UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Culture

  • Lucy Frazer – 2023 Letter to Richard Sharp Following his Resignation

    Lucy Frazer – 2023 Letter to Richard Sharp Following his Resignation

    The letter written by Lucy Frazer, the Culture Secretary, to Richard Sharp, the outgoing Chair of the BBC, on 28 April 2023.

    Dear Richard

    Thank you for your letter notifying me of your decision to resign from your position as Chair of the British Broadcasting Corporation. I understand and respect your decision to stand down.

    As you have stated the BBC is a great national institution. Over the past 100 years it has touched the lives of almost everyone in the United Kingdom and plays a unique part in our cultural heritage. It is respected globally, reaching hundreds of millions of people across the world every week. No other country in the world has anything quite like it.

    I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for the work you have done and the leadership you have provided as Chair of the BBC. You have been a champion for what a strong BBC can achieve, not only for audiences at home, but also for the BBC’s contribution to the economy and to the UK’s global soft power. I would like to express my gratitude for your work with the government to maintain the BBC World Service in its unrivalled status as the world’s largest international broadcaster, and supporting its crucial role in tackling harmful disinformation through providing trusted news and analysis globally.

    I know that you are held in high regard by the BBC Board. You have clearly demonstrated your commitment to public service, and I especially applaud the work you did during the pandemic. Your decision to step down in the wider interests of the Corporation is further testament to that commitment.

    Certainty and stability for the Corporation are clearly a shared priority. In this context, I have spoken to the Board and they have proposed that you stay in place until the next Board meeting on 27 June 2023, whilst an Acting Chair is appointed in line with the Charter. I have accepted this and would like to thank you for your continued service to assist in ensuring an orderly and smooth transition takes place. We will also move to launch a process to identify and appoint a permanent new Chair.

    Thank you, once again, for your service and I wish you well for the future. I am sure there will be further opportunities for you to make a significant contribution to public life.

    Yours sincerely

    Rt Hon Lucy Frazer KC MP

    Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

  • Lucy Frazer – 2023 Speech at the Council of Europe Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media

    Lucy Frazer – 2023 Speech at the Council of Europe Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media

    The speech made by Lucy Frazer, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, on 25 April 2023.

    Good morning everyone, I want to start with an apology.

    I would love to be there with you for what I know will be an informed and fruitful discussion, and one that will lead to a valuable report.

    And I am hugely grateful to your President for the kind invitation to speak to you all today and to have a chance to reinforce the UK Government’s position on the participation of Russia and Belarus in international sport.

    I’d also like to extend my thanks to all the members of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media for your illuminating work in this area.

    The UK Government has been committed to the people of Ukraine from day one of Putin’s barbaric invasion and that commitment is an unwavering one.

    Any change to our position on the participation of Russian and Belarusian athletes representing their states in international sport would be incompatible with that commitment and incompatible with our values as a country.

    As this Council knows, the Olympic Truce – a principle that dates back to the 9th century BC to promote peace, friendship and understanding through sport – and is agreed at the United Nations – has been broken by Russia not once, but twice.

    The first time was – rather unbelievably – at their own hosting of the Winter Games at Sochi in 2014, and the second was during the Beijing Games in 2022.

    Russia has shown nothing but contempt for the values of the Olympics movement and its flouting of the rules has extended beyond the current conflict, as we saw with its involvement in doping programmes.

    The facts are incontrovertible – Russia has devastated Ukraine, Russia has killed Ukrainian athletes and Russia has smashed Ukraine’s sports infrastructure to smithereens.

    This regime does not deserve to see its athletes line up on the starting blocks of races or stand on podiums during medal ceremonies as representatives of their countries.

    As part of our absolute commitment to Ukraine and Ukrainian sovereignty, we have used the convening power of sport to bring together a coalition of 35 countries opposed to Russian and Belarusian participation in international sport.

    The collective statements we issued in March and July of last year, and February of this year, set out shared principles that all those countries agreed on.

    Our common goal is for sporting bodies to minimise the ability of Russia and Belarus to use sport for political gain.

    We recognise and want to maintain the autonomy of sport, and we support those national and international sports bodies who have shown moral clarity and exceptional leadership in this area.

    Bodies like the World Athletics Council that reaffirmed their decision in March to exclude Russian and Belarusian athletes.

    World Athletics President Seb Coe highlighted the substantial damage that Russia and Belarus have already done to ‘the integrity of our major international competitions.’

    It is in our collective gift to restore that integrity.

    And I want to be clear on one point which is really at the heart of this issue: this is not about punishing individual Russian or Belarusian athletes. These individuals have dedicated their lives to sport.

    What we stand against is athletes competing to represent the state of Russia and Belarus. There is a fundamental difference.

    The UK Government has from March 2022 been clear in our guidance to our own domestic sports bodies that individual Russian and Belarusian athletes can compete as ‘neutrals’ on UK soil, as long they really are neutral and are not representing their states in any way.

    And we have been equally clear on what that neutrality looks like. These athletes must not, under any circumstances, express support for the war or the Russian and Belarusian regimes.

    This extends to athlete funding – so athletes funded by their states to compete in events or who are in receipt of funding or sponsorship directly aligned to their states, such as from state controlled companies like Gazprom – cannot be considered to be neutral.

    Athletes directly funded by their states to compete in sports competitions, who would not be present at those events without that support, are de facto representatives of those states. They are only there by virtue of being funded by, trained by, selected by, supported by the Russian state.

    And, in that sense, from the UK perspective both ourselves and the International Olympic Committee, through its recommendations on ‘neutrality’ to International Federations of 28 March, are both seeking the same outcome: ensuring the Russian and Belarusian states cannot be represented in international sport.

    We have seen the IOC start to address some of the concerns our group of 35 nations raised in February and that is to be welcomed.

    But the IOC’s recommendations do not go far enough for us and they leave far too many unanswered questions. Our deep reservations extend across three areas.

    Firstly, there is no reference anywhere in the recommendations to state funding, which as I have said is a breach of neutrality. That issue is simply too fundamental to be ignored and it strikes at the heart of what neutrality is. State funding is state representation.

    Secondly, the provisions set out on military and national security agency links are currently minimal, especially when we know that the links between state, military and sport in Russia and Belarus are root and branch.

    And if you think that sounds like an exaggeration, consider the fact that the two leading Russia sports societies, the Central Sports Club of the Army (CSKA) and the Dynamo Sports Society, were founded by the Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Internal Affairs respectively.

    Athletes trained by those two societies consistently bring home by far the largest share of Russian Olympic medals.

    Many Russian athletes have been active in their support for Putin’s invasion.

    The limited focus of the IOC’s recommendations around people being currently “contracted” to the military or national security agencies really does not account for the intrinsic relationship between the military and security apparatus.

    Our concern also covers the potential for loopholes, with people being ‘uncontracted’ before events and then ‘re-contracted’ afterwards to allow them to compete.

    In Belarus, the Lukashenko regime maintains close control of Belarusian sport, with the Belarus Olympic Committee and Presidential Sports Club, which provides direct financial support to Belarusian athletes, led by Lukashenko’s sons.

    The scenes at the pro-war rally at the Luzhniki Stadium last year, with Putin using Olympic athletes to promote his aggression only served to underline this issue.

    Thirdly, we have ongoing serious concerns about how these provisions will be implemented effectively, robustly and consistently.

    For example, there are issues around the consistent definition of ‘teams’ and whether pairs of athletes could be allowed. This issue is one that needs further clarification.

    Let’s be clear on why this matters. You cannot compete in a team event at the Olympics other than by virtue of being the same nationality and representing your country.

    There are no options to pair up across country borders, so there can be no place for any teams, of any numbers

    We are already seeing a great deal of confusion across sports as international federations take different approaches on the issue of allowing Russian and Belarusian athletes back into competition…

    And our fear is this will only escalate over coming weeks, exacerbated by the current lack of clarity on future participation at Paris 2024 for those Russians and Belarusians who may have qualified at events this summer.

    In all of these discussions we must not lose sight of the issues at stake.

    More than 220 Ukrainian athletes and coaches have so far lost their lives at the hands of Russian aggression.

    Countless more have been forced to flee or defend their homeland from invading forces.

    Our countries all have the luxury of talking about our participation in future sporting events – events that will bring joy to millions and showcase our greatest athletes.

    Meanwhile Ukrainian sport facilities have been destroyed or severely damaged by this war.

    None of us should countenance the idea of a Ukrainian athlete being forced to share a pitch, a court, a field, a starting line with state sponsored athletes from Russia and Belarus.

    The IOC must clarify their position or go back to the drawing board. Resolve the issues I have set out today.

    Implement an approach that guarantees only truly neutral athletes can participate.

    Then we can get back to sport.

    Thank you all for your time today.

  • Oliver Dowden – 2023 Speech at CyberUK in Belfast

    Oliver Dowden – 2023 Speech at CyberUK in Belfast

    The speech made by Oliver Dowden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, on 18 April 2023.

    Thank you.

    I’m delighted to be here in Belfast.

    Last year’s CyberUK was held in Wales, and in the years before that, in Scotland and in England.

    So it’s great to complete the full Union set with Northern Ireland – and it’s yet more proof that we have strong cyber talent in every corner of our country.

    Now, Belfast is clearly a very popular destination right now. You had President Biden visiting last week, along with the Prime Minister.

    The Clintons yesterday.

    The Prime Minister liked it so much he’s back again this week.

    And me today – lucky you.

    But of course this city was a natural choice to hold a cyber conference: It has become a global hotspot for cyber and tech companies – including IBM Security, Microsoft and Nvidia…

    …and we’re meeting at a very interesting time for cyber in the UK.

    Interesting because we have a Prime Minister and a government that is deeply passionate about science and tech, and has put it front-and-centre of our agenda.

    Interesting because we have a thriving tech sector to match, and because government and industry are building a strong partnership including through the new National Cyber Advisory Board, which I am co-chairing again this afternoon with Sharon Barber from Lloyds.

    But it’s also an interesting time because of the world we live in today.

    The last time CyberUK was held, last May, attendees were gathering in the shadow of Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.

    And the brutal reality is that a year on, we continue to live in a more dangerous, more volatile world – one that has far-reaching consequences for the British people.

    Now that’s partly a consequence of Russia’s aggression.

    It’s partly because of the growing economic coercion of other countries.

    And it’s also because of the way that climate change and technology continue to transform and disrupt our world.

    All of those things are putting our systems under more pressure than ever before.

    And so in Government, we are devoting a lot of time and energy on how we can improve our overall resilience of the Government in the face of those and future challenges.

    Now many of you will have seen that a few weeks ago the government published a refresh of our defence and national security strategy – the Integrated Review – setting out how we intend to fortify our national defences against the challenges both today and tomorrow.

    And it’s something the Prime Minister has asked me to lead on at the Cabinet Office – particularly when it comes to economic security and bolstering our national resilience.

    So I wanted to use this opportunity to take you through how that applies to cybersecurity;

    where I think we are as a country;

    and what the government intends to do to make sure we stay ahead of our adversaries every step of the way.

    THE CYBER THREAT

    It’s been a couple of months since the world was gripped by the progress of that Chinese balloon floating across the skies of the United States.

    Now I’m sure you will recall, that spy balloon dominated the headlines because it was a very visible symbol of America’s borders being breached by an uninvited guest.

    And yet every day, a combination of criminals, spooks, hacktivists and cyber soldiers silently and invisibly breach our digital defences – both in the UK and in the rest of the world.

    And we saw it earlier this year with Royal Mail, when a ransomware attack disrupted overseas deliveries for weeks.

    And last August when an attack on a third party supplier caused severe disruption to NHS 111.

    So what does the overall cyber threat to the UK look like today?

    Well, according to the latest assessments from the National Cyber Security Centre, the most acute state threats in cyberspace continue to come from those usual suspects – Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

    The NCSC are also devoting a lot of their energy today to defending democracy…

    …including by tackling threats against both the Conservative Party leadership contest last year and the recent Scottish National Party leadership contest – both of which took place online.

    And there is another new front opening, as we see more and more adversaries able to buy and sell sophisticated cyber tools and spyware like Pegasus.

    These are the types of tools that we used to only see in a handful of powerful state actors, and which can cause serious damage.

    So it’s something we are taking very seriously, and to which we are responding with our international partners.

    Meanwhile, cyber crime is estimated to cost the UK billions of pounds each year.

    According to new figures published today, 32% of UK businesses and charities suffered a cyber breach or attack in the past year.

    That is a third of our businesses.

    And ransomware continues to run rampant.

    And as President Biden rightly recognised a few weeks ago, thanks to its scale and impact, ransomware is no longer just a crime.

    It is a national security threat – and our response needs to reflect the severity of that threat.

    These are attacks on our citizens, our businesses and our democracy. They are an attempt to undermine our society.

    And we are determined to stop them, with your help.

    GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

    In the UK we grasped the need for urgent action early, and we’ve been doing a lot over the past few years to strengthen our cyber defences.

    We have published the National Cyber Strategy…

    …and we have a new and effective cyber sanctions regime, which we recently used for the first time against a group of Russian cyber criminals as part of a joint campaign with the United States.

    And we are working closely with international partners to tackle the proliferation of sophisticated commercial cyber tools.

    At the same time, the government itself continues to face a range of attacks, including ransomware and espionage – and so we are constantly looking to strengthen our cyber defences.

    As part of that, today, I can announce that we are launching GovAssure, a transformational new cyber regime for the whole of government.

    GovAssure will be rolled out across Whitehall. It will be used to assess every department’s cyberhealth on an annual basis, against stringent new measures…

    …so that government can better identify the risks we face, and make sure we are protecting systems that help us run public services.

    So with each day, as the threat evolves, so does our response.

    NCSC THREAT ALERT

    But a new adversary has emerged.

    Over the last 18 months, the National Cyber Security Centre has seen the rise of several Russian-aligned groups sympathetic to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

    Now these are fringe state threats – the cyber equivalent of the Wagner group – and initially these groups focused their attacks on Ukraine and the surrounding region.

    But recently, they have begun to turn their attention to the UK and its allies.

    They are now seeking opportunities to compromise our Critical National Infrastructure.

    We have experienced attempted attacks in the past – but these groups operate differently.

    Instead of seeking to profit or spy on us, their primary motive is to disrupt or destroy our infrastructure.

    These adversaries are ideologically motivated, rather than financially motivated.

    Secondly, though these perpetrators are aligned to national actors, crucially, they are often not controlled by those foreign states.

    That makes them more opportunistic, and less likely to show restraint.

    Together, those factors make the current situation particularly concerning.

    And so today I can confirm that the National Cyber Security Centre is issuing an official alert to operators of our critical national infrastructure, to highlight the risk they currently face.

    That alert is now live on the NCSC’s website – along with a number of recommended actions that operators should follow right now, to increase their resilience and help defend our infrastructure against these attacks.

    Disclosing this threat is not something that we do lightly.

    This is an unprecedented warning for businesses.

    We have never publicly highlighted the threat from these kinds of groups attempting such attacks before.

    And I should stress that we do not think that they currently have the capability to cause widespread damage to our infrastructure in the UK.

    But we do believe it is necessary at this point in time, if we want companies to understand the current threat they currently face…

    … and to take action to defend themselves and the country against such attacks.

    This approach fits with that wider national security strategy.

    And last year, when we saw that Russian forces were gathering at the Ukrainian border, we declassified the information to let the world see what they were doing.

    Today with cyber threats you will increasingly see us say what we are seeing.

    We won’t allow these groups to stay in the shadows.

    We are shining a light on these threats because we need to work together to strengthen our defences. That means that businesses need to see the threats clearly, too.

    And over the last few years we have done lots of things to make it easier for businesses to secure themselves…

    …including issuing world-leading guidance…

    …offering threat assessments underpinned by intelligence…

    …and providing key services like the Early Warning system.

    But given the constantly evolving cyber threat, I believe this is the right moment to look at our cyber defences more widely – particularly when it comes to those of our businesses.

    The reality is that we in government can only do so much.

    Businesses large and small sit on the front line of our cyber defences.

    They face attacks on a daily basis – and any gap in that front line leaves us all vulnerable.

    And when we published the National Cyber Strategy just over a year ago, we said we would review the government’s ability to hold operators of critical national infrastructure to account.

    I’ve concluded now that we do need to go further.

    So today I can confirm that I will be setting specific and ambitious cyber resilience targets for all critical national infrastructure sectors to meet by 2025…

    …And that I am actively examining plans to bring all private sector businesses working in critical national infrastructure within the scope of cyber resilience regulations.

    These are the companies in charge of keeping our country running. Of keeping the lights on.

    Our shared prosperity depends on them taking their own security seriously – and that extends to their cybersecurity.

    A bricks-and-mortar business wouldn’t survive if it left the back door open to criminals every night.

    Equally in today’s digital world, businesses can’t afford to recklessly ignore cyber risks, either – to leave their digital back door open to cyber crooks and hackers.

    And while we’re doing this to combat certain risks, there is also a real opportunity for our businesses.

    We have a huge amount to gain by making the UK the safest country in the world to do business.

    Because the fact is that in today’s modern world, prosperity and economic security go hand in hand.

    You can’t have the former without the latter.

    Investors want to put their money in a safe country, in businesses that take security seriously.

    So the safer we make our defences, the safer we make our country – and the more attractive we become as a destination for entrepreneurs and investors all over the world.

    And the fact that the UK has in the last few years taken cybersecurity so seriously already makes us one of the best places in the world to invest.

    So this is my call to arms for businesses: look again at your security.

    Strengthen it wherever you can.

    The stronger your business, the stronger our economy, and the more prosperous we become together.

    And in turn, we in government will continue to do as much as we can to support the cyber industry and businesses more widely…

    …and so finally, I just want to outline how we are fulfilling our part of this partnership.

    OPPORTUNITIES

    Cyber is an industry that continues to grow in every sense.

    New figures show that it is worth more, it has more companies, and it employs more people than this time last year.

    In 2022, revenues hit over £10.5bn, the sector attracted £300 million of investment, and it added an additional 5,300 jobs in that time.

    At a time of global market uncertainty, the industry really is looking strong.

    And through our Cyber Runway programme, we’ve helped over 160 cyber security companies and startups grow and develop their businesses.

    And there is even more room for growth, given that we currently face a shortfall of around 14,000 cyber security professionals each year in the UK.

    The jobs are there. We just need to give people the skills to fill them – which is what we’re trying to do in government through things like Cyber First and Cyber Explorers.

    And indeed, I saw this with my own eyes a few weeks ago when I spent time with students at the University of South Wales’s Cyber Academy.

    I watched them at their computers, going through the cyber equivalent of football drills – practising attack and defence.

    And through academies like that, we are building the UK’s cyber talent pool for the future.

    And on Monday the Prime Minister launched a major drive to improve maths skills across the country.

    As he said in that speech, numeracy is the foundation of the modern economy…

    Today, it’s just as essential as being able to read – and it is particularly vital if we want people to be able to take up jobs in cyber, tech, and beyond.

    We also recognise that as a major employer of cyber security professionals across the UK, the government needs to do more to attract the very best talent.

    Now, like many of you, I noted the recent debate around the salary offered for a cyber role in government. Of course, people who work for Government will always be motivated by public service.

    But a cyber specialist knows they can earn five to seven times, if not more, for the same role in the private sector.

    And the government needs to break through its own glass ceiling…

    So I am also examining what more we can do to improve salaries and other parts of our offer, so that we can continue to attract the very best cyber experts into the civil service.

    These are people protecting the systems and public services that millions of people across the country rely on every day, so we should want the very best people in charge of them.

    We must be competitive to stay ahead.

    CONCLUSION

    So, we are keen to do our bit, and for the private sector in turn to do its bit.

    To defend as one, so that we can prosper as one.

    And as I have set out, the Government is clear-eyed about the challenges that we face. We need business to be clear in their determination to meet those challenges with us.

    It’s not going to be easy, and these threats won’t disappear overnight. But by working together, I believe that when we meet next year at CyberUK 2024, the UK will be more resilient and more secure.

    Thank you.

  • Julia Lopez – 2023 Speech on Heritage Assets in London

    Julia Lopez – 2023 Speech on Heritage Assets in London

    The speech made by Julia Lopez, the Minister of State at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, in the House of Commons on 23 March 2023.

    I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Nickie Aiken) for securing a wonderful debate and for superbly highlighting London’s great and rich heritage, its wonderful villages and, of course, the importance of protecting historic assets for the benefit of present and future generations.

    Like her, I absolutely adore London’s history. It is a pleasure to see her passion for her constituency again, after her contribution to last week’s debate on the lease of London zoo. I responded to that debate, and am responding to this one, on behalf of Lord Parkinson, who covers the arts and heritage portfolio for the Department. These are all fascinating diversions from my portfolio on data and digital infrastructure, and I am glad to say I have now taken on the tourism brief for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. With the creation of the new Department, tourism will play an increasingly important role within the work of DCMS.

    As my hon. Friend said, our heritage is an essential part of our cultural landscape, our economy and our country. It is both globally renowned and world leading, playing a vital role in communities across the UK, making our places great to live in, work in and visit. She has a significant number of impressive heritage sites in her constituency, including the beautiful Westminster Abbey and the building in which we stand today. Her constituency contains more than 3,900 listed buildings, scheduled monuments and registered parks and gardens combined.

    It is a fun coincidence, as my hon. Friend said, that the debate takes place during English Tourism Week. I hope she will agree that the UK’s tourism offer is truly world class. I had the pleasure of visiting the Goring Hotel, in her constituency; the staff were complimentary about her efforts to champion the hotel sector and they are doing fantastic work supporting young people into hospitality jobs. As she highlighted, the sector has been tremendously resilient after some difficult years. As it is English Tourism Week, I pay tribute to everybody in that sector who has done such incredibly demanding work throughout the last three years.

    Our tourism landscape is iconic, from historic buildings and incredible scenery to culturally vibrant cities and world-leading hospitality, and that is not just here in Westminster. I loved the earlier plug for Strangford by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I hope he will not mind if I encourage hon. Members to sample the delights of my own constituency of Hornchurch and Upminster, including the vibrant Queen’s theatre. I note what my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster said about levelling up, but I am pleased to say that the Queen’s theatre was a beneficiary of levelling up within London, with a great grant from the Arts Council of England. We also have a wonderful green space in Dagnam Park, the Manor, as well as Thames Chase forest and heritage assets such as Upminster Tithe Barn and its windmill.

    It is undeniable that heritage sites are vital to our tourism industry and a tangible way to showcase our rich history. Of course, we want these sites to be around in the future for our children and grandchildren to learn from and be inspired by.

    Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)

    It seems the theatre in the Minister’s constituency was drawn out of the Arts Council lottery and won a prize. I am pleased to say that the theatres in my constituency also did not have their grants cut, but the loss of the London Coliseum and the English National Opera is a grave blow to London, and indeed to the whole country. Will the Government use their best endeavours to ensure that very misguided decision by the Arts Council is reconsidered?

    Julia Lopez

    I understand that hon. Members have made their feelings clearly known about ACE’s decision on the ENO. I know that a number of meetings have taken place, and I believe that some transitional funding is there, but I believe that this will continue to be a subject of ongoing discussion between the two organisations. I know that Lord Parkinson has been engaging with the issue.

    We want to make sure we are protecting our historic buildings, statues and memorials. Local planning authorities are required to

    “have regard to the desirability of preserving features of special architectural or historic interest”

    in any building. Buildings, statues and memorials of more modest interest can also be locally listed by local planning authorities. We want to make sure that developers and local authorities take into account the integrity and preservation of heritage sites and the local area. When considering applications for planning permission, local authorities are required to take into account national policy. That includes a clear framework on proposals that are liable to result in substantial harm to, or loss of, a grade I or grade II listed building.

    In some cases, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, who retains the power to take over planning applications rather than letting the local authority take over, can take the final decision. That is done only in exceptional circumstances, but my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster will have seen a number of such cases in her constituency over the years.

    I enjoyed my hon. Friend’s reference to the Gasketeers campaign. As she set out, there is often a tension between development and heritage. That is brought into sharp relief by examples in her constituency, including the planned redevelopment of the City of London and of Liverpool Street station. As she articulately set out, there are also proposals to replace gas-powered lamps in Westminster with modern LED lighting. Just before this debate, I was at a tourism reception in this House at which a lady thrust into my hand a little card telling me that Beverley in the East Riding also has some of the oldest gas streetlamps still in situ. I give a shout-out to them—it seems that Westminster has a level of competition when it comes to heritage.

    There are tensions between conserving the significance of historic buildings and modernising them to be fit for purpose for future generations. It is therefore vital that Historic England, which is our expert heritage adviser, and planning authorities work constructively with development teams to facilitate creative solutions to resolve some of those tensions.

    I would like to name-check Tim Bryars, a key member of the Gasketeers campaign. I first came across Tim, who is a map and book seller in Cecil Court, during a campaign to save that gloriously unique street in Westminster; he then went on to sell me a beautiful silk pocket map of London in the 1800s, which I very much treasure. I commend him for his enthusiasm and for all the work of the Gasketeers’ campaign. [Interruption.] Ah—hello, Tim.

    I understand that, after concerted campaigning, pressure and support from my hon. Friend, the council has seen the light, or the gaslight, and has paused what it was doing. Heritage England has now offered to identify a way forward and is encouraging listing applications, which it will be prioritising. I understand that a site visit is being undertaken. It will also be engaging on the redevelopment plans for Liverpool Street station in my hon. Friend’s constituency; it will look especially at the station, but also at the Great Eastern Hotel. Having sat on the planning committee for the neighbouring borough of Tower Hamlets, I fully understand some of the tensions.

    We have managed to save some parts of London’s historic fabric from rather ugly and unpleasant development over the years. I am thinking of the campaigns on the Fruit and Wool Exchange. My hon. Friend also cited campaigns relating to Smithfield; I think back with some concern to some of the original proposals for Smithfield, which were not sympathetic. I genuinely believe that preserving that historic fabric can really enhance, and no doubt increase the value of, some developments. If a sensitive approach is taken, the protection of heritage and a developer’s ability to make a profit should not need to be an either/or.

    As my hon. Friend will be aware, it is a criminal offence to demolish a listed building or to carry out works of alteration or extension that affect its character without the permission of the local council. A recent example in which a local authority played a critical role was the reopening of the Tavern Inn, a London grade II listed pub, six years after its illegal demolition: the owners were ordered to rebuild it brick for brick following a planning enforcement ruling. It is hoped that such cases will prevent developers from demolishing other sites without the relevant permissions.

    My hon. Friend will also be aware of Historic England’s Heritage at Risk programme, which gives our Department a strategic, overarching view of the overall state of England’s historic sites. It identifies the sites that are most at risk of being lost as a result of neglect, decay or inappropriate development. Historic England updates the Heritage at Risk register every year, and the end result is a dynamic picture of the sites most at risk and most in need of safeguarding for the future. As my hon. Friend said, there are 16 at-risk sites in her constituency, and Historic England is actively engaged with owners and local authorities to find solutions and ensure that repairs are made. I know that she will be watching those 16 sites like a hawk.

    The protection of London’s great heritage also extends to supporting the capital’s vibrant theatre scene and cultural offerings. Recent Government funding has ensured that access to arts and culture is not limited to the bright lights of the west end, but can be experienced by everyone. Investment in theatres across the country has increased through the latest Arts Council England investment programme, in terms of both the number of organisations supported and the volume of funding, which is now more than £110 million each year for nearly 200 organisations. There were also some positive announcements in the Budget about the extension of tax reliefs. That is on top of the unprecedented £1.5 billion culture recovery fund, through which more than £270 million was given to support nearly 700 theatre organisations across England during the pandemic.

    It goes without saying that the protection of heritage and cultural assets for the benefit of future generations requires people to work in those places, and for children to learn about and understand their heritage. We recognise the importance of cultural education for the future of our world-leading arts and culture sectors in the UK, and we think that all children should be entitled to take advantage of those enriching cultural opportunities. We consider them to be an essential part of a broad and balanced education, supporting children’s health, wellbeing and wider development. This is something about which I am particularly passionate, and I am working closely with Lord Parkinson in my Department and with the Department for Education to publish a cultural education plan later this year. The aim of the plan is to highlight the importance of high-quality cultural education in schools around the country, promoting its social value. As Minister for the creative industries, I also see it as critical to building our pipeline of talent into those industries, which suffer from skill shortages—as does the tourism industry.

    We are committed to ensuring that our historic environment is properly protected, promoted and conserved for the benefit of present and future generations, but also because it is that heritage that draws visitors from every corner of the world. Whether through the statutory functions that protect our most special historic buildings and ancient monuments or through the public bodies that it funds, such as Historic England, my Department seeks to protect and promote understanding of and access to our glorious historic environment.

    Let me once again thank my hon. Friend for bringing the House’s attention to this issue and for, as ever, being a truly passionate advocate for London’s heritage.

    Question put and agreed to.

  • Nickie Aiken – 2023 Speech on Heritage Assets in London

    Nickie Aiken – 2023 Speech on Heritage Assets in London

    The speech made by Nickie Aiken, the Conservative MP for the Cities of London and Westminster, in the House of Commons on 23 March 2023.

    When I stood for election, I promised my constituents that I would be a strong local voice. This debate is at the heart of that promise. The Cities of London and Westminster sit in the heart of our nation’s capital. It may be considered one of a handful of global cities, but to those of us who call it home it is also a group of local villages, with local people who are incredibly proud of their neighbourhood’s history. Whether it is Covent Garden, the square mile, Marylebone, Pimlico, Hyde Park or the west end, heritage matters. Heritage matters for so many reasons, not least because of its significant pull factor for tourism. In London we see that on a magnified scale, with people coming from all over the world to visit our heritage buildings, palaces, iconic sites and parks, and enjoy our cultural offer. Places such as Buckingham Palace and Westminster Abbey will come into sharp focus later this year with the coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla. Right here, the Palace of Westminster, where we sit today, is a UNESCO world heritage site. I can therefore think of no better time for this debate, with this being English Tourism Week.

    I recognise the incredible work that my hon. Friend the Minister’s Department is doing to bolster UK tourism, especially since the pandemic. In particular, I applaud the Department’s support for heritage and the arts including, of course, the £1.57 billion culture recovery fund, and measures within the tourism recovery plan. I do so in large part because London’s unique appeal lies in its ability for its heritage assets to tell the many stories of a 2,000-year-old city.

    In London, our historic buildings are so common that it is easy for us to take them for granted without giving them a second thought, but without protection, those buildings may not be here in the future. That is made clear in Historic England’s annual at-risk register, which highlights the critical health of England’s most valued historic places. For those in the Cities of London and Westminster, such places have huge community importance, from the Buddhist temple in Margaret Street to the former Samaritan Hospital for Women in Marylebone, and the 18th-century church of St Mary Woolnoth in the City of London. Those are valued historic places, many of which, according to Historic England, are at risk of being lost.

    In 2022, London had 421 listed buildings, 101 places of worship, 25 archaeological entries, 12 parks and gardens and 72 conservation areas that were at risk of neglect, decay or inappropriate change. Thankfully, many have been rescued thanks to heritage bodies and dedicated teams of volunteers, community groups, charities, owners and local government, all working together. For example, two historic buildings with heritage value were recently under threat in the two cities, but both were saved due to community action that I was delighted to fully support. I speak of Bevis Marks synagogue—the oldest synagogue in continuous use in the United Kingdom—and the historic Simpson’s Tavern in Leadenhall, which is 250 years old and a constant in an ever-changing part of the City of London. Both were under threat, but local people stood up and said no to unfettered development, and yes to heritage.

    Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

    I commend the hon. Lady, who I spoke to beforehand, for securing this debate. She has said not a word that I do not fully support and see the need for. She is right to say that our heritage assets are historic and need to be retained and protected, and that can happen only through funding. She also referred to tourism. Our tourism goes across the whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and we can all benefit. I encourage people to come to London for their holidays, and I am sure she encourages people to come to my constituency of Strangford for holidays. Whenever she comes, I suggest that she goes and visits Scrabo tower, an historic building that has been retained for two or three hundred years. It overlooks Strangford lough, and whenever I go home on the plane on a Thursday night—I usually head home then, but now it will be tomorrow morning—I see Scrabo tower and I know I am coming home, and it always does my heart good.

    Nickie Aiken

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. As he knows, I have visited Strangford several times and I plan to do so in the near future. It is a great and beloved place that is part of the United Kingdom.

    We cannot rely solely on community action to protect our cultural assets. There are cases where local people and local government really make an effort to ensure we look after heritage assets—we saw that with the site of Smithfield market, which has been in place since the 14th century. It is now to be the home of the Museum of London, which is moving. The development plans pay a lot of attention to preserving the historic fabric of London for future generations, and I pay tribute to that. I appreciate that not everyone is happy to lose the meat market at Smithfield, but there are cases where development can be done well to create a new offer for the next generation.

    There are also cases where people are still fighting to save their heritage. I share the concerns of Barbican residents about proposals to knock down and redevelop the former home of the Museum of London and Bastion House, and replace it with a major office development. I am delighted to work with the Barbican Association and Barbican Quarter Action to ensure local voices are heard by the City of London Corporation, and that these unique and important historic places are saved for community use, and, hopefully, housing. They are functional historic assets that serve their community and add to London’s cultural offer. That is so important, because communities want to see their local heritage thrive.

    Yes, concentrating on digital and tech is important for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, but we cannot afford to lose focus on the conservation of the country’s cultural and historic heritage. Without that emphasis, heritage will be at risk. London is modernising, but tourism figures and local support underline the popularity of the historic landscape. People care passionately about their historic environment. They want to be involved in decisions about their heritage and how we manage change.

    A good example of that recently was when constituents, as well as heritage experts and heritage bodies, wrote to me concerned that Westminster City Council was not, in their view, giving enough consideration to the historical significance of Victorian gas-powered lamps in its plans to replace them with LED replicas. There are now very few functioning gas lamps left in Westminster. Each, in its own right, is a work of art and a piece of our history, surviving the Blitz and London’s urban revolution, but not all of them will survive due to the council’s diktat to replace them with LED lamps.

    Thankfully, the brilliant London Gasketeers, a fantastic group of locals, are rallying to save these historic lamps. I met the London Gasketeers on Maunsel Street in Westminster to show my solidarity with their cause, along with many locals. Many of those local people had never been part of a campaign before and they were delighted to support the London Gasketeers. The cause gained wide-ranging support: everyone from myself to the president of the GMB union—believe it or not—historians, actors, cabbies, heritage experts and, most importantly, a diverse mix of Westminster residents who care passionately about their local heritage. We have been successful. I pay tribute to the London Gasketeers and I am delighted to see many of them in the Public Gallery this afternoon.

    Things like gas lamps might seem trivial to some, but like it or not, they are our material history. People care because Westminster’s heritage belongs to everyone. Such things matter to our overall social landscape, and are so important because London is a city where history and modernity remain intrinsically linked. The same can be said for urban development. Consider Soho, which has always been characterised by its narrow streets that lend it a friendly, human scale. That is part of Soho’s material history. However, the pavement licensing scheme, which might have been a great offer during covid as an emergency lifeline to many local restaurants and bars, could now have a detrimental effect on the historic streetscape if it becomes permanent without any protections in place. That is why I am calling on the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to ensure that guidance accompanying the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill is clear about the conditions on which licences are granted. It is important that local councils have the flexibility to determine where it is appropriate to have a licence and where it is not.

    Beyond the principal argument on access, we need to ensure that our streetscape is consistent with Soho’s conservation area status, respecting Soho’s unique history and character. We must preserve elements of material history and evolve sensitively in places that already have protection, such as Soho’s conservation area, or deserve protection, such as Westminster’s Victorian gas lamps or London’s historic buildings and places.

    The preservation of our heritage and cultural assets draws millions of tourists to London every year. A VisitBritain survey found that the vast majority of tourists see Britain as a place where heritage meets vibrancy and modernity. The same can be said of our cultural institutions, as 15% of international tourists attend a play, musical, opera or ballet. I am incredibly proud of the vibrant arts and culture offer in my constituency, much of which can be found in the historic west end, dating back to the 1600s. In fact, according to the Office for National Statistics, 8% of the UK’s art and culture businesses are based in the Cities of London and Westminster—around 2,500 businesses.

    There is no doubt that the past few years have been extremely difficult for the arts and culture. The commercial uncertainty of the current climate has not helped. Rising global inflation and consistent train and tube strikes have all had a knock-on effect, hampering the recovery of this £2.4 billion sector. We saw during the pandemic the fragility of the industry. We cannot be complacent; we must protect our cultural assets. After all, heritage and theatre bring in £890 million a year, with more than 16 million people attending London theatres last year.

    We need to work with the theatre sector in London to develop a strong UK talent pipeline, through investment in the arts premium and development of the culture education plan. My hope is that will mean that we can make sustainable, evidence-based decisions to conserve our culture and heritage while enabling people to enjoy them. While I am on this point, although London is not part of the new levelling-up agenda per se, it forms the heartbeat of British artists and culture. We risk losing those institutions at our peril. We saw that with Arts Council England’s rash decision to cut funding to the English National Opera, based in the London Coliseum, not far from here. That decision would have seen the loss of a national icon that gave local people so much—not just world-class opera performances but local initiatives such as the ENO’s Breathe programme, which supports people suffering with long covid.

    I urge the Minister to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to the arts and culture sector, and in particular the west end. We cannot forget the strength of the sector as an entrepreneurial and SME-led economic driver locally, nationally and globally. For those reasons, I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak on the importance of protecting heritage assets in London.

    Since London’s founding in what is now the square mile in the City of London, this has been an ever-changing metropolis. Each generation has added its own personal touch, culminating in a hugely diverse and historic modern city. Now more than ever, it is our duty to ensure that we do not lose what makes London London. Therefore, we must be proactive in protecting our cultural assets, from the west end to the wider historic fabric of London, which is becoming increasingly under threat.

    I urge the Minister to reaffirm her commitment to protecting our heritage assets for future generations, and ask that she work with London’s cultural sector to stimulate growth, encourage tourism and safeguard the industry. London’s historic assets are at risk of being lost to history; we cannot allow that happen.

  • Lucy Frazer – 2023 Statement on the Draft Media Bill

    Lucy Frazer – 2023 Statement on the Draft Media Bill

    The speech made by Lucy Frazer, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on 29 March 2023.

    Today the Government are publishing a draft Media Bill. This will ensure that we can deliver on key aspects of the Government’s vision for the broadcasting sector, set out last year in our landmark White Paper, “Up next”. The Media Bill will reform decades-old laws to turbocharge the growth potential of our world-leading public service broadcasters (PSBs), allowing them to better compete with global giants. It will give PSBs the tools to adapt to changing viewer habits as people now increasingly watch TV on demand via smart TVs and other connected devices, instead of traditional “linear” services such as terrestrial TV.

    The draft legislation will bring video-on-demand (VoD) services such as Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime Video under new Ofcom content rules, ensuring that children and vulnerable viewers are better protected from harmful material and that these on-demand, online-only streaming services platforms are properly accountable to the UK regulator. The draft Bill also has new rules to make streaming content more accessible to those with seeing and hearing impairments, bringing them in line with existing broadcasting standards.

    The draft Bill reflects the Government’s decisions to proceed with a package of reforms to support Channel 4 to meet the sustainability challenges it faces. Channel 4 will have greater freedom to make and own its own content, should it choose to do so. A new legal duty will also be introduced on the corporation to consider its long-term sustainability alongside the delivery of its public service remit. This will ensure that this globally renowned broadcaster can continue to produce high-impact, distinctive shows long into the future. The Government have already committed to raising the level of Channel 4’s independent production quota and will continue to work closely with industry to consider additional protections that will safeguard Channel 4’s important role supporting the production sector following these changes.

    The Bill now also includes measures that are vital to the future of UK radio services. These long called for reforms will help protect radio’s long-term position on connected audio devices, including smart speakers, and ensure the continuation of the huge public value that radio provides for listeners across the UK. It will also include legislation for radio deregulation, which will reduce burdens and the costs on commercial radio.

    The Media Bill will:

    Deliver a new public service remit for TV while making sure public service broadcasters continue to service audiences across the UK with universally available, high-quality programming;

    Make sure public service broadcast content is always carried and easy to find for UK audiences on connected devices and major online platforms, including on smart TVs, set-top boxes and streaming sticks, so audiences can easily access this content in the way that best suits them;

    Introduce a sustainability duty on the Channel Four Television Corporation (C4C) and remove the existing publisher-broadcaster restriction on C4C so it has a greater ability to produce and monetise its own content, if it chooses to do so, ensuring Channel 4’s long-term future in public ownership;

    Update the public service remit of S4C (Sianel Pedwar Cymru), the Welsh language television service, to include digital and online services. Removing the current geographical broadcasting restrictions so that S4C can broaden its reach and offer its content on a range of new platforms in the UK and beyond, demonstrating the Government’s commitment to the future of Welsh language broadcasting;

    Bring video-on-demand services such as Netflix under UK regulation, ensuring that larger, TV-like services are subject to the same high standards as broadcast TV channels, by giving Ofcom powers to investigate and take action if it considers it appropriate;

    Reduce regulatory burdens and costs on commercial radio stations that are no longer needed due to the decisive shift towards digital listening, while also strengthening protections for the provision of national and local news and local information for listeners;

    Introduce measures to protect the position of radio accessed via smart speakers—for example, “Alexa” devices—by ensuring that listeners are able to find the content they expect in an unaltered format, without additional or substituted advertisement; and

    Repeal section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, which would—if commenced—force news publishers to pay the costs of any court judgment if they were not a member of the approved regulator, regardless of the outcome of the court judgment.

    In recognition of the importance of getting these reforms right, and delivering the best outcome for audiences, the Government are publishing the Bill in draft to facilitate a period of technical engagement with industry prior to introduction.

    The Government are today publishing the draft Bill and associated documents on www.gov.uk. I will deposit copies of the draft Bill and these documents in the Libraries of both Houses.

    Alongside publication of the draft Media Bill, I am also issuing my response to Ofcom’s report on the licensing of Channel 3 and Channel 5 submitted under section 229 of the Communications Act 2003. This response confirms that I do not intend to block the renewal of these licences, acknowledging the valuable role that ITV, STV and Channel 5 continue to play within the PSB system. A copy of my response will be available on gov.uk.

  • Stephen Parkinson – 2023 Speech at Heritage Day (Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay)

    Stephen Parkinson – 2023 Speech at Heritage Day (Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay)

    The speech made by Stephen Parkinson, Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay, at Charterhouse in London on 2 March 2023.

    “Thank you very much and thank you to you, Lizzie, for inviting me to be here today. I’m delighted to be the Minister for both Arts and Heritage and to be able to talk to you all here at the Charterhouse. And what a glorious building this is – inside and out, looking splendid in the sunshine – and what a fantastic room, so thank you for having me here with you.

    This is a brilliant part of London to be holding Heritage Day in. As well as the Charterhouse, a number of us started the day in the fabulous Great Hall at St. Bart’s Hospital, where the National Lottery Heritage Fund was unveiling its new 10-year strategy. St. Bart’s celebrates its 900th anniversary this year, along with St. Bartholomew the Great, which is part of the same foundation, both great examples of living heritage, still doing the things – providing clinical and spiritual nourishment to people – that they’ve been doing for close to a millennium.

    Sir John Betjeman – one of my heritage heroes – lived alongside it in Cloth Fair, in what has been dubbed ‘the oldest house in London’, the only surviving residential home that pre-dates the Great Fire of London, and now brilliantly looked after by the Landmark Trust, where you can walk in his footsteps and sit in his sitting room. If you’re itching for a pint at the end of today’s discussions, there are so many wonderful pubs – I’d particularly recommend the Hand & Shears, which has been serving people on that site since 1532.

    Or you could wander home through Smithfield Market, which has nearly 800 years of continuous trading there. And if, like me, you are sad that that’s coming to an end soon, you can cheer yourself up by seeing the fantastic work which is already underway for its new home for the Museum of London – so it’s a really brilliant neighbourhood you’ve chosen to meet in.

    I hope that today’s meeting, and the discussions you’ve been having today and yesterday, have been a good opportunity to come together and discuss the challenges and opportunities which are facing the heritage sector.

    As a history graduate, I’m passionate about history and heritage, so I was delighted to be appointed Minister responsible for Heritage. It has been wonderful to get out and about and meet lots of people – I joined DCMS towards the end of the pandemic so I’ve been meeting people as they’ve been able to get back to their sites and venues. I’ve seen the strong collaboration across the sector, and across all of our sectors at DCMS, during the challenging months of the pandemic – so thank you to all of you who were helping each other and helping us out through those challenging times.

    As you know, as of last month DCMS has a new Secretary of State – a frequent occurrence, I know. We now have Lucy Frazer, and a renewed focus on Culture, Media and Sport – which encompasses heritage, the arts, and the creative industries. I’m sure there are many here who hark back fondly to the days of the Department for National Heritage, but heritage and tourism are very much part of the central work of the Department, even if they’re not quite in the acronym. The changes reflect the Prime Minister’s recognition of the importance of our sectors to the UK economy – and build on our position as a global leader in them.

    And heritage of course is a key part of that. Our heritage, and the sectors that sustain it, are an important source of economic prosperity and growth for our country, as well as nourishing well-being. It is hard to define heritage in a way that fully encapsulates the depth and breadth of our national heritage – from thousands of historic buildings, parks, and natural landscapes, to ancient monuments, maritime wrecks, and archaeological sites.

    What we know is that heritage is a key part of the UK’s global brand, and an important source of economic prosperity and growth for our country. It is a significant draw for tourists from all over the world, from the historic landscape of the national parks like the Lake District to venues like the Tower of London which attracts so many people year in, year out. Heritage attracts millions of domestic and international tourists each year, and the visitor economy plays a vital role in driving growth.

    And of course during the months of the pandemic when we were all taking staycations, I think people have been rediscovering the heritage and the destinations that are right on their doorstep and looking at them afresh, which is very exciting.

    This year will give us plenty more to celebrate and promote.

    It was wonderful news to hear that Thornborough Henges have been saved for the nation, and are now part of the National Heritage Collection. And today, through this conference, we celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Heritage Alliance, the largest coalition of heritage interests in England, with over 190 independent organisations. Over the last two decades the Alliance has played a vital role in protecting our nation’s heritage. So thank you for that incredible work over the last 20 years, and here’s to many more successes in the decades to come.

    As I mentioned, this morning saw the launch of the Heritage Fund’s new ten-year strategy, which I was pleased to attend with many of you. It is great to see the Heritage Fund’s unwavering commitment to ensuring that – through both open and targeted investment – a broad range of the UK’s heritage will continue to be supported and valued and cared for, for the widest possible audiences.

    In May, of course, we have the Coronation of His Majesty The King, something that very few people living have experienced before. It’s a huge opportunity to show off the rich history of this country and for people across the UK to come together and celebrate. Shortly after that, we have the Eurovision Song Contest in Liverpool – a culturally different but equally exciting opportunity which we’re very proud to be hosting on behalf of Ukraine, and a chance for Liverpool, that fine city with wonderfully rich musical heritage, to show itself off on the world stage.

    But I know that we can’t look forward without also looking at some of the challenges which we all know we still face. I appreciate that, for lots of organisations, reserves were depleted during the pandemic – and now inflation and the rising costs of living because of the invasion of Ukraine and the actions of Russia are having a significant impact; that the economic headwinds are still blowing strongly and that the environment is still a challenging one for many.

    As you know, the Government has taken action – we were proud to stand with you during the pandemic through the Cultural Recovery Fund. I’m so grateful to Historic England and the Heritage Fund and others who helped us get that money to the organisations that needed it so we could welcome people back. And of course for the past six months, through the Energy Bill Relief Scheme, we’ve been supporting organisations through a discount on wholesale gas and electricity prices. From April, we’ll continue to provide support through the Energy Bills Discount Scheme, which will continue to help businesses over the next 12 months.

    In addition, we will also offer support to energy- and trade-intensive industries – including heritage sites – with a higher discount applied to 70% of energy volumes. Details on how that will work, and how widely it will apply, are yet to be determined, but we wouldn’t have got that outcome and that recognition without the brilliant collaboration we’ve had across the sector, so thank you for the evidence and the insights you’ve helped give the team at DCMS, which helped us represent you effectively across Government.

    Alongside this, environmental sustainability and reaching Net Zero carbon dioxide emissions are a key priority for the Government. Heritage plays a unique role in our journey to a cleaner, greener, and more sustainable future. And of course heritage knows only too well the risks to our cultural, historical, archaeological and marine environment from climate change.

    We need to use our internationally-renowned expertise in the UK to make significant changes in the coming years to protect our natural and historic environment, and to limit the impact of climate change.

    There are more than 5 million homes in England built before the end of the First World War. That represents 20% of England’s housing stock. If we want to reduce our energy consumption, we need to ensure that historic buildings are a successful part of the transition to Net Zero.

    Our aim is to ensure that the right balance is struck between our Net Zero goals, protecting heritage, and ensuring the positive adaptation of our existing housing stock.

    Not only do we need to create incentives for that sort of positive adaptation, we need to ensure that the workforce is there to deliver it and to meet the scale of the challenge required. As part of the review into Adapting Historic Homes for Energy Efficiency, we are working with other Government Departments to see how we can boost the skills of existing builders and craftspeople, and how we can create a new pipeline of future talent. We’re doing some work with the Department for Education on a new Cultural Education Plan – I’m glad that heritage and heritage skills are being reflected in the panel that are helping us to do that work.

    We are also committed to working with you to explore potential ways to encourage the repair and maintenance of historic buildings. This includes what I know is the long-running issue of VAT on maintenance of buildings.

    I am determined to explore opportunities for reform, and to understand the implications of any potential change to VAT on repairs and maintenance of historic buildings. Our new Secretary of State has come fresh from being Housing Minister, and she’s previously been Financial Secretary to HM Treasury, which are both very important in helping us make that case across Whitehall. We’ve already been discussing the issue with colleagues in Government. and we’ll continue to work with you on that.

    One of the Government’s top priorities, which I know you have been keenly engaged in, is levelling up every part of the UK ensuring that everyone has the ability to engage with the opportunities that are around them.

    Our country’s world-class heritage – from our historic coastline, our industrial buildings and inspiring places of worship – are a vital part of our national identity.

    This means that recognising, protecting, and celebrating our heritage can (and indeed already does) play a critical role in levelling up, by contributing to our local and national economy, regenerating places that have too long felt overlooked, enhancing well-being, and building pride in place. The Government’s levelling up funding programmes are helping to do that.

    As part of the first round of the Levelling Up Fund, places all over the country were supported to deliver a wide range of projects with culture and heritage at their heart. The Fund is enabling Wentworth Woodhouse, for instance, to transform its riding school and stables to create new hospitality and visitor centres – and, in the second round of the fund that was announced at the beginning of this year, there were many more inspiring projects that I look forward to visiting as the funding unlocks them and helps them be delivered.

    Other heritage-led initiatives, like the £95 million High Streets Heritage Action Zones programme, which is funded by the Government and delivered by Historic England, also have a key role to play in empowering people to engage with their local heritage.

    The Secretary of State and I celebrated this programme only last week at a Parliamentary reception. It’s been the largest ever Government investment in built heritage, benefiting 67 high streets across England. I’ve seen some myself, including in a visit to Coventry during its time as City of Culture, and in Gloucester.

    It is important that, as we seek to boost growth and regenerate places across the country, that the planning system continues to protect our heritage buildings, and ensures that these historic assets are complemented by new, high-quality buildings which will reinforce and add to the distinctive character of local places.

    I am pleased that heritage protection has been recently championed in planning legislation through the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill which is currently before the House of Lords.

    The heritage provisions in the Bill aim to provide greater clarity on requirements, standards, and processes when dealing with heritage – and to enable a more streamlined approach to be taken in the new planning system.

    The Bill will also deliver planning reforms to ensure that new development is more beautiful, produces more local infrastructure, is shaped by local people’s democratic wishes, improves environmental outcomes, and takes place with neighbourhoods very much in mind.

    I want neighbourhoods and communities to continue to celebrate their local heritage in places across the country, and to harness the power of the past to build links between people and the places they live and work in today.

    That’s why I’m keen to explore new and more ambitious ways of doing this – including looking into the expansion of the official Blue Plaque scheme beyond London. I know that’s something that has been looked at before, and I know there are brilliant schemes across the country where people already recognise local figures that are celebrated in their communities, but I’d like to see that taking place not just in our nation’s capital.

    Blue Plaques help people to understand and value their local heritage, and to take pride in their community. Since 1866, the scheme has been focused on London alone – and while there are many brilliant schemes that sit alongside it, I think it is right that the official scheme run by a national organisation should be nation-wide.

    Indeed, the politician who inspired the scheme in the 1860s, William Ewart, was born in Liverpool, and sat in the Commons for that city, as well as for Wigan and Bletchingley in Surrey. He died in Devizes in Wiltshire. None of those places are covered by the scheme he bequeathed us.

    I want young people across the country to see that people from their local area have done things of which they can still today be so proud.

    It’s very fitting that on World Book Day – particularly as we walked past the wonderful Florin Court, which so many people know from the TV adaptation of Agatha Christie’s Poirot novels – that we can think of Dame Agatha today. She has a Blue Plaque on her house in Kensington, but she was born in Torquay and lived a lot of her life in Berkshire and Oxfordshire. She’s world renowned – and people everywhere should know the links that she and figures like her have to their communities.

    Robert Stephenson, the great railway pioneer, was born in Willington Quay on the banks of the Tyne. He sat in Parliament for Whitby, in North Yorkshire. I want those communities and the world to know what a pioneer he was – and what a great gift he gave to the world through the engineering which we celebrate in railway heritage. I look forward to working with English Heritage and others who have views on the best way of doing that.

    I would like to finish thanking you all again for the hard work that you and your organisations have done during the pandemic and since, and the many years before that as well, in support of our nation’s great heritage.

    Thank you to the Heritage Alliance for putting on this fantastic event. It’s been brilliant working with you since I got heritage in my job title, and I look forward to continue doing that in the future.”

  • Julia Lopez – 2023 Speech on Funding and Support for Classical Music

    Julia Lopez – 2023 Speech on Funding and Support for Classical Music

    The speech made by Julia Lopez, the Minister of State at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on 29 March 2023.

    Madam Deputy Speaker, I apologise for anticipating my cue when one was not given.

    I thank the hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate (Bambos Charalambous) for securing this debate on what is obviously a popular topic, and for highlighting some of the fantastic work that orchestras, choirs and opera companies are doing to bring classical music to people across the country. I too have been contacted by constituents about this issue. The hon. Gentleman is right to touch on the quality of our musicians as a selling point of our very successful film and television industry. The creative industries form part of my portfolio, and he is right to point out the contribution of film scores.

    The hon. Gentleman covered a lot of ground, so I will try to cover the topics he included in his speech. As he said, classical music in Britain continues to be a source of national pride and inspires not just the people of our country but the entire world. As other hon. Members have pointed out, it feeds our souls. He rightly talked about the classical ecosystem. From the smaller but rapidly developing new orchestras, such as the Multi-Story Orchestra, to the long-established giants such as the London Symphony Orchestra or the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, the orchestras of this country have a rich history of excellence and innovation. That has a profound impact on the world of classical music.

    The classical music sector creates jobs, supports local businesses and generates revenue for the local and national economy. It attracts tourists from across the world who come to see performances by renowned orchestras and musicians. More importantly than any of that, classical music, whether performed by orchestras, choirs, quartets or soloists, whether professional or amateur, has the ability to fascinate, inspire and enthral us. That is why it is an art form that this Government support consistently, gladly and proudly.

    I welcome the birthing tips from the right hon. Member for Walsall South (Valerie Vaz). Classic FM got a lot of us through lockdown; I shall be thinking of it and perhaps playing it when the moment comes, hopefully not too imminently. We published the draft Media Bill today, which includes provisions on radio that a number of hon. Members are calling for. I hope the Bill will support the growth and future of our radio sector, including Classic FM, and that it will continue to be a means through which people can access classical music.

    I want to address up front some concerns that have been raised about recent announcements by the BBC in relation to its symphony, concert and philharmonic orchestras. As hon. Members have noted, the BBC is an operationally and editorially independent organisation, and the Government have no role in its strategy for classical music, so any decisions on the matter are for it to take independently. However, of course I recognise how valuable the BBC orchestras and singers are to many individuals and communities across the UK. Having encouraged in this House a response—

    Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 9(3)).

    Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Joy Morrissey.)

    Julia Lopez

    The choreography of tonight’s debate is intriguing, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is new to me, so I apologise if I am not playing my part very successfully.

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)

    It is always a surprise when the motion lapses at 7 o’clock. I assure the Minister that many Ministers are caught out slightly.

    Julia Lopez

    I appreciate that reassurance, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is all good exercise for me as I try to maintain my mobility over the coming weeks.

    I was about to say that I encouraged, on the Floor of the House, staff members to engage vigorously in the consultation that the BBC was running on the recent announcement. I was very glad that the BBC said last week that it will now undertake further work, in discussion with the Musicians’ Union, on the future of the BBC Singers. I also welcome the update that the BBC is engaging with the Musicians’ Union and other unions on its proposals on its English orchestras.

    We agree, however, that the BBC should focus on prioritising value for licence fee payers. We welcome the intent to pursue greater distinctiveness while increasing the regional and educational impact of the BBC’s performing groups. As my hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr Lord) pointed out in relation to the licence fee, the BBC is required to deliver the remit set out in its charter, which includes a mission to serve

    “all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain”.

    We think that the BBC should be prioritising using its £3.8 billion annual licence fee income to deliver that remit, which includes culturally distinctive content.

    The hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate laments the £3.8 billion that the BBC gets. We think that it is a substantial sum. Given the cost of living challenges that our constituents face, we did not feel it right to increase the licence fee by more. There is also a balance to be struck in maintaining consent for the licence fee. We think there was a risk that if the licence fee had been increased substantially, it would have reduced the public support for the organisation.

    I highlight again the fact that today we published the draft Media Bill, which is about underpinning our public service broadcasters in an increasingly competitive media environment. We hope that in doing so we will in turn underpin the future of British creativity. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept and welcome those proposals, which are substantial.

    Beyond the recent discussion of the BBC’s strategy for classical music, I want to recognise the wider support that the Government give to the arts. As has been highlighted, it is primarily delivered by an arm’s length body, Arts Council England. The policy area is within the remit of the arts and heritage Minister, Lord Parkinson, on whose behalf I speak today; I know that he has engaged extensively with hon. Members’ concerns, and I shall raise with him the suggestions from my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) about the potential Arts Council review and about transparency.

    To read some of the public narrative around the Arts Council, one would think that funding or support for classical music had ceased altogether, so I would like to put some context around some of the concerns that have been raised. In November last year, ACE announced the outcome of its major investment programme, which is known as the national portfolio. It is the largest national portfolio so far: 990 organisations are receiving funding, compared with 814 between 2018 and 2022, and 663 between 2015 and 2018.

    Overall, the investment programme is good news for orchestras and for classical music. Investment remains high in classical music and particularly in orchestral music organisations: 23 orchestral music organisations are being funded—an increase from 19 in the last round—at approximately £21 million per annum, which is £2 million more than in the previous year.

    Those statistics do not include some of the largest and best-funded organisations, including the Southbank Centre, which are not specifically focused on classical music but which play an important role in its success. Organisations including the Multi-Story Orchestra, Orchestras for All, Paraorchestra, the People’s Orchestra and Pegasus Opera are joining the national portfolio for the first time. We think that that will help to bring down barriers to classical music and celebrate the power that it can have in people’s lives, which several hon. Members have referred to this evening. We think that the new portfolio has particular strengths in supporting young people in classical music. It has new funding for Awards for Young Musicians and the National Children’s Orchestras of Great Britain. There is also an increase in funding for the National Youth Choirs of Great Britain and the National Youth Orchestra.

    The Arts Council has been thinking about how to build a fairer, more diverse classical music sector, and has commissioned a study entitled “Creating a More Inclusive Classical Music” to help it to understand the workforce, examine talent pathways, and think about how we might improve inclusion. A great deal of work has been done, not least through the broadening of the national portfolio, but the Arts Council will produce an update on its plans in the coming months. Its support for classical music goes well beyond orchestras. Some recent Arts Council support through lottery money includes backing for the Schubert 200 project, which will see Die Schöne Müllerin, Winterreise and Schwanengesang—I apologise for my pronunciation; I am relying on GCSE German—performed in new arrangements using period instruments and animated with puppetry, and £50,000 for one of our leading professional chamber choirs, The Sixteen, to support its summer pilgrimage.

    Concern has been expressed across the sector about the work of English National Opera and the outcome of the new portfolio. The Arts Council and ENO are working closely to reach an agreement on ENO’s future funding and business model. As I mentioned earlier, Lord Parkinson has met representatives of ENO and Members of Parliament to discuss this issue, the context being that the Arts Council made all its decisions independently of Government.

    Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)

    Let me say as a Mancunian that English National Opera would be more than welcome in Manchester, either to reside or to visit, but as a former director of the Hallé, I want to assure the people of this country that the classical ecosystem in our great city is well served. Will the Minister join me in welcoming Debbie Francis, OBE, as the new chair of the Hallé Concerts Society? She is the first woman to do that job in its 165-year history.

    Julia Lopez

    I do indeed welcome Debbie Francis to her position, and congratulate her on her success as the first female in the role.

    Questions have been raised about the overall strategic direction from the Secretary of State. The view was taken that London has a huge number of incredibly important cultural organisations, but that the value to be obtained from them should be spread more fairly across the country. As a London Member, I am always anxious to ensure that levelling up does not necessarily mean removing a resource from London, which is a city of 8 million people consisting of a huge range of communities with different needs and different levels of wealth. I do not believe that this should be a zero-sum game. However, a range of organisations in the rest of the country do not have such a strong voice in this place, and I think it important that communities throughout the country are benefiting from this funding, some of them for the first time. We should accept that that will make a huge and enriching contribution to people’s lives.

    Sir Robert Neill

    Let me add my congratulations to the Minister on what will happen in the coming weeks. I hope she will accept that there is a particular issue in relation to London, which professionals will clarify for anyone who talks to them. Most choristers in opera companies or orchestral players, for instance, will not rely entirely on their work for the opera company or orchestra concerned for their income; they top it up because they are able to do outside freelance work, such as session work, and also teaching work, sometimes at the colleges in London. There is an ecosystem that supports them and enables them to do their mainstream classical work, which is not the best paid. If they are taken out of the area where that ecosystem is, and where those alternative or additional employment opportunities are, it becomes much harder for them to survive. That is why plucking them out of London, or Manchester for that matter, does not work in practice in the way in which it may seem to work in theory.

    Julia Lopez

    I was going to make the same point about the importance of the ecosystem. However, these things can become self-fulfilling, and if we never attempt to spread the benefits of the arts beyond the capital city, they are always going to happen. This is about trying to achieve a balance. As London MPs, it is incumbent on us not to be over the top about the level of funding that has gone outside the capital. The capital still receives by far the lion’s share of arts funding and we are grateful for the richness it gives our capital, but we should bear in mind that a lot of communities have no arts funding at all and it is important they should have access.

    Bambos Charalambous

    The hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) and I made the point that many of these orchestras and opera companies tour, providing access to classical music in areas that would never otherwise have that access. By cutting or getting rid of some of these organisations, the Government are cutting back on the ability of people in other parts of the country to access the amazing classical work that they provide. It is not just about where the organisations are located; it is also about what they provide by touring.

    Julia Lopez

    I accept what the hon. Gentleman says about the importance of touring. I would also say that a lot of creators and musicians would like to have opportunities beyond London. London is not a cheap place to live, and they might welcome the idea that they might not have to concentrate their entire career in the capital, where housing is expensive and there are other challenges in relation to the cost of transport and so on. As the hon. Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane) said in that context, Manchester is not all that far away. It is important not to forget that a lot of people want opportunity to be spread across the country rather than concentrated in a single place—notwithstanding the fact that I am also a London MP and I totally understand the importance of our capital thriving, as it should.

    The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) highlighted the importance of early music education. That is something that Lord Parkinson and I are working on with the Department for Education. Classical music ensembles play a crucial role in cultural education and the development of young musicians. The inclusion of so many organisations that run music education programmes in the Arts Council portfolio speaks to the importance of providing a strong foundation in music from a young age.

    We have a refreshed national plan for music education. It launched last June and it aims to provide music opportunities for all children and young people, regardless of background, circumstances, need or geography. As part of the commitments we have made alongside that plan, £25 million of new funding has been made available so that we can purchase hundreds of thousands of musical instruments and equipment for young people, including adaptive instruments for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities so that they, too, can share the joy that music can provide. The refreshed plan also renews its commitment to the music hubs programme, which is delivered by the Arts Council and provides £79 million every year until 2025.

    Alongside these programmes, the Department co-funds the national youth music organisation programme with the Arts Council. All 15 national youth music organisations will receive Arts Council funding for the next three years, and earlier this week I was pleased to hear that the Department for Education had recognised this outstanding work and agreed to commit a further £1.5 million over the next three years as well. That is fantastic news because this programme will lead the way in developing young musicians and music makers.

    Mr Lord

    With the indulgence of the House, I would like to make a point about young musicians. Towards the end of last year I went to the final of the Woking young musician of the year competition. The standard was extraordinarily high, and it is a competition that does not cost the council or the taxpayer any money. It gives mentoring and advice to all the young musicians who put themselves forward for the competition. The big final had an extraordinarily high standard of musicianship. It has provided finalists and also a winner of the BBC musician of the year competition. I would encourage colleagues to encourage that sort of support locally.

    One other thing I would like to mention is that last year I attended the 100th concert of the Breinton concert series, in which a local family open their house to fantastic young and up-and-coming musicians of enormous talent. They have classical concerts and little bits of operetta, and as they are blessed with good grounds, in the summer people come and hear these amazing, normally young, musicians. Again, it is entirely self-funding. I would like to congratulate the organisers of the Breinton concerts, and it would be lovely to see that happen elsewhere in the south-east and in the country at large.

    Julia Lopez

    My hon. Friend does a wonderful job of highlighting all the wonderful activity in his constituency, including Woking young musician of the year. He highlights the joy of music and its huge impact on communities.

    The hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate raised the issue of tax reliefs. He will be aware that, in the spring statement, the Chancellor extended the higher rates of theatre tax relief, orchestra tax relief, and museums and galleries exhibition tax relief for a further two years. This will help to offset some of the ongoing economic pressures and boost investment in our cultural sectors, which we have been supporting substantially through some very difficult times, not least through covid and the energy challenges. This will ensure that they can continue to showcase the very best of British talent, not only in our recognised concert halls and theatres but in the many museums and other arts venues across the nation. The changes made in the Budget are estimated to be worth some £350 million, which is as strong a signal as we can send of the Government’s faith and support for our cultural sector.

    A wide range of other topics have been raised, including grassroots music venues. Today I met Mark Davyd, who represents grassroots music venues, to discuss support for such venues. We are looking at a range of measures that we might be able to take to support him. He was particularly grateful for some of the things the Government did through the pandemic and beyond. We are also working closely with the Intellectual Property Office, and with the industry itself, on some of the streaming questions.

    Exports have been raised, and we are considering the expansion of the music export growth scheme. We are also doing lots of work on touring, which was also raised in this debate. Discussions will continue on improving the touring offer, but we have already made quite substantial progress.

    The hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) talks about the importance of soft power and our relationship with Ukraine. It may have escaped his attention, but we will shortly host the Eurovision song contest on Ukraine’s behalf. We also have a huge package of cultural partnerships with Ukraine, so we are already doing a lot in that space.

    Of course, our flagship levelling-up fund is also supporting access to culture and the performing arts across the UK. The second round of funding was announced in January 2022, and it made 31 culture and heritage awards to projects across the country, to the tune of some £546 million. Chamber ensembles, soloists, orchestras and many more will now be able to perform in state-of-the-art spaces across our country, all because of that fund. This includes a new state-of-the-art site at Embassy Gardens in Nine Elms, which opened late last year and includes the first public concert hall to open in London in more than 13 years. We should recognise the huge investment we are making in our capital.

    Our cultural development fund has just launched, and the right hon. Member for Walsall South (Valerie Vaz) will be pleased to learn that Walsall Council will receive £3.7 million in that round to refurbish a currently unused grade II-listed building in the centre of the St Matthew’s quarter, and to deliver a three-year cultural activity plan that we hope will enliven and invigorate Walsall town centre.

    I hope Members will feel reassured by the support we give to classical music, which takes many forms. By investing in music education, supporting classical music organisations and promoting the industry, we are ensuring that classical music continues to thrive in this country. It remains an important contributor to our economy and to our cultural and social wellbeing. We hope that, now and for many years to come, people can continue to experience its many wonders.

    Question put and agreed to.

  • Jonathan Lord – 2023 Speech on Funding and Support for Classical Music

    Jonathan Lord – 2023 Speech on Funding and Support for Classical Music

    The speech made by Jonathan Lord, the Conservative MP for Woking, in the House of Commons on 29 March 2023.

    I am grateful, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to say two things. First, the funding cuts and the change of direction, particularly for the English National Opera, really affect some of our constituents, including musicians and singers in my constituency. Out of a clear blue sky, an organisation that is not just nationally famous but world famous and that undertakes all the tours that could be reasonably expected on the budget that it has, as well as performing happily at its home in London where it has made its name, has been subject to an Arts Council change that chucks everything up in the air. That is not acceptable, and I am pleased that there will be a review.

    Secondly, I congratulate both the hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate (Bambos Charalambous) on securing the debate and my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) on his work and campaigning. My hon. Friend spoke eloquently about the ENO; I agree with what he said, with the key questions he posed to the Minister and with the remedies he set out. We are still looking for a reasonable and satisfactory outcome for this world-famous opera company, and we look to the Minister for answers to those questions.

    We hope the Government will make the right recommendations and ultimately guide the House, but let us not take time over that. The problem is that now everything is up in the air and people are being made redundant. We need some certainty for the future, so let us have a review, but in the meantime let us ensure the support needed is there. I look to the Minister for replies that will help my constituents and, more importantly, help the opera-loving public and that wonderful opera company.

  • Valerie Vaz – 2023 Speech on Funding and Support for Classical Music

    Valerie Vaz – 2023 Speech on Funding and Support for Classical Music

    The speech made by Valerie Vaz, the Labour MP for Walsall South, in the House of Commons on 29 March 2023.

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate (Bambos Charalambous) for securing this debate and for allowing me to speak. I knew that the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) would be here, and I wish him a belated happy birthday for last Saturday. I, too, want to acknowledge the role that my hon. Friend the Member for Worsley and Eccles South (Barbara Keeley) has played in securing widespread support for the BBC Singers. The fight is not over; she will continue, and we will support her.

    I add my voice to everything that my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate, has said, although, hon. Members will be pleased to hear, not in song—I will stick to words. This is an extremely important topic. I start with classical music’s large body of work. I was taught the piano by my mother Merlyn when I was quite young. My first piece was Bach’s “Well-Tempered Clavier”, prelude No. 1. I still empty the room when I practise it. My daughter Liberty plays the violin and piano. She did an extended project for her A-level, entitled “Does exposure to music make you more intelligent?” She came down saying yes, it does, but if we have active participation.

    I appreciate that the Minister is going to give birth fairly soon. She does not need to buy “Baby Mozart”, but I encourage her to listen to relax. It is important for children to hear music in the womb it, and later on. The brain waves change when people listen to music. The same can be said of classical Indian music—Ravi Shankar with the sitar, which takes years to learn how to play, has exactly the same effect.

    We know how important music is for children. When I first came here in 2010, I asked the then Education Secretary to make sure that there is a piano in every school, because I grew up surrounded by music. José Abreu suggested that children can benefit from it and formed El Sistema, which has transformed children’s lives in Venezuela. It has now been rolled out throughout the world.

    We are lucky to have very good radio here. Classic FM is a must to listen to, and public broadcasting is important, as my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate, mentioned, as did the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Lord) in his intervention. We have BBC Radio 3—I do not know whether other hon. Members listen to “Building a Library”, but it is a fantastic programme. The Proms is the biggest music festival in the world—way before Glastonbury. It is so important that international artists come here from around the world. What our public broadcasters do is so important.

    I stumbled upon a documentary about the amazing genius that is Daniel Barenboim on BBC Four last week. The BBC had captured him at 25, conducting a masterclass. It was amazing. Even if someone did not know anything about music, they could see how he explained to the two pianists how they could change and make their music sound better. Added to that, he formed the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra with Edward Said. That is how amazing he is. They brought together young people from Israel, Palestine, Egypt and all across the middle east to play together. Daniel Barenboim said that when they play music, they are all equal—they are just playing Beethoven. It is so important that that continues. I missed the Prom where Martha Argerich and Daniel Barenboim played the piano together, but it was captured at the end of the documentary. I suggest that everyone tries to listen to it.

    Music is inspirational. We can see our achievement as human beings, because a few notes can show what creative people we are. It can start with classical music and move to other forms of music such as jazz and modern music. It forms the basis of every aspect of our life. We need to protect that, because music moves us—it moves our emotions and it speaks to our soul. I hope that the Minister will protect it.