Latest news with #BaronessStowell
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Labour plan to let foreign states team up to own newspapers sparks alarm
Labour's plan to let foreign powers own shares in newspapers has sparked alarm that they could team up to gain sway over Britain's free press. Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, has proposed laws to allow states to hold passive stakes of up to 15pc in newspapers and news websites. There is no planned rule on what portion a group of foreign states could own, however, raising concerns in the House of Lords over 'where will it end?' The legislation is partly intended to dispel the uncertainty faced by The Telegraph since a takeover bid led by the United Arab Emirates was blocked by the Conservatives over a year ago. By easing an existing outright ban on foreign state ownership, Ms Nandy's plan is also meant to help improve British relations with the wealthy Gulf state, which were damaged by the saga. The UAE is now expected to become a silent minority shareholder in a consortium led by RedBird Capital Partners, the US private equity firm which was previously the junior partner in its bid. The Conservative Party leadership has said it will support a limit of 15pc. However, after analysing the proposed statutory instrument, the Tory peer Baroness Stowell, a pivotal figure in the rebellion that derailed the UAE bid, has written to Ms Nandy to demand changes. Baroness Stowell, who has said she will not oppose single passive stakes of up to 15pc, told The Telegraph: 'Without a cumulative limit on foreign state shareholdings you have to ask where will it end? 'You could have countries teaming up to seek influence. I don't understand why this hasn't been addressed in the proposed legislation. It may be that there are other ways the Government believes it can address this risk. If so, let's hear it and debate it.' Ministers have other powers to block foreign investments, such as those they believe are a potential threat to British security, under the National Security and Investment Act. Lord Fox, the Liberal Democrats' culture spokesman in the Lords, backed Baroness Stowell's demand for a rethink and said there were 'glaring loopholes … ready to be taken advantage of by foreign states'. He added: 'It's wrong that this Government has no qualms with multiple states owning unlimited aggregate stakes in British papers. The independence of UK media must not be made subject to foreign sway. 'We are pressing peers from right across the House to stand with us, block this legislation and defend press freedom.' The Liberal Democrats have tabled a rare 'fatal motion' in the Lords to obstruct Ms Nandy's legislation. They argue that it would effectively overturn the ban on foreign state ownership approved by Parliament last year. Some Conservative peers, led by Lord Forsyth, are expected to back the bid to block the legislation. He has said the idea that a stake of 15pc could be entirely passive was 'utterly naive'. The Conservatives originally proposed a limit of just 5pc to allow sovereign wealth funds to make small passive investments in newspapers, such as via share index trackers. Ms Nandy opted to increase the limit three-fold after lobbying on behalf of Rupert Murdoch and Lord Rothermere, the owner of The Daily Mail. She agreed with them that a 5pc limit would cut news publishers off from a potentially vital source of international capital at a turbulent time as the decline of print accelerates. It is not clear whether any foreign state has already made an equity or debt investment in a UK news publisher. The Independent news website, controlled by Lord Lebedev, sold a 30pc stake to a Saudi investor in 2017. A subsequent Ofcom investigation explored potential links between the investor and the Saudi state but did not draw conclusions. The Independent subsequently formed an editorial and commercial partnership with a Saudi state media company. Under Ms Nandy's proposals, she will have a duty to trigger regulatory investigations when there are concerns of foreign state influence. Baroness Stowell said there was a need to ensure MPs and peers had a bigger role, with a guarantee that questions about press freedom would be heard in the chamber. Questions she attempted to ask about the fate of The Telegraph were rejected by parliamentary officials in consultation with the Government on three occasions. Baroness Stowell said: 'My concern is that Parliament has all the tools it needs to protect freedom of the press. This is especially important given the proposals from the Government create an ongoing duty to monitor and investigate issues with foreign state investors. 'When it comes to press freedom it is critical that Parliament can ask any questions it sees fit.' The Department for Culture, Media and Sport was asked for comment. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
28-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Labour plan to let foreign states team up to own newspapers sparks alarm
Labour's plan to let foreign powers own shares in newspapers has sparked alarm that they could team up to gain sway over Britain's free press. Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, has proposed laws to allow states to hold passive stakes of up to 15pc in newspapers and news websites. There is no planned rule on what portion a group of foreign states could own, however, raising concerns in the House of Lords over 'where will it end?' The legislation is partly intended to dispel the uncertainty faced by The Telegraph since a takeover bid led by the United Arab Emirates was blocked by the Conservatives over a year ago. By easing an existing outright ban on foreign state ownership, Ms Nandy's plan is also meant to help improve British relations with the wealthy Gulf state, which were damaged by the saga. The UAE is now expected to become a silent minority shareholder in a consortium led by RedBird Capital Partners, the US private equity firm which was previously the junior partner in its bid. The Conservative Party leadership has said it will support a limit of 15pc. However, after analysing the proposed statutory instrument, the Tory peer Baroness Stowell, a pivotal figure in the rebellion that derailed the UAE bid, has written to Ms Nandy to demand changes. Baroness Stowell, who has said she will not oppose single passive stakes of up to 15pc, told The Telegraph: 'Without a cumulative limit on foreign state shareholdings you have to ask where will it end? 'You could have countries teaming up to seek influence. I don't understand why this hasn't been addressed in the proposed legislation. It may be that there are other ways the Government believes it can address this risk. If so, let's hear it and debate it.' Ministers have other powers to block foreign investments, such as those they believe are a potential threat to British security, under the National Security and Investment Act. Lord Fox, the Liberal Democrats' culture spokesman in the Lords, backed Baroness Stowell's demand for a rethink and said there were 'glaring loopholes … ready to be taken advantage of by foreign states'. He added: 'It's wrong that this Government has no qualms with multiple states owning unlimited aggregate stakes in British papers. The independence of UK media must not be made subject to foreign sway. 'We are pressing peers from right across the House to stand with us, block this legislation and defend press freedom.' The Liberal Democrats have tabled a rare 'fatal motion' in the Lords to obstruct Ms Nandy's legislation. They argue that it would effectively overturn the ban on foreign state ownership approved by Parliament last year. Some Conservative peers, led by Lord Forsyth, are expected to back the bid to block the legislation. He has said the idea that a stake of 15pc could be entirely passive was 'utterly naive'. The Conservatives originally proposed a limit of just 5pc to allow sovereign wealth funds to make small passive investments in newspapers, such as via share index trackers. Ms Nandy opted to increase the limit three-fold after lobbying on behalf of Rupert Murdoch and Lord Rothermere, the owner of The Daily Mail. She agreed with them that a 5pc limit would cut news publishers off from a potentially vital source of international capital at a turbulent time as the decline of print accelerates. It is not clear whether any foreign state has already made an equity or debt investment in a UK news publisher. The Independent news website, controlled by Lord Lebedev, sold a 30pc stake to a Saudi investor in 2017. A subsequent Ofcom investigation explored potential links between the investor and the Saudi state but did not draw conclusions. The Independent subsequently formed an editorial and commercial partnership with a Saudi state media company. Under Ms Nandy's proposals, she will have a duty to trigger regulatory investigations when there are concerns of foreign state influence. Baroness Stowell said there was a need to ensure MPs and peers had a bigger role, with a guarantee that questions about press freedom would be heard in the chamber. Questions she attempted to ask about the fate of The Telegraph were rejected by parliamentary officials in consultation with the Government on three occasions. Baroness Stowell said: 'My concern is that Parliament has all the tools it needs to protect freedom of the press. This is especially important given the proposals from the Government create an ongoing duty to monitor and investigate issues with foreign state investors. 'When it comes to press freedom it is critical that Parliament can ask any questions it sees fit.'
Telegraph
20-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Foreign state ownership is a systemic threat to a free press
Last week I received an unexpected invitation to meet with Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary. I assumed it was to tell me that the Government was finally going to ask the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to end the uncertainty over the ownership of The Telegraph. I had raised the issue in the Lords on a number of occasions and was grateful for her courtesy. Instead I was astonished to learn that she had issued a press release announcing that the Government intended to reverse the decision taken by Parliament last year to ban foreign governments from owning or co-owning British newspapers. Her department, no doubt cheered on by the Foreign Office, had clearly surrendered to the lobbying from sovereign wealth funds, foreign governments and investors and extended the concession for ownership by sovereign wealth funds from 5pc to 15pc and included in that concession any foreign government, however odious their regime. It was only last year that a cross-party rebellion led by the redoubtable Baroness Stowell resulted in both Houses of Parliament amending primary legislation to place an absolute prohibition on foreign state ownership or control of British newspapers. A duty was imposed on the Culture Secretary under the amended Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act to block media mergers where a foreign power was deemed to have control or significant influence. Opinion polls showed more than two thirds of the public supported a ban. This was now to be reversed using secondary legislation. The text of the regulations were not available and it was unclear whether several foreign governments could each own 15pc of any newspaper. The Government says that this would only apply to passive investors, but it is utterly naive to believe that a 15pc holding would not result in a degree of influence. The CMA takes 15pc as a starting level to consider scrutiny for material influence in takeover bids. This threshold is unarguably a serious undermining of the safeguards Parliament voted for and a cynical manipulation of the statutory instrument which was intended to provide for a 5pc holding for existing sovereign wealth funds. Allowing foreign governments to hold stakes in national newspapers is a systemic threat to a free press and a free press is a necessary condition for a free country. We have a saying in Scotland that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Autocratic governments intent on acquiring stakes in our media are seeking influence opportunities not investment opportunities. Of course they are prepared to pay handsomely to achieve that. If permitted there is a potential unwelcome conflict of interest created between journalists and their employers. The Government's proposals are not some technical adjustment. They open the door to state-funded media and undermine independent journalism. At a time of great geopolitical upheaval, the Government should be strengthening media independence not trading it away for foreign capital. Now Parliament must act to reassert the protections enshrined in the legislation and make it clear that foreign governments have no place in ownership of our national media.
