Stephanie Peacock
MP for Barnsley South · Labour · United Kingdom
“It is a pleasure to conclude this debate. I am grateful to Members for their contributions and for the broad consensus that households facing fuel poverty and energy debt should receive support quickly, fairly and effectively. At its heart, this draft statutory instrument makes three targeted changes.”
“Secondly, the amendments, laid by the then Department for Science, Innovation and Technology on 6 July, specify that Department under the existing fuel poverty objective, enabling the Government Department responsible for data policy to support work assisting people living in fuel poverty, including the national data library kickstarter p…”
“We have cut VAT on electricity bills, expanded the warm home discount to around 6 million households, and are delivering the warm homes plan and fuel poverty strategy to reduce bills, improve energy efficiency and help to lift up to 1 million households out of fuel poverty by 2030.”
“I know that the right hon. Gentleman was a little bit late in arriving, but I did say that the scheme is the responsibility of the relevant Department. These regulations provide the legal framework for the data sharing. I now turn to the third amendment, which concerns the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero.”
“Member for North East Cambridgeshire asked me some questions about who is in scope and who will benefit from the scheme. Again, had he been listening to my contribution, he would have heard—I will repeat my comments—that the precise design of any scheme remains in development by the Government and Ofgem.”
“They provide the legal data-sharing basis that would allow an appropriately designed scheme to operate effectively. If such a scheme proceeds, it is estimated to reduce the administrative burdens involved in identifying eligible households and providing further support to families in need.”
The complete record
Every one of 609 lines we hold for Stephanie Peacock, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 13.
“My Department continues to monitor progress. I will reflect his comments to the ECB and I will write to him, and if it is helpful, we can certainly set up a meeting. I know that I have not covered all the points, but I intend to address them in my speech. As we watch the England men’s team, it is important to remember that each player began their cricket journey at a grassroots club. Grassroots cricket reaches a broad and diverse range of communities. For example, a third of recreational players come from south Asian backgrounds that overwise make up just 8% of the overall population, as the hon. Member for Leicester South said. He asked specifically about women’s cricket, as did a number of other Members, which I will talk about a few times in my speech.”
“Member for Bath spoke about funding being cancelled, and the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Isle of Wight East, spoke about funding being allocated. The simple truth is that the previous Government announced £35 million, but it was not costed or delivered. This Government are not only funding facilities with £400 million over the spending review period, but also through Sport England funding of more than £250 million, and an additional £1.5 million for cricket domes, so I simply do not recognise the characterisation of the points that those three Members made. The hon. Member for Leicester South made an important point about the importance of cricket to his community and gave an interesting overview of the long history of the sport. I want to pick up the point about the Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket.”
“We debated broadcasting and cricket on 9 September in this very Chamber. Broadcasting revenue is, of course, very important to the ECB and is reinvested into sport. The Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone), made a similar point. It is important to remember that the evidence shows that watching live sport is the thing that most inspires people to get involved, so it is a balance. I will come to cricket domes shortly, but I want to address the point about funding head-on. Language is very important, and it is particularly important in this place. The hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) spoke about a commitment and the previous Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak). The hon.”
“We intend to start a new teacher-training programme, which aims to reach more than 160,000 students over the next year, and to train 1,000 teachers by 2030. I am happy to write to the hon. Lady with more details if she is interested. My hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) made an important point, which I really appreciate, about flood damage. I had a similar challenge in my own constituency, albeit with a football club, rather than a cricket club. Sport England’s movement fund can offer specific support for flood damaged facilities. I will perhaps write to my hon. Friend after the debate and can facilitate a meeting, if that would be helpful, with Sport England to help her and her club. The hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson), who is no longer in his place, made a point about broadcasting.”
“Member for South Antrim (Robin Swann), asked me specifically about engaging with my counterparts. I am always delighted to do that; I visited Northern Ireland a few weeks ago and met with and chaired a meeting of Sports Ministers. I am also due to meet them tomorrow in relation to a separate subject. I am always keen to engage. There were a number of questions about private schools, and I can see the huge benefit from opening up facilities. A good example from Birmingham was given, and I will certainly reflect on the points made to the Department for Education. The hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) asked me specifically about class, disparity and some of the statistics. I share her concerns and her worry. To close that gap, we want to increase opportunities for state school children.”
“The hon. Lady makes an incredibly important point—one that I am sure all Members agree with. Indeed, I have seen that in my own constituency of Barnsley South. I visited Darfield cricket club a few months ago, and since we last debated cricket in this Chamber, my town lost the late, great Dickie Bird, who hailed from Barnsley. I pay tribute to all the work he did over a long and happy life. My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Edgbaston (Preet Kaur Gill), who is no longer in her place, spoke about the importance of her local club, Harborne cricket club. Indeed, my cousin and his family have been members of that club for many years. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) gave many examples of clubs in his local community, and his colleague from Northern Ireland, the hon.”
“We intend for the Secretary of State to report to Parliament every six months, beginning in July 2026, six months after the notification and publication requirements come into force. If a state-owned investor makes an acquisition that results in them having a direct holding in a newspaper of more than 5%, and does not comply with the notification and publication requirements, the Secretary of State will be compelled to issue a foreign-state intervention notice, and refer the case to the Competition and Markets Authority. Essentially, the regulations address the remote risk of multiple state-owned investors from different countries each investing 15% in one newspaper, and further improve transparency around investment. Both those things benefit the UK press sector and the role that it plays in our democracy.”
“The draft regulations also impose new transparency requirements on state-owned investors that acquire shares or voting rights in UK newspaper enterprises. They must notify the Secretary of State if acquiring a direct holding of more than 5% in a newspaper, before the end of a period of 14 days after the relevant transaction is made. If a state-owned investor is required to notify the Secretary of State, they must also publish certain details of their investment within the same timeframe of 14 days. That will allow the Secretary of State to report to Parliament on the published details of acquisitions. The purpose of those requirements on state-owned investors and the regular report is to improve the confidence of both the public and Parliament through greater transparency about news enterprise ownership.”
“To make the limit workable, the regulations also introduce a specific and narrow exemption for holdings of 5% or below in quoted companies. This will apply only when calculating whether the 15% cap has been reached in cases where multiple state-owned investors from different countries or territories all have investments in the same newspaper. That exemption will avoid a chilling effect on legitimate inward investment by removing the need for state-owned investors to take account of existing, undisclosed, small direct or indirect investments in the same newspaper. Holdings in companies with publicly traded shares are not disclosed unless they cross certain thresholds; 5% is a common benchmark, beyond which the investor must declare the interest to the company and wider market.”
“The Government made a commitment to deliver today’s draft regulations; in fact, it was I, as Media Minister, who first made that commitment in the Third Delegated Legislation Committee on 18 June. While we considered it a remote risk, we saw the concerns in this House and in the other place, and committed to putting the matter beyond doubt through an additional statutory instrument. That is what brings us here today, having consulted on the draft regulations, with the response published on 30 October. The draft regulations will introduce a 15% cap on investments in a newspaper by a state-owned investor acting on behalf of foreign powers of different countries or territories. That will apply to the combined total of direct and indirect holdings of shares or voting rights.”
“The regime has a low bar for intervention. Regardless of whether there is an intention to influence, if the Secretary of State has “reasonable grounds for suspecting” that a foreign power may hold the ability to influence or control the policy of a UK newspaper enterprise as a result of a merger, she must intervene. This is not discretionary. During the parliamentary scrutiny process in the lead-up to the debate on the 15% targeted exemptions, colleagues raised concerns about a potential unintended consequence that could allow multiple state-owned investors acting on behalf of foreign powers of different countries or territories to each invest 15% in one newspaper enterprise. The argument was made that foreign state-owned investors could collectively own the majority of a newspaper enterprise.”
“Just as we value the importance of a press that is independent from Government in the UK, we must equally ensure that foreign states are unable to assert influence over this sector. The foreign state influence regime carefully balances these two priorities: an independent press and the importance of investment in the sector. In July, the Government introduced targeted exemptions to allow certain state-owned investors to invest up to 15% in UK newspapers and news periodicals. This approach will still limit any scope for foreign state control or influence of news organisations, while giving newspapers much-needed flexibility to seek business investment that supports their long-term sustainability. The 15% ceiling is lower than the level at which the Competition and Markets Authority generally identifies that material influence arises.”
“I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Enterprise Act 2002 (Mergers Involving Newspaper Enterprises and Foreign Powers) (No. 2) Regulations 2025. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Jardine. I am pleased to speak about the draft regulations, which were laid before the House on 30 October. They form an important part of the foreign state influence newspaper mergers regime, which is designed to protect our newspapers and news magazines from foreign state influence and control, while permitting legitimate investment that can support newspapers to thrive at a challenging time for the industry. An independent press is crucial for our democracy.”
“Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill made—removing any chilling effect that may occur as a result of requiring a state-owned investor to be aware of undisclosed smallholdings from other countries in quoted companies before deciding whether they can invest. I do not recognise the delay. It is a complex piece of legislation. I took the other instruments through Parliament; I believe that this Government have moved apace and that we will crack on. The shadow Minister will of course appreciate that I cannot comment on The Daily Telegraph , but I draw his attention to the written ministerial statement placed on record by the Secretary of State on 24 November. Question put and agreed to.”
“I appreciate the shadow Minister’s comments and the broad support that he and his party have given. I read the Lords Hansard debate, so I am familiar with some of the topics that were discussed in the other place. I join the shadow Minister and other Members in paying tribute to the work of Baroness Stowell; it is a fair representation to say that she felt these regulations were a proportionate way forward. Indeed, DCMS officials have worked very hard with several Members of Parliament. To respond to concerns raised about the 5% exemption, I highlight the narrow applicability: it applies in very limited circumstances and for an explicit and important purpose—which speaks to the intervention the hon.”
“We regularly engage with colleagues across Government on issues that affect young people, especially through the development of our national youth strategy. This year alone we are investing over £145 million to deliver projects that reflect young people’s priorities across our country.”
“Our national youth strategy focuses on rebuilding youth services so that young people have access to people who care, something to do and places to go. A key aspect of our forthcoming youth strategy will be to ensure that funding goes to grassroots organisations such as Bletchley youth centre, and I would be delighted to visit when my diary allows.”
“The Government are taking a new approach to youth services, rebuilding the landscape and improving local co-ordination. We regularly engage with colleagues across Government to drive this shift through the development of our national youth strategy that is co-produced with young people.”
“Indeed, Mr Speaker; we have a brilliant one opening in Barnsley very shortly. My hon. Friend makes an incredibly powerful point. This Government are taking a new approach to youth services, which is why we will be launching our national youth services strategy shortly.”
“The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right and makes an important point. Youth services are vital for giving young people safe, healthy and fulfilling lives. Under the last Government, 1,200 youth centres closed their doors and 4,500 youth workers lost their jobs. That is why this Government are taking a different approach.”
“This Government believe in the power of grassroots sport, which is why we announced investment of more than £400 million in the future of grassroots facilities. Our ambition is for girls to have equal access to any facility that we fund, doubling access to priority slots for women and girls over this Parliament.”
“We support all aspects of sport for women and girls, and we are working alongside the sport sector and local leaders to develop a place-based approach to funding. We launched our women’s sport taskforce to drive a decade of change in women’s sport. We will ensure that we deliver facilities that each area needs, so that women and girls can participate in sport in Greater Manchester and across the UK.”
“The hon. Gentleman refers to a consultation being carried out by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and I have spoken to my ministerial counterpart. I remind the hon. Gentleman that it is this Government who have announced £400 million for grassroots facilities.”
“The Chancellor set out the Budget yesterday. We believe that we have made fair choices. The Minister responsible for gambling will have heard the hon. Gentleman’s question, and I will relay it to her.”
“This Government know that football reaches people like nothing else, and in the summer of 2028 it will bring people together across the whole of the UK. I was pleased to chair a meeting of sport Ministers a few weeks ago to discuss the tournament and its legacy. Glasgow is of course due to host five matches at the tournament, which will bring significant benefits.”
“My hon. Friend makes an important point. This Government are committed to ensuring that short-term lets actively benefit our local communities, and we will implement a short-term lets registration scheme in England in 2026. I know that this issue is of significant interest to Members from across the House, and I would be delighted to meet him to discuss it further.”
“I again thank all Members who spoke this afternoon, and everyone who signed and engaged with the petition to enable this debate to take place.”
“With that in mind, DCMS, as the lead Department for video game policy, and DBT, as the lead Department for consumer protection, have engaged the Chartered Trading Standards Institute. The institute maintains the Business Companion guide to businesses on complying with consumer law, including in relation to digital content. Following this debate, our two Departments will consider the case for asking the institute to develop guidance to help businesses to ensure that the information provided to video game consumers accurately reflects existing consumer protections. It is vital to take into account the rights of consumers, while continuing to support the growth of our world-leading video game industry, with its benefits to the wider economy.”
“We welcome ongoing discussions between the industry, national museums, libraries and archives about developing standards for game preservation. We encourage video game developers and publishers to continue considering preservation efforts when developing, releasing and supporting their games. In the Government response to the petition, we pledged to monitor the issue and to consider the relevant work of the Competition and Markets Authority on consumer rights and consumer detriment. We do not think that mandating end-of-life plans is proportionate or enforceable, but we recognise the concerns of gamers about whether information on what they are purchasing is always sufficiently clear.”
“Our role is to ensure that those selling and purchasing games are clear about their obligations and protections under UK consumer law. I will touch briefly on the subject of video game preservation, which is an important issue for the gaming community, and one that my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk rightly spoke about. The Government recognise the cultural value of games and actively support initiatives that promote and support that, whether through cultural institutions such as the National Videogame Museum and London’s Science Museum, digital distribution platforms, or individual video game companies donating their games and hardware to preservation organisations. We recognise that preserving games can be uniquely complex, in particular when they rely on specific hardware or software to function as intended.”
“Finally, and perhaps most importantly from the perspective of gamers, there are the safety and security impacts to consider. Under the Online Safety Act 2023, video game companies are responsible for controlling exposure to harmful content in their games. Removing official moderation from servers or enabling community-hosted servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed to such content. Security threats could also be more likely if player data is no longer protected on official servers. Although the Government are, of course, supportive of businesses that are able to implement end-of-life plans voluntarily, we do not think that a blanket requirement is proportionate or in the interests of businesses or consumers.”
“If they proved to be too risky or burdensome, they could discourage the innovation that is the beating heart of this art form. Secondly, the approach carries commercial and legal risks. If an end-of-life plan involves handing online servers over to consumers, it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services. It could also result in reputational harm for video game businesses that no longer officially support their games if illegal or harmful activity took place. The campaign is clear in its statement that it would not ask studios to pay to support games indefinitely. However, it is hard to see solutions to these issues that do not involve significant time, personnel and monetary investment.”
“The Government are sympathetic to the concerns raised, but we also recognise the challenges of delivering such aims from the perspective of the video game industry. First, such a change would have negative technical impacts on video game development. It is true that there are some games for which it would be relatively simple to patch an offline mode after its initial release. However, for games whose systems have been specifically designed for an online experience, this would not be possible without major redevelopment. Requiring an end-of-life plan for all games would fundamentally change how games are developed and distributed. Although that may well be the desired outcome for some campaigners, it is not right to say that the solutions would be simple or inexpensive, particularly for smaller studios.”
“The Government are clear that the law works, but companies might need to communicate better. In response to a specific point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley, I should say that it is particularly important in cases where projects fail or games have to be pulled shortly after launch that the information provided to consumers is clear and timely. Furthermore, I understand that campaigners argue that rather than just providing clear information, games should be able to be enjoyed offline after developer support has ended, either through an update or a patch, or by handing over service to the gaming community to enable continued online play—in other words, mandating the inclusion of end-of-life plans for always online video games.”
“The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 requires information to consumers to be clear and correct, and prohibits commercial practices that, through false or misleading information, cause the average consumer to make a different choice. Points and questions about this issue were made by a number of Members, including the hon. Members for Dundee Central (Chris Law), for Stratford-on-Avon (Manuela Perteghella) and for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon), and my hon. Friends the Members for Colchester (Pam Cox), for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) and for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards). Points were made about consumer law and ownership. UK law is very clear: it requires information to consumers to be clear and correct.”
“For gamers used to dusting off their Nintendo 64 to play “Mario Kart” whenever they like—or in my case, “Crash Bandicoot” on the PlayStation—without the need for an internet connection, that can be frustrating, but it is a legitimate practice that businesses are entitled to adopt, so it is essential that consumers understand what they are paying for. Existing legislation is clear that consumers are entitled to information that enables them to make informed purchasing decisions confidently. Under existing UK legislation, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires that digital content must be of satisfactory quality, fit for a particular purpose and described by the seller. It also requires that the terms and conditions applied by a trader to a product that they sell must not be unfair, and must be prominent and transparent.”
“However, the video game industry has changed a lot over recent decades in ways that directly impact the way that these licences are sold under law. First, video game development today is more complex, and it is done at a much greater scale than 40 years ago. Secondly, the format of video games has shifted from physical to digital. As a result, the approach to protecting intellectual property has changed, including the “always online” functionality—the most relevant to this debate—which requires games to maintain a constant connection to an online server.”
“Games are more complex than ever before to develop and maintain, with the largest exceeding the budget of a modern Hollywood blockbuster. That can make it extremely challenging to implement plans for video games after formal support for them has ended and risks creating harmful unintended consequences for gamers, as well as for video game companies. A number of Members have made points about ownership. It is important to note that games have always been licensed to consumers rather than sold outright. In the 1980s, tearing the wrapping on a box to a games cartridge was the way that gamers agreed to licensing terms. Today, that happens when we click “accept” when buying a game on a digital storefront. Licensing video games is not, as some have suggested, a new and unfair business practice.”
“With that in mind, the Government recognise the strength of feeling behind the campaign that led to the debate. The petition attracted nearly 190,000 signatures. Similar campaigns, including a European Citizens’ Initiative, reached over a million signatures. There has been significant interest across the world. Indeed, this is a global conversation. The passion behind the campaign demonstrates that the core underlying principle is a valid one: gamers should have confidence in the right to access the games that they have paid to play. At the same time, the Government also recognise the concerns from the video gaming industry about some of the campaign’s asks. Online video games are often dynamic, interactive services—not static products—and maintaining online services requires substantial investment over years or even decades.”
“At DCMS, we are very pleased to be championing video games across Government. The Government take their role in supporting video games, both as an industry and as an art form, very seriously. We are all aware of the economic power and potential for growth in the sector. That was highlighted in the creative industries sector plan and is why we have committed £30 million investment through our games growth package. Gaming’s place in culture is equally important, and that has really featured in the debate. For more than 40 years, video games have been entertaining audiences of all ages, and today, the vast majority of young people will grow up playing video games and making memories that they will carry with them throughout their lives. Video games, much like films and music, have become cultural touchstones.”
“Friend the Member for South Norfolk. My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner) spoke about the wider benefits of gaming. I am aware of the “Power of Play” report, which gives an insight into the social purpose of gaming. My hon. Friend the Member for Mid and South Pembrokeshire (Henry Tufnell) spoke about the vital importance of our creative landscape, and I will address his points on ownership and consumer rights throughout my speech, but I will answer his questions with a simple yes—it is important that we have effective advice and information. I am delighted to be a champion for the creative industries. I am indeed standing in for the Minister of State. This is not my policy area, but it is an area shared between the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department for Business and Trade.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Mundell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) for introducing this important debate, everyone who signed the petition raising this important issue, and all the contributors to the debate. It has been really interesting and thought provoking to hear the different perspectives and experiences. Some of the figures shared during the debate really brought to life the importance of the sector. It contributes £7.6 billion and tens of thousands of jobs to the economy, and, as the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson) mentioned, millions of gamers up and down the country enjoy gaming daily. The Government recognise that gaming makes a huge economic contribution and that it is a cultural powerhouse, in the words of my hon.”
“This Government are proud to play a part in the continued growth and success of the motorsport industry. We have recently published the advanced manufacturing sector plan, which has automotive at its heart, aiming to nearly double the annual business investment in the sector to £39 billion by 2035, with 84% of advanced manufacturing jobs based outside London.”
“I would of course like to congratulate McLaren on back-to-back Formula 1 constructors’ championship victories, and I am sure the support it receives in Woking is no small part of that. Alongside the Secretary of State, I attended the British grand prix in the summer and witnessed McLaren and Britain’s own Lando Norris claim victory. My Department will continue to stay in close contact with Formula 1, and I will reflect his comments to the Chancellor.”
“The Government are committed to supporting the visitor economy in rural and coastal communities, because we recognise the potential the sector has to contribute to economic growth and to the pride in place of an area. Through ongoing dialogue with other Departments and Ministers, we are exploring how best to support communities and businesses, including through our forthcoming visitor economy growth plan.”
“I recognise how important the tourism and hospitality sectors are to Suffolk, and I know that my hon. Friend is a strong champion for them and for her area. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport works closely with other Departments, including DESNZ and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, to ensure that the needs of the visitor economy are considered as part of the planning and delivery of large-scale projects. The Government acknowledge concerns that numerous projects may be consented to in one region, and the cumulative impacts of schemes are considered as they move individually through the NSIP regime. I will reflect her comments to MHCLG, but of course such large infrastructure projects are important for the country.”
“I have heard the right hon. Gentleman’s point. I am sure that the relevant Secretary of State and indeed the Scottish Government have heard it. I would be happy to meet him to discuss it further.”
“I know from my own experience, from Members across the House and from my constituents, of the deep unhappiness with CISWO. As Charities Minister, I met representatives of the Charity Commission to discuss CISWO’s support for coal mining communities, and I know the commission is in contact with CISWO. I encourage the chief executive officer and trustees to reflect on how they deliver their charitable purposes in the light of the dissatisfaction expressed by hon. Members and local communities, and I strongly encourage CISWO to strengthen its engagement with the local coalfield communities that it was established to support.”
“I understand my hon. Friend’s grave concerns, which are reflected across our coalfield communities. I am deeply troubled to hear the example he shares with the House. Charities must stay true to their charitable purposes and act within the law and the terms of their governing document. Where they fail to do so, it is right that we have the Charity Commission as the independent regulator to investigate. I am happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss his concerns in more detail. That invitation is open to any Member of the House, as it is clear to me that concerns regarding CISWO are sincerely held. I once again reiterate my encouragement for the CEO and trustees to reflect on how they deliver their charitable purposes for the coalfield communities they are meant to represent.”
“We will soon be launching our national youth strategy, created with young people and designed to tackle the problems affecting them. As part of that work, we engage regularly with Cabinet colleagues on ensuring that the problems impacting young people are heard and properly tackled. This financial year, DCMS is investing over £145 million in youth funding.”