To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to issue, under Schedule 6B of the Enterprise Act 2002, a foreign state intervention notice in relation to the sale of the Telegraph Media Group to RedBird Capital Partners.

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to issue, under Schedule 6B of the Enterprise Act 2002, a foreign state intervention notice in relation to the sale of the Telegraph Media Group to RedBird Capital Partners.

To ask His Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to publishing the names of respondents to the consultation on foreign ownership of newspapers, and what assessment they have made of the evidence base provided by the consultation.

To ask His Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to publishing the names of respondents to the consultation on foreign ownership of newspapers, and what assessment they have made of the evidence base provided by the consultation.

The consultation on the foreign state influence regulations was published on 9 May 2024 by the previous Government. This made it clear that individual responses and organisation names would not be published, but their content would be summarised in the Government’s consultation response. This was published on 15 May 2025. Our assessment of the responses showed that respondents had a strong preference for a higher limit. On 14 July, we published the consultation responses, with appropriate redactions, following a number of FoI requests.

The consultation on the foreign state influence regulations was published on 9 May 2024 by the previous Government. This made it clear that individual responses and organisation names would not be published, but their content would be summarised in the Government’s consultation response. This was published on 15 May 2025. Our assessment of the responses showed that respondents had a strong preference for a higher limit. On 14 July, we published the consultation responses, with appropriate redactions, following a number of FoI requests.

Although we received four responses to the consultation, they were quite detailed and technical. We have had quite a lot of discussions in your Lordships’ House about the future of media and the need to make sure that we get good funding sources in so that media groups can modernise. It is appropriate that the Government paid account to the media organisations, but, as the noble Lord will be aware, we settled on 15% because this is within the CMA’s views on where it might be appropriate to set things so that there is no inadvertent material influence.

Although we received four responses to the consultation, they were quite detailed and technical. We have had quite a lot of discussions in your Lordships’ House about the future of media and the need to make sure that we get good funding sources in so that media groups can modernise. It is appropriate that the Government paid account to the media organisations, but, as the noble Lord will be aware, we settled on 15% because this is within the CMA’s views on where it might be appropriate to set things so that there is no inadvertent material influence.

On the regulations and the exception, I want to be clear: this is a privilege, not a right. It is about passive investment, which is why the level has been set at 15%. The Government have published the second set of regulations today, to put it beyond doubt that multiple states cannot act in concert to take a stake in a UK newspaper that is bigger than 15%. The FSI regime gives the Secretary of State a specific duty to intervene and to refer to the CMA for investigation merger cases that she suspects may have resulted, or may result, in foreign state control or influence over a newspaper enterprise’s policy. So these safeguards are in addition to what we would already consider to be quite clear duties on the part of the Secretary of State.

On the regulations and the exception, I want to be clear: this is a privilege, not a right. It is about passive investment, which is why the level has been set at 15%. The Government have published the second set of regulations today, to put it beyond doubt that multiple states cannot act in concert to take a stake in a UK newspaper that is bigger than 15%. The FSI regime gives the Secretary of State a specific duty to intervene and to refer to the CMA for investigation merger cases that she suspects may have resulted, or may result, in foreign state control or influence over a newspaper enterprise’s policy. So these safeguards are in addition to what we would already consider to be quite clear duties on the part of the Secretary of State.

Media organisations desperately need investment to secure their modernisation and their future. It is really important that these historic or local titles, which we all value, are not something of the past but something of the future. Supporting the provision of high-quality, public-interest journalism is a priority for this Government; we need serious investment in order to support this sector to thrive and to meet the challenges of the future.

Media organisations desperately need investment to secure their modernisation and their future. It is really important that these historic or local titles, which we all value, are not something of the past but something of the future. Supporting the provision of high-quality, public-interest journalism is a priority for this Government; we need serious investment in order to support this sector to thrive and to meet the challenges of the future.

If there were any attempt to intervene in the direction of the newspaper, the Secretary of State would, as I have mentioned, have a specific duty to intervene. We have followed the CMA guidance very closely; I ask your Lordships’ House to note that page 20 of the CMA’s jurisdiction and procedure guidance sets out how the CMA assesses whether material influence arises. Generally, the CMA views shareholdings of below 25% as

“less likely to confer material influence”,

but it may scrutinise shareholdings below this figure to consider whether there are factors that indicate material influence.

As I mentioned, though, we should all be explicitly clear that the foreign state influence regime gives the Secretary of State not just the ability to intervene but an explicit duty to do so: she must intervene and refer to the CMA for investigation merger cases that she suspects may have resulted, or may result, in foreign state control or influence over a newspaper enterprise’s policy.

If there were any attempt to intervene in the direction of the newspaper, the Secretary of State would, as I have mentioned, have a specific duty to intervene. We have followed the CMA guidance very closely; I ask your Lordships’ House to note that page 20 of the CMA’s jurisdiction and procedure guidance sets out how the CMA assesses whether material influence arises. Generally, the CMA views shareholdings of below 25% as

“less likely to confer material influence”,

but it may scrutinise shareholdings below this figure to consider whether there are factors that indicate material influence.

As I mentioned, though, we should all be explicitly clear that the foreign state influence regime gives the Secretary of State not just the ability to intervene but an explicit duty to do so: she must intervene and refer to the CMA for investigation merger cases that she suspects may have resulted, or may result, in foreign state control or influence over a newspaper enterprise’s policy.

The Secretary of State does not have to have all the evidence: it is for the CMA to investigate. The regime has a duty to intervene where she suspects that there may be influence. I am happy to provide further information to the noble and learned Baroness, or to meet her and others who have questions about this. The Secretary of State does not have to have material evidence; she just has to have reasonable grounds to suspect that this might be the case. If it were to be the case—for example, if a newspaper took a radically different position or there was a nuance change—it is likely she could intervene in that regard.

The Secretary of State does not have to have all the evidence: it is for the CMA to investigate. The regime has a duty to intervene where she suspects that there may be influence. I am happy to provide further information to the noble and learned Baroness, or to meet her and others who have questions about this. The Secretary of State does not have to have material evidence; she just has to have reasonable grounds to suspect that this might be the case. If it were to be the case—for example, if a newspaper took a radically different position or there was a nuance change—it is likely she could intervene in that regard.

I was not aware of the point that my noble friend raises. I will take that back to the department and write to him in due course.

I was not aware of the point that my noble friend raises. I will take that back to the department and write to him in due course.

The noble Lord makes many points that sound entirely reasonable. We are clear that we need serious investment in our media and we hope that the certainty that these SIs will provide, albeit with considerable protections around them, will enable media groups to obtain that investment.

The noble Lord makes many points that sound entirely reasonable. We are clear that we need serious investment in our media and we hope that the certainty that these SIs will provide, albeit with considerable protections around them, will enable media groups to obtain that investment.

I would find it very difficult to disagree with my noble friend.

I would find it very difficult to disagree with my noble friend.

I find myself having to defend giving good news to your Lordships’ House. I will have to write to the noble Lord on the specific VAT rule that he referred to.

I find myself having to defend giving good news to your Lordships’ House. I will have to write to the noble Lord on the specific VAT rule that he referred to.

As the noble Lord is aware, this Government are very supportive of the memorial. It is an MHCLG scheme, and I will have to write to the noble Lord following Questions. He will note that this Government are currently taking the legislation through this House.

As the noble Lord is aware, this Government are very supportive of the memorial. It is an MHCLG scheme, and I will have to write to the noble Lord following Questions. He will note that this Government are currently taking the legislation through this House.

To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have for introducing admission charges to museums and galleries for non-UK residents.

To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have for introducing admission charges to museums and galleries for non-UK residents.

The introduction of universal free admission to national museums and galleries was a landmark policy of the previous Labour Government which we do not currently have any plans to change. These museums attract huge numbers of national and international visitors, and they support jobs and investment across the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors. We continue to support these museums in their efforts to broaden access to national collections. That is why the DCMS Secretary of State announced a 5% increase to their funding and £120 million for critical estates maintenance in 2025-26.

The introduction of universal free admission to national museums and galleries was a landmark policy of the previous Labour Government which we do not currently have any plans to change. These museums attract huge numbers of national and international visitors, and they support jobs and investment across the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors. We continue to support these museums in their efforts to broaden access to national collections. That is why the DCMS Secretary of State announced a 5% increase to their funding and £120 million for critical estates maintenance in 2025-26.

I am unclear whether I can respond as to how the Louvre is going to do this in practice. I understand that it has a way of checking eligibility. The decision in respect to the Louvre is clearly a decision for it, as it is for other museums—my apologies if I have misunderstood the question. As I said in my initial Answer, we remain proud of the landmark Labour policy, which means that everyone is able to enter our national museums free of charge.

I am unclear whether I can respond as to how the Louvre is going to do this in practice. I understand that it has a way of checking eligibility. The decision in respect to the Louvre is clearly a decision for it, as it is for other museums—my apologies if I have misunderstood the question. As I said in my initial Answer, we remain proud of the landmark Labour policy, which means that everyone is able to enter our national museums free of charge.

DCMS is committed to working in partnership with councils and local leaders so that residents’ needs are met, but we are also reviewing wider funding structures and addressing challenges across the entire sector. This includes through the review of Arts Council England and the Government’s commitment to restoring stability to local government finances. We really do understand the issues that a number of cultural institutions are facing.

DCMS is committed to working in partnership with councils and local leaders so that residents’ needs are met, but we are also reviewing wider funding structures and addressing challenges across the entire sector. This includes through the review of Arts Council England and the Government’s commitment to restoring stability to local government finances. We really do understand the issues that a number of cultural institutions are facing.

As I said in my initial Answer, we currently have no plans to charge for entry to national museums, but the noble Lord is right about what happens when people visit those museums, particularly those which would potentially see lower visitor numbers if they were not free to enter. I am not going to do a league table of which ones I think that might be. There has currently been no impact assessment or any sort of feasibility study on this, because we do not currently have such plans. However, I entirely anticipate that the huge benefit to museums and galleries of visitors’ spend on retail and hospitality when they go to these museums would be considered.

As I said in my initial Answer, we currently have no plans to charge for entry to national museums, but the noble Lord is right about what happens when people visit those museums, particularly those which would potentially see lower visitor numbers if they were not free to enter. I am not going to do a league table of which ones I think that might be. There has currently been no impact assessment or any sort of feasibility study on this, because we do not currently have such plans. However, I entirely anticipate that the huge benefit to museums and galleries of visitors’ spend on retail and hospitality when they go to these museums would be considered.

I agree with the caution that the noble Lord expressed. We would have to consider a whole range of issues. This is not to say that we are not always looking at how we can bring more funding into the sector, but anything we do needs to be measured against the disbenefit of any action we might propose.

I agree with the caution that the noble Lord expressed. We would have to consider a whole range of issues. This is not to say that we are not always looking at how we can bring more funding into the sector, but anything we do needs to be measured against the disbenefit of any action we might propose.

I am happy to write to the right reverend Prelate with the specifics. It is really welcome that people can go into places of worship for quiet reflection as well as to see the most magnificent structures in the country. I do not have a specific answer to his question, and I will endeavour to write to him.

I am happy to write to the right reverend Prelate with the specifics. It is really welcome that people can go into places of worship for quiet reflection as well as to see the most magnificent structures in the country. I do not have a specific answer to his question, and I will endeavour to write to him.