at the BBC. This has sparked intense debate across the media and our nation. Today, I want to set out for the House what action is being taken to address the allegations that have been made, and the actions that the Government are taking to support the BBC in addressing this, and I want to address the future of an institution that has been at the centre of our democratic and cultural life for over a century.

The House will know that yesterday, the chair of the BBC, Samir Shah, wrote to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee. He accepted that there had been editorial failings, and he committed to a number of steps in response. Dr Shah believes that our national broadcaster, which remains one of the most trusted sources of news in our country, has a responsibility to uphold the highest standards. I agree. Over the past week, I have been in regular contact with him and his team to ensure that where these standards have not been met, firm, swift and transparent action follows. I welcome the steps that have already been set out, and I will keep the House updated as the BBC leadership grips these issues.

The concerns that have been raised are serious in and of themselves, but some in the House have gone even further, suggesting that the BBC is institutionally biased. It should not be lost on us that the BBC has faced criticism from all sides for its coverage of highly contentious and contested issues. It has been accused of giving too much airtime to particular parties, and of giving them too little. Those in the House, from left and right, who are attacking the BBC for not expressing views with which they agree should consider just what is at stake. There is a fundamental difference between raising serious concerns about editorial failings, and Members of this House launching a sustained attack on the institution itself.

The BBC is not just a broadcaster; it is a national institution that belongs to us all. Every day, it tells the story of who we are—the people, places and communities that make up life across the UK. It projects British values, creativity and integrity to the world. It underpins our creative industries, has a footprint in our nations and regions that is unmatched, and is by far the most widely used and trusted source of news in the United Kingdom. At a time when the line between fact and opinion, and between news and polemic, is being dangerously blurred, the BBC stands apart. It is a light on the hill for people here and across the world. Trusted news and high-quality programming are essential to our democratic and cultural life, and all of us in the House should value them, uphold them and fiercely defend them.

The BBC is facing challenges, including some of its own making, but it is doing so in the context of a revolution in the media landscape that has challenged all broadcasters, and polarised and fragmented our national debate. It is time to grip this with a clarity of vision and purpose that will secure the BBC’s future. Throughout its history, the BBC has always adapted and evolved. This is an institution that began in the era of radio, when it was deemed an existential threat to the newspaper industry. It evolved into the age of mass audiences ushered in by the invention of television, and navigated the complexities of reporting during the second world war.

We will imminently begin the charter review, which will set the terms of the BBC for the next decade, and through it, we will collectively write the next chapter of the BBC’s story. Together, we will ensure that it is sustainably funded, commands the public’s trust, and continues to drive growth, good jobs, skills and creativity across every region and nation of the UK. In an era in which trust is fraying and truth is contested across our nation, the charter will ensure that the BBC remains fiercely independent and is genuinely accountable to the public it serves. We will publish a Green Paper and launch a public consultation shortly, and I will set out more detail on that for the House in the coming weeks.

I would like to thank the outgoing director general for his service and his commitment to public service broadcasting over many years. I thank the CEO of BBC News for leading the BBC’s news operation through stormy times. I do not underestimate the challenge of taking on those roles, and the personal toll that that can take on the individuals who hold them. As we write the next chapter of an institution that has stood at the centre of British public life for a century, our overarching goal is simple: to ensure that the BBC can renew its mission for the modern age and continue to inform, educate and entertain, not just for the coming decade but well into the next century. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. She will be aware that the charter sets a strict legal threshold that must be met before dismissal of a board member, so I am unable to pursue the course of action that she suggests.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

The fact of the matter is this is not just about manipulating the speech of a President the BBC clearly detests. There were other allegations made about promoting Hamas propaganda, producing fake stories about race bias, censoring people who were gender critical, and promoting stories with a one-sided view of climate change, as well as a whole range of other issues. What has been the response of the BBC? It rolls out the lefty luvvies to try to justify its position and then to indicate that it was the victim of some right-wing coup. Does the response not show that this body—which has fabricated the news, misused its monopoly and hidden behind the protection of politicians in this House who were far too cowardly to take it on over the years—is not capable of change? Like many millions across the United Kingdom, I object to paying for it. I hope that in the review the Minister will decide that there should be no more enforced taxation—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

Order. I call the Secretary of State.

[Lisa Nandy]

It will not surprise the right hon. Gentleman to learn that I do not agree with that or with his characterisation of an institution that plays a vital role in this country. I gently say to him that I do not think most people do either. While I am sure the public have been extremely concerned about the serious failings that have been accepted this week by the BBC, it still remains the most trusted source of news in this country.

I say to all Members of this House that there has been a lot of discussion today about individuals being held responsible for all the problems at the BBC, whether they are individuals who serve on the board or as senior executives. My assessment of the failures that have been admitted over recent years is that they stem not from an institutional bias, but from a need to have sufficient rigour and oversight at the top of the organisation that is applied consistently across the board. That is something I know the chairman of the BBC is seeking to achieve, and as a Government we stand ready to support it in that.

Football Governance Bill [Lords]

Debate between Lisa Nandy and Judith Cummins

2nd reading
Monday 28th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Lisa Nandy]

I am going to proceed, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I can see, by your nodding your assent, that you would like to do so.

Real change or lasting change never comes from the Government alone; it takes a nation. I thank the fans, the clubs and the leagues, including the English Football League, the Premier League and the National League, for their extensive and constructive engagement; the FA, UEFA and FIFA for their continued support of the Bill; the Football Supporters’ Association, the Professional Footballers’ Association, Kick It Out and clubs across the pyramid for their invaluable perspective and support; and noble Lords for their close scrutiny. I also thank the civil servants in my Department who have worked tirelessly for many years, across two different Governments of different political persuasions, to get us to this point. Most of all, I thank one woman, without whose passion for football and its fans, relentless drive and determination to make good on this long-held promise, we would never have reached this moment—Dame Tracey Crouch.

This effort has united clubs across every league, fans and governing bodies; towns, villages and cities across our country; and, until today, even political parties, in our determination to fulfil our promise to fans. For the Conservatives, this—the amendment—is genuinely a shameful moment, pitting themselves against fans, clubs and the national game. However, for football and its fans, this is a new dawn. Hard-fought-for and long-awaited, it will give our national game and our much-loved clubs the most promising future, and put fans back at the heart of the game, where they belong. I commend this Bill to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

Film Industry

Debate between Lisa Nandy and Judith Cummins

Wednesday 9th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Lisa Nandy]

I put on record our thanks as a Government for the work that my hon. Friend has done to champion opportunities for young people in his constituency and across the country. One of the things that matters personally to our Government is not just that we put rocket boosters under some of the fastest-growing industries—the creative industries outside of London and the south-east, as well as in London—to offer opportunities in every part of the country, but, crucially, that we ensure that young people in those communities can have those opportunities. That is why we have already kick-started the curriculum review to put art, sport, music and culture back at the heart of the curriculum where they belong, after the mindless cultural vandalism of the last 14 years. It is why we are also reforming the apprenticeship levy, and it is why we are working closely with industry to ensure that there are no limits on our ambition for young people, so that we can match the ambition that they have for themselves.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Nandy]

May I take the opportunity to thank my hon. Friend for all the work he has done to support the creative industries both in Merseyside and up and down the country? Yesterday I was at Pinewood, where the work he has done to support our creative industries was spoken of highly.

I share my hon. Friend’s enthusiasm for the work that Steve Rotheram is leading in Merseyside. Just a few years ago, the mayor took me to see the newly opened Shakespeare North playhouse, an incredible project just a few streets from where he grew up. He was told by the previous Government that nobody would come to see Shakespeare in the north of England—how wrong they were.

I am keen to support the work that Steve Rotheram, Tracy Brabin and other mayors in the north of England are doing through One Creative North. It is the most exciting project to create a cultural corridor in the north of England, building on the assets and talent that exist in every part of our country. Parts of the country have not been heard for far too long, but with this Labour Government they will be heard.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

First, I welcome the Secretary of State’s words. The Select Committee worked hard to get that commitment to tax credits in the Budget earlier this year, and her implementing it at a time when investment in British film—particularly low-budget British film—is at its lowest ebb, is both welcome and timely. Our recollections of the previous Government’s achievements on the creative industries differ. I think that once she has had a little bit of time to get her feet under the table, she will see that she has a hard act to follow on commitment to the creative industries.

When does the Secretary of State expect the Government to confirm the introduction of the visual effects tax credits? They were also announced in the Budget and have been consulted on, and they are also desperately needed and urgent. I would be grateful for an urgent response on that. Does she have any plans to look at the enterprise investment scheme for film and high-end TV? That is also much needed to get investment into British independent film and television. Finally, she spoke about the investment summit. Will she please confirm that the creative industries’ role in that will not just be to add the stardust? They are such a fundamental and integral part of our industrial strategy and they contribute so much to the British economy, so they must be there as a central focal point of her Government’s future industrial strategy.