MPs back foreign investors owning minority stakes in UK newspapers
It is the latest turn in a tumultuous two-year takeover process for the 170-year-old newspaper business.
It comes after the previous Conservative government put a block in place amid fears the Telegraph could be bought by a majority-owned UAE company, RedBird IMI. The investment vehicle is a joint venture with US financiers.
The regulation was approved by 338 votes to 79, majority 259. Labour was boosted in the voting lobbies by four Reform UK MPs, including its leader Nigel Farage (Clacton), and seven Independent MPs.
Meanwhile former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, a vocal critic of China, was among those to vote against it.
The Liberal Democrats, who forced the vote over fears foreign ownership would compromise editorial independence, also opposed it.
The result will give the green light to RedBird IMI, with the cap in place now being supported by MPs.
RedBird Capital, the US junior partner in RedBird IMI, agreed a deal in May to buy a majority stake in the newspaper for £500 million.
Abu-Dhabi's IMI will look to buy a minority stake as part of the consortium.
RedBird has investments in AC Milan, film production giant Skydance and Liverpool FC owner Fenway Sports Group.
It is also understood that the Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) – which owns the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, the i, and the Metro – is also looking to buy a stake.
This is in addition to Sir Len Blavatnik, who owns the Theatre Royal Haymarket in the West End, who is considering a minority stake, according to Sky News reports.
The rules were introduced after RedBird IMI looked to buy the Telegraph Media Group (TMG) from the Barclay Brothers.
Then-Conservative culture secretary Lucy Frazer told a Society of Editors Conference in April 2024: 'I had concerns about the potential impacts of this deal on free expression and accurate presentation of news and that's why I issued a public interest intervention.'
Culture minister Stephanie Peacock told MPs last month that appropriate safeguards had been introduced.
She said: 'Government need to balance the importance of creating certainty and sustainability for our newspaper industry with the need to protect against the risk of foreign state influence by setting a clear threshold for exceptions within the regime at 15%. We believe that we have done that effectively.'
Speaking after the vote, the Liberal Democrats' spokesman on media Max Wilkinson said: 'Freedom of the press is an historic and inviolable cornerstone of our democracy. That the Government is pushing to sell off stakes in our British papers to foreign governments is astonishing.
'It's outrageous that Labour and the Conservative MPs failed to stand up, do their patriotic duty and block this legislation. The leader of the opposition sponsored the Bill that restricted foreign states owning British newspapers last year – yet even she failed to vote against the measure.
'Liberal Democrats have already successfully forced the Government to backtrack on their senseless plan to let multiple states club together to buy whatever sized stake in a British outlet they fancied. Now my colleagues in the Lords and I will deliver a showdown to overturn this Bill entirely – rallying Conservative and crossbench peers to defeat the Government on this misguided policy.'
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has been approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
44 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Elon Musk's X says Online Safety Act that requires users to provide ID to show they are over 18 is 'putting free speech at risk'
Elon Musk 's X has warned that the Online Safety Act, which requires users to prove their age, is 'putting free speech at risk'. The new rules, seen by watchdogs as a way to protect children online, have sparked a furious backlash from thousands of users. The act forces platforms like Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and X, along with sites hosting pornography, to implement strict age verification measures to prove users are over 18. But critics are outraged, arguing that age checks are blocking access to large parts of the internet that have no business being grouped with adult content. To use platforms like X, users must surrender personal details such as credit card information, ID, or even facial scans, leading many to bypass the system altogether. X has now joined the chorus of criticism, warning that unless the act is amended to be more 'balanced', 'free speech will suffer'. The uproar has already seen nearly half a million people signing a petition demanding the act be scrapped as the n umber of users searches for VPN surged since the changes came into force. But a government spokesperson has dismissed these concerns, calling the claim that the law compromises free speech as 'demonstrably false,' insisting that it is 'not designed to censor political debate'. Critics argue that age checks are blocking access to large parts of the internet that have no business being grouped with adult content The dispute reached a fever pitch earlier this week when a senior Labour minister accused Reform's Nigel Farage of aligning with 'sick paedophiles' like Jimmy Savile during the ongoing clash over the law. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle went even further, accusing Farage of siding with 'extreme pornographers' over Reform UK's vow to scrap the act. Mr Farage labelled the comments 'disgusting' and demanded an apology, however Mr Kyle later doubled down on his remarks. Now X has joined the list of critics, saying: 'When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of 'online safety.' 'It is fair to ask if UK citizens were equally aware of the trade-off being made.' The platform claims the timeframe in which they were given to meet mandatory measures had been unnecessarily tight - and despite complying, sites still faced threats of enforcement and fines, 'encouraging over-censorship'. Adding: 'A balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children. 'It's safe to say that significant changes must take place to achieve these objectives in the UK.' Peter Kyle also accused the Reform UK leader Nigel Farage of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers' over the party's pledge to scrap the Online Safety Act Critics including Mr Farage claim that the law is being used to stifle free speech by blocking people from seeing some controversial political statements online Nearly half a million people have signed a petition against the Online Safety Act Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. It comes as Spotify users were left furious after they were told their accounts were at risk of being deleted if they fail to verify their age when trying to access videos marked 18+, with some urging users to stop using it. One user questioned: 'How old do you have to be to listen to music?', while another declared: 'I think I'm deleting payments to any company that ever sends me something like this.' Previously, campaign group, Big Brother Watch, also warned of the 'catastrophic effect on free speech online' that the Ofcom legislation could have with 'intrusive new age checks to access a range of websites'. Xbox have also followed suit, announcing they too will be investing in technologies and tools to ensure players have age-appropriate experiences on their platform, while sending notifications to UK users to verify their age. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.'
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Government defends Online Safety Act after X claims it threatens free speech
In a post titled What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach, the platform, formerly known as Twitter, outlined criticism of the act and the 'heavy-handed' UK regulators. The Government countered that it is 'demonstrably false' that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech and said it is not designed to censor political debate. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. This includes a new duty for online providers to reduce the risk that users encounter illegal content as well as age verification measures in the UK to access pornographic content. 'As a result, the act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer,' X said. It accused regulators of taking a 'heavy-handed approach' and said that 'many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression'. Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. The company said 'a balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children'. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.' Technology Secretary Peter Kyle became embroiled in a row with Nigel Farage earlier this week over Reform UK's pledge that it would scrap the Act if the party came into power. He said the Reform UK leader of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers'.
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Government defends Online Safety Act after X claims it threatens free speech
In a post titled What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach, the platform, formerly known as Twitter, outlined criticism of the act and the 'heavy-handed' UK regulators. The Government countered that it is 'demonstrably false' that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech and said it is not designed to censor political debate. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. This includes a new duty for online providers to reduce the risk that users encounter illegal content as well as age verification measures in the UK to access pornographic content. 'As a result, the act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer,' X said. It accused regulators of taking a 'heavy-handed approach' and said that 'many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression'. Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. The company said 'a balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children'. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.' Technology Secretary Peter Kyle became embroiled in a row with Nigel Farage earlier this week over Reform UK's pledge that it would scrap the Act if the party came into power. He said the Reform UK leader of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers'.
