Chris Bryant MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 27 Feb 2025 · Television Industry: Wales · Hansard source

  More

  I think it is a three-part series, Mr Speaker. I commend the hon. Lady on managing to get gigabit-capable broadband, which is my other responsibility as a Department for Science, Innovation and Technology Minister, into this session. We are determined to try to make sure that across her constituency, everybody is able to take part in the digital future. Incidentally, that is why we published a digital inclusion strategy yesterday, which I very much hope all Members will support.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Television Industry: Wales · Hansard source

  More

  I am glad to say that we have a thriving TV industry in Wales. We have not only our own broadcaster, S4C, but phenomenal studios, including Dragon Studios just outside my constituency, where “Willow” was produced with the magnificent Warwick Davis. And, above all, we have “Gavin and Stacey”. I know that it is completely out of order, Mr Speaker, but can I say thank you to Dawn in the Tea Room, who is retiring today?

• 27 Feb 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I would be absolutely delighted to come to St Kilda. I think there are quite a lot of Members who would quite like to send me to St Kilda for a very prolonged period. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] It is nice to unite the House, isn’t it? You’re so cruel! My hon. Friend makes a very important point. The archipelago of St Kilda is unique. Since the last 36 people left in 1930, it has been run by the National Trust. As he says, it is a double UNESCO world heritage site and we want to ensure that we make the best of it—

• 27 Feb 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  As the Secretary of State referred to, I had that conversation yesterday, and I think a lot of people in the European Union and Commission are keen to reset their relationship with the UK, in particular in this regard. I will not name the European Minister, but when I sat down opposite him and asked, “What’s the most important thing I can do for you?”, he replied, “Get me tickets for Oasis.” I think it is very important that people are able to see our great musicians touring across the whole of Europe.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I think Kate Bush was running up that hill, too. Look, the truth of the matter is, as I have said many times, that we will not progress in this area unless we are absolutely certain that we will secure more licensing of content by British creatives, rather than less. That is absolutely key to what would be success for us. I hope that people will take us at face value on that.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday I met people from LIVE, and we are still very keen on trying to ensure that there is a levy on arena tickets to make provision for small music venues across the UK. That is where most young people will have their first experience of live music. We are determined to get there as soon as possible. I would just like to correct the record, Mr Speaker. I said earlier that the £85 million would apply across the whole of the UK. I was wrong, of course—it is only England.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Small Theatres and Performing Arts Venues · Hansard source

  More

  I commend my hon. Friend and all those who have engaged as volunteers to try to take over the theatre and run it in an effective way. I look forward to the first production; after all, “The play’s the thing”— I saw “Hamlet” last week, and “Richard II” twice. The most important thing is that we try to ensure that young people have an opportunity to act and have a creative education in their school, and that there are local theatres and other venues where they are able to see really high-quality live entertainment, such as in the theatre he is talking about. I am very happy to ensure that officials meet his volunteers.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Small Theatres and Performing Arts Venues · Hansard source

  More

  We are absolutely committed to supporting small and large theatres across the UK. It is one reason why we have specifically announced capital funding, as the Secretary of State has said, of £85 million for theatre and other cultural infrastructure across the UK.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Small Theatres and Performing Arts Venues · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman used to be in the Treasury, so he is very good at making financial bids and I think he has just made a bid on behalf of Salisbury’s theatre. We warmly commend the work it is doing. As I have said, it is brilliant if we can get lots of kids coming into theatres. I want every single child, as part of their education, to be able to see live theatre and live music, because that is a part of what stirs their creative opportunities in life. Yes, we are looking at whether there are other ways of bringing in not only commercial money but philanthropic money to try to match-fund the funding that can come from government.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Electronic Travel Authorisations: Tourism · Hansard source

  More

  I am absolutely delighted that even the Liberal Democrats are citing our target of 50 million international visitors by 2030; we have got that into this session three times now. The hon. Lady is right—of course we have to bear in mind all the issues that could affect those numbers. I do not know whether she has seen the recent video produced by VisitBritain, “Starring GREAT Britain”, which includes film clips from James Bond, Tom Cruise and many others, but we are determined, through the visitor economy advisory council, to make sure that we reach those numbers. We will work with the Home Office to try to mitigate the problems that we may have.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Electronic Travel Authorisations: Tourism · Hansard source

  More

  We are absolutely determined to reach our goal of 50 million international visitors to the UK by 2030. I am very hopeful that the electronic travel authorisation system will be simpler and make it easier and safer for people to visit the UK in the coming years.

• 27 Feb 2025 · Electronic Travel Authorisations: Tourism · Hansard source

  More

  One of the problems with the Conservatives is that they want us to endlessly spend more money on things, but they do not want to find the money that enables us to afford that expenditure. There are lots of things that affect the tourism industry in the UK —incidentally, I think the hon. Gentleman mistook his millions for his billions in what he said—but it is really important that we look at how we can extend the season in the UK and make sure that more international visitors do not just come to London and the south-east, but go to places across the whole of the United Kingdom. That is precisely the kind of thing that I hope we will be able to incorporate into our national tourism strategy this autumn. It will be the first time that the UK has ever had one.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  No, I do not. I am trying to make a very simple point: many factors have contributed to the mental health problems that many young people have, and social media is undoubtedly one. The question is, how do we rate and address all those different factors? As the hon. Member for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins) said, we must address this from a public health angle, and that is essential. But then, when we have the whole bag of evidence, rather than just individual bits of evidence, the question is, what is the most useful intervention that we can make? I want to come on to the definition issues. Several Members raised the issue of what social media is. That is partially addressed by the Online Safety Act, but we may want to go further. As to the reason why the previous Government landed on 13 rather than 16—which was an option available to them—the consultation at the time came back with 13. It is interesting that Members referred to content availability and to there being two ages in the UK that are generally reckoned to be part of the age of majority: 16 and 18. Actually, for film classification, it is 12 and 15. There is an argument for saying that we ought to look at film classification because it is long established and—although the issues are different in many regards—some of them are similar. We might want to learn from that—I say this from my Department for Culture, Media and Sport angle—to inform the debate on this matter. On enforcement, several Members referred to the fact that there is no point in just changing the law; if we do that but have no form of enforcement, that is worse than useless. That is one of the Government’s anxieties, and we need to make sure that the enforcement process works properly. I take the point that there are two areas where Ofcom feels it is unable to act, because the law does not allow it to do so, and we will need to look at that. That is why we are keen to get to the moment in April when the two codes will be voted on in Parliament. We will then make sure that Ofcom has not just the powers but the ability to enforce. As my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Mrs Russell) said, Ofcom has the power to fine up to £18 million, or 10% of qualifying worldwide revenue in the relevant year, which could be a substantial amount, but it needs to ensure it is in a legally effective position to do so. My final point is that the Secretary of State has made it clear that nothing is off the table. We are keen to act in this space. The question is, how do we act most proportionately and effectively in a way that tackles the real problem? Some of that is about how the evidence stacks up, and some of it is about when the right time to legislate is. But, as I said earlier, I do not think for a single instant that this debate or the Online Safety Act will be the end of the story. I would be amazed if there were not further legislation, in some shape or other, in this field in the next two or three years. With that, I once again thank Kim Campbell for bringing the petition to us, and I thank my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe for introducing the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  There are four or five different areas where the legislation is not sufficient for the task. Both codes require parliamentary approval, but that process will happen in the next few weeks, with the powers coming into effect this spring. As a Government, we have to decide whether it is better to make that happen now and bed it in, or say that we will have another piece of legislation. I am not allowed to make commitments on behalf of the Government, but I would be absolutely amazed if they did not bring forward further legislation in this field in the next few years. All these issues—and the others that will come along—will definitely need to be addressed, not least because, as my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe said at the beginning of the debate, we need to make sure that the legislation is up to date. My hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister) talked about the burden of proof, and he is quite right. Of course there should not be a one-way burden of proof. We have to bear in mind two things about proof—perhaps evidence is a better word, because it is not about criminality; it is about evidence-based policy. The first is that, as everybody has said, causation is not correlation. I apologise for the slightly flippant way of putting this, but Marathon became Snickers at the same time as Mrs Thatcher gave way to John Major. I am not aware of any causal relationship between those two events. Many people understand that, but it is often very difficult to weed out what is causation and what is correlation in a specific set of events. For instance, we have all laid out the problems in relation to mental health for children, but only one Member mentioned covid. I would argue that covid is quite a significant player. It was shocking that we strove hard as a Parliament to open pubs again before we opened schools, and that children, who were at the least risk, bore the heaviest burden and that sacrifice on behalf of others. I think we need to factor that in. The second point is something that I have campaigned on for quite a long time: acquired brain injury. Children from poorer backgrounds are four times more likely to suffer a brain injury under the age of five than kids from wealthier backgrounds, and again in their teenage years. Acquired brain injury in schools is barely recognised. Some schools respond to it remarkably well, but it is likely that there are somewhere between one and three children with a brain injury in every single primary class in this land. Nobody has yet done sufficient work on how much that has contributed to the mental health problems that children have today. We certainly know that the use of phones and screens after brain injury is a significant added factor, but we need to look at all the factors that affect the mental health of children to ensure that we target the specific things that really will work in a combination of policy changes.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, of course; my hon. Friend is always intervening on me.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  I am sorry if I indicated that it was mainly covid; I was not trying to say that at all. I am simply saying that that is one factor, and there may be many others—social factors, personal factors and the structure of education. One could argue, as one of my hon. Friends did, that there are other things that kids could do in society. We might, for instance, want to intervene by having a creative education option. We hardly have a youth service in most of the country any more.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  I do not want to be a hypocrite; this 63-year-old engages in all those things as well. In fact, it is a shocking shame for me every time I get that notification that says, “You spent on average x number of hours a day on your mobile phone.” I can make justifications—I have to find out what an hon. Member’s seat is, I have to send things back to my private office on WhatsApp and all of those kind of things—but the truth is that if somebody had said to us 40 years ago that they were going to invent something that would make us all, in an addictive way, spend hours and hours and hours looking at a phone rather than engaging with other human beings, we would have said, “Maybe not, eh?” I was really struck by that when I went to a primary school in Blaengarw in my patch. The headteacher was saying that one of the difficulties is that all the parents waiting to pick up their kids were on their mobile phones outside, as the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett) mentioned earlier. Whatever they did inside the school, the message that every single child got was that life was about being on a mobile phone. As has been said, one of the most important things that a parent can do is engage eye to eye with their children. If they are engaging eye to eye only with their phone, I would argue that that is as much of a problem. I will come on to some of the issues, but I do not want to be hypocritical about it. I think we all accept that we have to do more. One thing that was not included in the list of things that someone might do if they did not have a mobile phone to spend all their time on was reading a book. I would love more young people to read a book. That longer attention span is one of the things that is an admirable part of being an adult human being. Several hon. Members referred to the fact that legislation needs to keep up. I will put this very gently to Conservative Members: we argued for an online safety Act for a long time before one ended up becoming legislation. It went through a draft process, and there were lots of rows about what should and should not be in it, and whether we were impinging on freedom of speech and all those kinds of things, but the legislation did not end up on the statute books until the end of 2023. Even then, the Act provided for a fairly slow process of implementation thereafter, partly because Ofcom was taking on powers that, on that day, it simply would not have had enough staff to engage with. The process has been difficult, and I am absolutely certain that the Online Safety Act will not be the end of this story. That is why the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology has said clearly that everything is “on the table”, and that is why today’s debate is so important. Of course, legislation has to be proportionate, balanced, based on evidence—I will come to that in more detail in a moment—and effective. That is why the Online Safety Act will require all platforms that are in scope, including social media platforms, to set up robust systems and processes to tackle the most egregious illegal content or activity proactively, preventing users from encountering it in the first place. Platforms will be required to remove all other illegal content as soon as it is flagged to them. The Act will also require platforms easily accessed by children—this goes to a point made by several people—to deploy measures to protect children from seeing content that is harmful to them. That includes the use of highly effective age assurance to prevent them from seeing the most harmful types of content, such as that which promotes, encourages or provides instructions for self-harm, suicide or eating disorders. Platforms will also be required to provide age-appropriate access for other types of harmful content, such as bullying, abusive content or content that encourages dangerous stunts or serious violence. Additionally, under the Act, providers that specify a minimum age limit to access their site must specify how they enforce that in their terms of service and must do so consistently. As many Members have said, this spring will be a key moment in the implementation of the Act, and that is an important point for us to recognise: later this year, things will change, because of the implementation of the Online Safety Act. Ofcom has already set out its draft child safety codes of practice, which are the measures that companies must take to fulfil their duties under the Act. Ofcom’s draft codes outline that all in-scope services, including social media sites, will be required to tackle algorithms that amplify harm and feed harmful material to children. I would argue that that includes the process of trying to make something addictive for a child. Services will have to configure their algorithms to filter out the most harmful types of content from children’s feeds, and to reduce the visibility and prominence of other harmful content. In January, Ofcom published its guidance for services to implement highly effective age assurance to meet their duties, including the types of technology capable of being highly effective at correctly determining whether a user is a child.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  I have not seen any of the statistics for what has happened to youth services and the cultural education offer in schools in France and other countries.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, of course. I am about to come to my hon. Friend’s speech, in fact.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  It is always a delight to see you, Mr Vickers—and particularly to see you in the Chair, where you cannot take part in the debate. First, may I pay enormous tribute to Kim Campbell? Many other Members have already done so, but it is a significant achievement to force Parliament to debate something. Getting 130,000 people to sign up to the petition is a phenomenal achievement, so thank you very much. I think I can say that on behalf of all the political parties in Parliament and all Members of the House. I also thank my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan): first because he is a Labour Member for Folkestone and Hythe, which is a great advance in the world, and secondly because he advanced the cause on behalf of the Petitions Committee so effectively. Many Members may not know this, but when I was first elected back in 1873 under Queen Victoria, we did not have online petitions. It is an irony, in a way, that today we are talking about an online e-petition about online activity. If colleagues do not mind, I will not answer each contribution individually. Members have put their own arguments powerfully; there has been a mix of views, but with a general direction of travel, which I fully understand and to which I am very sympathetic. I want to lay out where we are at now and where we, as a Government, think that we could get to and should get to. The first thing to recognise is the utter toxicity of large parts of social media. You do not have to be an MP to be aware of that, but being an MP certainly does make you aware of it. The toxicity for children is utterly degrading and pernicious, as I think everybody in society recognises. We all recognise, too, that the social media companies need to go much further to protect children. We have talked about some of the misogyny that is evident on many platforms and to which kids have access—it is pumped at them, in fact, because that is sometimes what the algorithm seems to support. Similarly, there are large amounts of utter misinformation. I do not know who is driving that or why it is being driven; sometimes it may be state actors from elsewhere in the world, and sometimes it is just pernicious actors in their own right. Completely unrealistic body shapes are being promoted to girls and, for that matter, to boys. There was a time when the concern was solely that girls were being encouraged to be a particular shape, but exactly the same concern applies to many young men and boys today. I used to be a priest in the Church of England, many years ago; I was a clergyman in High Wycombe. While I was the curate there, a young girl took her own life, and then three of her friends took their own life in successive months. Undoubtedly, they had somehow or other managed to engage one another in that spiral. That was long before social media. Now, social media can play a pernicious role in undermining young people’s self-confidence and their belief in themselves through a whole series of images, videos and so on. That is very dangerous. Tackling this is one of the most important things that the Government have to do. It is good to have a former Education Secretary, the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds), with us today.

• 12 Feb 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a good point. We need to look at that specifically at the Committee stage of the Data (Use and Access) Bill. Perhaps he will sit on the Bill Committee.

• 12 Feb 2025 · Innovation: Livingston · Hansard source

  More

  We have already spent £4 million on projects in my hon. Friend’s constituency, including £88,000 on SilviBio Ltd. I am very proud of the fact that we have been able to commit, in 2025-26, to a record amount of money—£20.4 billion—for research and development.

• 12 Feb 2025 · Innovation: Livingston · Hansard source

  More

  Livingston is a remarkable example of where investment can make a significant difference. I am really pleased that the chief executive of SilviBio recently received a women in innovation award for innovation in science. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that innovation accelerator projects in Glasgow and across the whole of Scotland need the integration between the Westminster Government and the Holyrood Government to be really successful, but that is precisely what we are determined to do. In October last year, he also had another £4 million investment in Livingston by Merck, making it one of the biggest investors in Scotland.

• 12 Feb 2025 · Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  No Paddington?

• 12 Feb 2025 · Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  rose —