Oral Answers to Questions

Matt Hancock Excerpts

Thursday 22nd March 2018 Commons Chamber

[John Grogan (Keighley) (Lab)]

1. Whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of extending the provisions of the Communications Act 2003 to give greater prominence to public service broadcasters; and if he will make a statement.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Matt Hancock)]

Before I answer the question, let me say that I am sure the whole House will want not only to mark the memory of those who passed away a year ago, as we have just done in the one-minute silence, but to thank once more the emergency services who keep us safe, and—especially on this day—those who put others’ safety ahead of their own. We remember those who have lost their lives defending democracy. They will not be forgotten.

We warmly welcome the high-quality programming of our public service broadcasters. It is important for public service broadcasting content to be widely accessible to UK audiences, and we strengthened provision for that in the Digital Economy Act 2017.

[John Grogan]

As one who somewhat unexpectedly returned to the House last June, I too want to thank all those who protect us on a daily basis to enable us to do our own job of giving voice to our constituents in the Chamber.

Does the Minister agree that Parliament needs to give updated powers to Ofcom so that it can ensure that public service content, such as “Newsround” on CBBC, is easier to find than, say, cartoon networks on the ever-increasing number of platforms that are available?

[Matt Hancock]

The rules require the provision of a programming guide to ensure that public service broadcasting is prominent in linear programming. Content is increasingly consumed not in a linear way in a programme, but across the internet and on smart TVs. We have required Ofcom to revise its code by 1 December 2020, and to report before then on how we can ensure that that prominence can work effectively in the digital age.

[Graham P. Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

I raised the issue of the electronic programming guide with the right hon. Gentleman during the Committee stage of the Digital Economy Bill. It is vital for the guide to have prominence. Amazon, Netflix and all the other platforms have no electronic programming guides, and even Sky has reduced its guide. Although I raised the matter, the Government have done nothing. They are doing very little to protect public service broadcasters. When will the right hon. Gentleman and the Government act?

[Matt Hancock]

As I have said, we have already acted in the Digital Economy Act. The hon. Gentleman served on the Bill Committee—with great distinction, I might add. I made it clear during the debates on the Bill that if Ofcom’s report makes it clear there is a problem, and one that can only be fixed by legislation, we will introduce that legislation.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

Creating equality for indigenous language programming takes political will. What will the Secretary of State do personally to bring about parity in funding and original broadcasting output for languages such as Scottish Gaelic and Welsh?

[Matt Hancock]

We are strong supporters of the other indigenous languages of the UK. We have strongly supported the Welsh-language channel S4C. However, I am keen to see what more we can do to support the Gaelic language, and I look forward to meeting the hon. Lady’s colleagues to discuss how we can make that work.

[Mr Speaker]

I know that—exceptionally—the shadow Secretary of State would like to echo the tributes articulated by the Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Joanna Cherry (Edinburgh South West) (SNP)]

6. What assessment he has made of the potential effect of the Data Protection Bill on data protection agreements with the EU after the UK leaves the EU.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Matt Hancock)]

The free flow of data is critical to both the EU and the UK, and it is at the core of any modern trading relationship. That is why we are committed to ensuring that we will keep data flows open after the UK leaves the EU.

[Joanna Cherry]

I thank the Secretary of State for his answer, but the immigration exemption in schedule 2 to the Bill is not reflective of the stated permissible exemptions under article 23 of the general data protection regulation. Why is the Secretary of State resisting amendment to the Bill when he must know that it could affect the grant of adequacy by the European Commission following our exit from the European Union?

[Matt Hancock]

On the contrary, the Data Protection Bill is entirely compliant with the GDPR. Indeed, it implements the GDPR in the UK.

[Brendan O’Hara (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)]

I want to associate the Scottish National party with the Secretary of State’s comments remembering those who died last year and thanking those who keep us safe on a daily basis.

In the Data Protection Bill Committee this week, fears of achieving adequacy were raised time and again, including around immigration exemptions, as my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry) mentioned. Given what has just happened to the UK fishing industry, the “Trust us, it will be okay” approach has failed spectacularly. What cast-iron guarantees has the Secretary of State received from the European Commission that there is nothing in the Data Protection Bill that could jeopardise achieving adequacy?

[Matt Hancock]

We are entirely aligned on what we want to achieve, which is a Data Protection Bill entirely consistent with the GDPR, and that is what is before the House at the moment. Some amendments that have been tabled would make it more difficult for adequacy to be achieved, not least by introducing absolutist language on rights, as opposed to the nuanced language in the Bill at the moment. I urge the whole House to support the Government in our aim of achieving adequacy with the EU.

[Liam Byrne (Birmingham, Hodge Hill) (Lab)]

We will not get an adequacy agreement with the EU if we cannot keep data safe in this country. The Cambridge Analytica scandal shows how grave that threat has become. To get to the bottom of that threat, it is vital that we understand the network of companies associated with that malign octopus. Will the Secretary of State commit now to auditing and making public all Government contractors with links to Cambridge Analytica, some of whom, I understand, the Foreign Office is assembling for a secretive weekend somewhere in the countryside on Saturday?

[Matt Hancock]

An investigation, led by the Information Commissioner, was already under way before the recent scandal became public at the weekend. The Government have made it clear that there were contracts in the past with this group of companies, struck in 2008, for instance, and 2009 and 2014, but there are no ongoing arrangements—contractual arrangements—between the Government and Cambridge Analytica, or the Cambridge Analytica group.

[Liam Byrne]

There are many individuals and intellectual property agreements between Cambridge Analytica and other firms, and I hope that the Secretary of State will reflect on his answer and come forward with a more comprehensive approach. This episode has revealed that the Information Commissioner simply does not have the power to conduct investigations properly. It is ludicrous that it has taken her so long to get a search warrant for Cambridge Analytica offices, and it is ludicrous that people frustrating her investigations do not face jail for that frustration. Will the Secretary of State now commit to bringing forward extra powers for the Information Commissioner in the Data Protection Bill? If he does not, we will.

[Matt Hancock]

It is all very well the right hon. Gentleman’s adopting an abrasive tone, but the truth is that the Data Protection Bill currently before Parliament is all about strengthening enforcement and strengthening people’s right to consent. I did not intend to get partisan, but the powers that we were left by the Labour party are the powers that are being used at the moment, and I want those powers strengthened.

If, in the light of the evidence from this investigation, we need to further strengthen those powers, I am willing to consider that, but I am not willing to take a lecture from somebody who left the data protection powers in need of the update that we are driving through.

[Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) (Lab)]

7. What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Education on changes to music provision in schools.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Matt Hancock)]

We strongly support the provision of music and arts in schools, and I firmly believe in the importance of investing in creative schools for the future. I am meeting my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education next month to discuss music and arts in education.

[Daniel Zeichner]

Cambridgeshire Music hub does a great job for Cambridgeshire schools, but many still struggle—so much so that long-established local music shop Millers Music last year felt moved to donate 21 free pianos to local schools. More than 270 groups applied, leading Simon Pollard, the managing director, to say:

“This overwhelming response to the giveaway only served to highlight the lack of funding for music in the curriculum.”

It was a tremendous gesture, but are random acts of generosity really the way to sustain our creative industries in the future?

[Matt Hancock]

I welcome the generosity of that group and of many others, but the hon. Gentleman is right—it is not all down to local generosity, welcome as that must be. We have invested over £400 million in music provision through music education hubs, and we continue to invest at the rate of £75 million a year.

[Luke Graham (Ochil and South Perthshire) (Con)]

Owing to stinging cuts from Edinburgh, local authorities in my constituency have had to face cuts to music education. Is there anything that my right hon. Friend can do to provide support from Westminster to local authorities in Scotland, to protect the services that the SNP will not?

[Matt Hancock]

As my hon. Friend knows, we have protected per pupil funding in England, but of course education is devolved in Scotland. I do not know whether the Scottish Government have provided anything like the support that we have for music education hubs here in England. The money that we have put into music education hubs goes an awfully long way, and frankly it looks like the SNP Government need to do more.

[Julian Knight (Solihull) (Con)]

9. What recent assessment he has made of the level of gender pay equality in the broadcasting sector.

--- Later in debate ---

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Matt Hancock)]

I take this opportunity to congratulate all those in Team GB who competed at the Winter Olympics and Paralympics in Pyeongchang. It was one of our most successful Winter Olympics and Paralympics, and Team GB exceeded its medals target with some brilliant performances. I know that the whole House will join me in saying well done to our athletes, who have done their country proud. We continue to support them through the national lottery and look forward to many future successes.

[Vicky Foxcroft]

As we are talking about competitions, Lewisham is in today’s final of the world cup of London boroughs on Twitter, and if anybody has not yet done so, please feel free to vote Lewisham. The competition has been social media at its best: fun and engaging. Unfortunately, we know that social media can also be a platform for bullying and harassment. I know that the Government are consulting on a code of conduct, but when will they finally take action?

[Matt Hancock]

Of course I congratulate those who win that Twitter competition, but the hon. Lady raises a serious point. We are already taking action, both through the Data Protection Bill, which will protect children online, and more broadly through the internet safety strategy. I pay tribute to Baroness Kidron and other peers who have put a huge amount of effort into getting the details of the Bill right. We continue to work with them to make sure that we do everything we can to make Britain the safest place to be online.

[Luke Hall (Thornbury and Yate) (Con)]

T2. South Gloucestershire Council’s broadband roll-out scheme has been hugely successful so far. It has brought connection up from 61% to 92% in just four years. With fibre- to-the-premises technology being required to connect the remaining households, what more support can the Department give to make sure that rural communities are not left behind?

[Tom Watson (West Bromwich East) (Lab)]

When it comes to personal data theft, the Secretary of State said that

“the Leveson inquiry looked into everything in this area, and it was followed by three police investigations…We looked into these things as a society. We had a comprehensive Leveson inquiry.”—[Official Report, 1 March 2018; Vol. 636, c. 974.]

Will he tell me which of the inquiries and investigations that he says were comprehensive surfaced the evidence of the illegal data theft of the personal information of Dr David Kelly, who was very distressed when subsequently a journalist from The Sunday Times turned up unannounced at his home, just a week before he took his own life?

[Matt Hancock]

The point that I have made repeatedly about the Leveson inquiry is that it was broad and police investigations followed it. The question we face now is what to do in future. I am determined to make sure that we get the answer to that question right.

[Tom Watson]

In his non-answer, the Secretary of State has shown that the previous inquiries were not comprehensive. There are still questions to answer, including allegations that at least one senior editor misled the first part of the Leveson inquiry and possibly even perjured himself. In caving in to the press barons, the Secretary of State betrays not just the victims of phone hacking but the promises of the previous Prime Minister. Will he at least have the decency today to admit that he was wrong to tell the House that previous inquiries were comprehensive and got to all the facts of criminal behaviour in our national newspapers?

[Matt Hancock]

Of course they were comprehensive. If the hon. Gentleman’s accusations of perjury, which he is alleging today, are true, then we have rules in place to deal with them. If there is evidence of criminal wrongdoing, it should be brought forward, and that is the proper way to proceed.

[Alan Mak (Havant) (Con)]

T4. Britain is well placed to lead the fourth industrial revolution. A new research centre, such as the one proposed by the World Economic Forum, would help us to stay ahead of the curve. Will my right hon. Friend consider its proposal and meet me to discuss it further?

[Matt Hancock]

I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend on that question. He has done so much to promote the importance of the fourth industrial revolution and artificial intelligence. Indeed, I am on the board of a World Economic Forum body, which is looking into how we can make the most of this, and I look forward to engaging with him on it.

[Ben Lake (Ceredigion) (PC)]

T3. The 25 March marks precisely three years since the then Culture, Media and Sport Committee published its report on society lotteries, which was supportive of raising the fundraising limits. With every month that passes, funds that could otherwise go to good causes are instead spent on additional administrative costs arising from outdated fundraising limits. Does the Minister not agree that it is time that those limits are addressed?

[Vicky Ford (Chelmsford) (Con)]

On this day last year, I remember being in the Westminster Parliament during our attack and lockdown. I also remember two years ago on this day being in the Brussels Parliament during that attack. How does the Minister intend for us to continue to interact with Europe on data issues after we have left the EU?

[Matt Hancock]

There is clearly huge benefit for both the rest of the EU and the UK in having a strong, rich and deep relationship in terms of how data are transferred, but as the evidence of the past few days has shown, that must be done on the basis of strong data protection. That is why we have the Data Protection Bill before the House, and why we think that the GDPR is a good measure that we will not only implement but implement in full, and we will make sure that we have that relationship in the future.

[Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab)]

T5. The Secretary of State complains about the data protection legislation that he inherited eight years ago, when Facebook had one tenth of the number of users it has now. Just last year, when I asked him whether he thought that the collection and use of data by Facebook was abusive, he said it was not for his Government to have a view, but that it was an interesting question. Does he now agree that it was abusive, and given that this has happened on his watch, will he agree to bring forward a digital bill of rights which we are pressing for?

[Matt Hancock]

It is increasingly clear that we need a new settlement with these big tech companies. There is no doubt that the Data Protection Bill currently before this Parliament takes us significantly forward. I have been worried for some time about these concerns, which is why we brought forward this Bill.

[Colin Clark (Gordon) (Con)]

What assessment has the Department made of the costs of data protection officers for community and parish councils?

[Sandy Martin (Ipswich) (Lab)]

One of my friends took his own life, at least partly as a result of online bullying. Why are the Government still pursuing a model of voluntary codes for social media when they have already demonstrably failed?

[Matt Hancock]

We have made it extremely clear that we are prepared to legislate further if that is necessary. We are currently consulting on the internet safety strategy. I would be very happy if the hon. Gentleman wanted to feed back into that. We have shown, and made the case, over the past year that this wild west free-for-all of the internet companies must come to an end, and this is a turning point.

[Steve Double (St Austell and Newquay) (Con)]

Newquay is Cornwall’s premier tourist resort, attracting hundreds of thousands of people a week in the summer. However, too many families have the shine taken off their holiday when they get home and find a penalty charge notice from an aggressive parking firm on their door mats. Does the Minister agree that these firms should take more responsibility for the impact their actions have on the tourism industry?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I do not want the hon. Gentleman suddenly to develop self-effacement, with which he has not traditionally been identified. I have been in the House with him for 13 years and I can honestly say that he has done many things, but he has never, ever bored me.

[Matt Hancock]

Nobody has done more to make the case for the rejuvenation of the Bradford Odeon than my hon. Friend. The Odeon has applied to our fund for support for its rejuvenation, right in the heart of Bradford, and this man has put his heart and soul into the campaign. We will be announcing the results very soon. I cannot tell him the answer today, but I have a smile on my face.

[Mr Speaker]

The hon. Member for Shipley (Philip Davies) may never know—the Secretary of State might one day want his vote.

--- Later in debate ---

[Kirstene Hair (Angus) (Con)]

Will my right hon. Friend set out what progress the UK Government have made on ensuring that mobile coverage notspots in rural areas such as my constituency are a thing of the past?

[Matt Hancock]

We are absolutely determined to ensure that there is decent mobile coverage where people live, work and travel right across the UK. We have made further progress in Scotland than in any other part of the country. There is clearly more to do and we are absolutely determined to do it.

[Several hon. Members rose—]