Caroline Dinenage MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Sept 2026 · Tourism: Overnight Visitor Levy · Hansard source

  More

  I must admit that I am really puzzled by the Minister’s statement. The visitor levy is not going to be ringfenced for tourism, so how does he know that it will go to its intended destination? The levy will not be capped. We normally tax things to stop people doing them, not to encourage them to do more of them. What evidence can he offer to demonstrate that this measure will bring growth, as he says? What work have the Government actually done to prepare for this measure? How will they know whether hospitality businesses—let us face it, they are already collapsing in their droves following decisions that the Government have already taken—will survive yet another tax being imposed on them?

• 8 Sept 2026 · Online Safety · Hansard source

  More

  I also warmly welcome this announcement. The sheer number of young people whose lives have been impacted by this issue is a damning indictment of a collective failure to keep children safe. Let us not forget that major tech companies have the capability to implement device-level controls but have chosen not to do so. As far as I am concerned, it is simply unforgivable that those companies innovate quickly on new products, yet so slowly on children’s safety. Given Ofcom’s sluggish implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023, can the Secretary of State explain to me how compliance with this policy will be monitored, and what sanctions will be available to address non-compliance?

• 3 Sept 2026 · Sporting Events Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston) in welcoming our hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) to her role—I know that she will be excellent. I also want to pay tribute to him as her predecessor. He was an exceptional Minister and shadow Secretary of State. He has always been an exceptional champion for the sectors that DCMS represents, and I know that he will be a formidable and quite terrifying Back Bencher as well, so it was a pleasure to hear from him. At the risk of universal agreement breaking out from all corners of the room, I too widely support the Bill. Sport is one of our country’s greatest strengths and most successful worldwide exports. Major sporting occasions represent such a huge source of national pride and inspiration, as the Secretary of State said. They are a massive driver of tourism, investment and jobs, and when they are done correctly, their legacy can have tentacles that go on forever. We are world class at delivering them. We know that British athletes and sportsmen are representing us on the world stage with the most phenomenal success. I was exceptionally proud of the UK deaf athletes who claimed 12 medals, including five gold, at the Tokyo 2025 Deaflympics, despite the fact that they received no public funding. They are elite athletes who make our country very proud. I say this as a gentle reminder to the Minister, given that sports is the theme today, to look again at their eligibility for UK Sport funding. Our strength is reflected not only in our participation and elite performance, but in our ability to host and showcase some of the world’s most significant sporting events. This small island gave the world some of our best-loved sports—from football to cricket, lawn tennis to boxing, rugby to snooker. We may not always lead the world as we did in those halcyon days of the 1700s, when the small village of Hambledon in Hampshire, known as the cradle of cricket, took on the rest of the world and won, but iconic British fixtures, from the premier league to Wimbledon, the British grand prix to the grand national, are globally synonymous with their sports. They bring people to our shores, generate economic growth, inspire participation and project the United Kingdom’s reputation around the world. That reputation is under pressure. The gap in soft power between the UK and our competitor nations is closing. Brand Finance has said that the UK has recorded a “sharper-than-average” drop in soft power, and the British Council says that the lead that western nations, including the UK, hold over our competitors is “narrowing”. That is why—I gently say to the Front Bench—it is disappointing that the Government’s action on soft power has failed to keep pace with their rhetoric. I really welcomed the creation of the UK Soft Power Council, but it cannot even claim to be a talking shop when it has met only four times in the last 18 months and the Culture Secretary, whom I admire enormously and who chairs it, has attended only twice. It needs to put together a coherent strategy, and if it did, major events would play a significant role. Our DCMS Committee will shortly report back on our recent inquiry into major events. The UK’s events sector is an engine for so much growth, but it has received limited attention from the Government until now. They could be doing so much more to unleash its potential and ease some of its constraints, so this Bill is a good place to start to redress that balance. In particular, given that when done well the ratio of investment to return on these kinds of things is so high, it makes sense for the Government to do all they can to attract opportunities to hold all kinds of major events, particularly sporting events. The Sport and Recreation Alliance told our Committee, as part of our inquiry: “Dedicated major events legislation would strengthen the UK’s global position as a key destination for major sporting events”, so I really support the principle of the Bill. Bespoke legislation for individual events creates uncertainty and is unwieldly and impractical. The framework introduced by this new legislation is welcomed by everybody—organisers, rights holders, sponsors and hosts. Our noble colleagues in the other place made such important improvements by widening the legislation to include other substantial annual events. To be honest, that is something our Committee would have introduced, had it not already been done—I suppose we should not be at all surprised that amendments proposed by the Paralympic medallist Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson have won that race. As she said, legislation in this area does not come along often, so we must take advantage of the opportunity. When Parliament has the chance to establish the framework, we should ensure that it is robust enough to support not only the next tournament but the ecosystem that exists all year. The benefits of the Bill in its amended form—creating offences on ticket touting, ambush marketing, and unauthorised trading and association—will be felt not just by the one-off totemic events, but by the stalwarts. That is why I am so grateful to the Secretary of State for her signal today that the Government do not intend to remove the amendments made in the House of Lords. Throughout our Committee’s inquiry, the evidence we received underlined a few wider concerns. The major events sector does not always feel recognised as a strategic national asset. Particularly organisers outside the world of sport often feel excluded from national planning and policymaking. The flower shows, cultural festivals, music festivals and military tattoos attract tourists, create jobs and bring people together, yet many witnesses told us that they do not feel recognised in the same way as their sporting counterparts. Across the board, the events sector is asking for better co-ordination and the removal of barriers that prevent it from reaching its economic potential. Witness after witness called for better cross-Government working, clearer points of contact, streamlined approvals and a more coherent long-term strategy. I appreciate that the Bill aims to make the United Kingdom more competitive in winning bids to host international sporting events, but it does not do much to alleviate the concerns that we have heard from other event organisers across the country about things such as the weight of bureaucracy, the cost of policing and the integration of events with transport plans, to name just a few. During the passage of the Bill in the other place, I was grateful to hear that the Government have promised a major events strategy, which we welcome. We hope that the Government will lean heavily on the conclusions and recommendations in our Committee’s report when it is published. I want to say one final thing about the contribution of business events. They really should not be forgotten. Conferences, exhibitions and trade fairs generate huge economic value for the UK and bring in massive inward investment. More than a million conferences and business meetings take place in the UK every year, generating £33.6 billion for the UK economy. Given its firepower, it is almost laughable that there is not an industrial strategy for the sector alone. The business events sector means business. We will shortly be releasing a stand-alone report on the topic, which I hope the Government are minded to take note of. In conclusion, this Bill is a welcome step. It has the potential to strengthen the UK’s ability to compete for and host major sporting events. It provides a more consistent framework and reflects the importance of sport to our economies, communities and international standing, but it needs to be the starting point of the conversation. For those reasons, I support the Bill’s objectives, welcome the improvements made in the other place and encourage the Government to see it as the beginning of a wider and more ambitious vision for the future.

• 3 Sept 2026 · Access to Sport: Poorer Families · Hansard source

  More

  I know that the Minister cares deeply about increasing sporting participation, so she must be as disappointed as I am that the Government’s rhetoric just does not match the facts. School sport funding has been cut; business rates rises mean that clubs and facilities are raising their participation fees, some by as much as 85%, making them less accessible for the poorest; local authorities are shutting their facilities; and the UK ranks near the bottom of EU expenditure on sport and physical activity. The Government say that this is important, but how can we believe them when existing facilities are shutting faster than they can invest in new ones?