Music Streaming: Label-led Principles

And now for something completely different. With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement about the Government’s progress with industry on the remuneration of artists in the music sector.

Music is not just the food of love. It does not just set our hearts dancing and express our deepest desires. It does not just showcase the UK to the world. As part of our dynamic creative industries, which we have identified as one of the eight priority growth sectors in our industrial strategy, it is key to our economic future as well. That is why music is at the heart of our new 10-year creative industries sector plan. Our new music growth package will more than double Government funding for the industry to £10 million annually for the next three years. That will help UK artists to achieve domestic and international success, while nurturing our grassroots music scene.

We want the UK music industry to thrive, but we know that it will not unless artists receive their fair share of the rewards, especially in the new era of streaming. The stereotype of artists starving in garrets is not a model for a successful industry. Musicians deserve their fair reward, and the industry will only flourish if new generations of musicians are able to make a living, so it is with pleasure that I announce today an important milestone: UK record labels have agreed to new measures that will boost the earnings of legacy artists, songwriters and session musicians.

The UK music industry is a global powerhouse. Coldplay, Adele, Stormzy, Ed Sheeran, Dua Lipa, Raye, Bryn Terfel, Alfie Boe, Iestyn Davies—our country has been the birthplace of genre-defining talent that has shaped the soundtrack of generations, so it is no surprise that we are the third largest music market in the world, and the second largest recorded music exporter. The first music streaming service started in 2001, and streaming now accounts for a majority of music revenue. This has created a series of challenges for the UK music industry, radically transforming how audiences experience music, how musicians earn a living, how record labels treat their artists, and how artists access different markets.

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee sought to address some of these issues in an important report on music streaming in 2021. In response, the Competition and Markets Authority completed a market study into music streaming, and the Intellectual Property Office conducted research on potential copyright reforms. In spring 2024, three years after the Committee’s report, the then Government finally launched the creator remuneration working group, which is tasked with

“exploring and considering industry-led actions on remuneration from music streaming for existing and future music creators”.

The Government convened the group once before the general election, and I chaired my first meeting with it within a month of taking office. I am pleased to announce that after six meetings and a series of bilateral discussions—some of them quite difficult—this work has resulted in a set of measures from UK record labels that they estimate will deliver tens of millions of pounds of new investment to support UK artists by 2030. Central to this is a new set of principles that will be adopted by the British Phonographic Industry and the Association of Independent Music, and recommended to their UK label members.

Some independent labels are already implementing the principles, and I am delighted to say that the three major labels—Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group—will adopt them and introduce bespoke packages to boost the earnings of artists, especially legacy artists who signed up before streaming came on to the scene. In order to address the specific challenges faced by smaller labels, the BPI and the AIM are encouraging them to provide targeted support that is appropriate for their size and resources.

The principles will commit labels across the UK to providing targeted support for legacy artists, songwriters and session musicians. For legacy artists, this includes disregarding unrecouped advances, bespoke support to increase streaming engagement, and much greater clarity about the process of contract renegotiation. For songwriters, the support includes the payment of per diems for the first time, with major labels Warner UK and Universal UK committing to a payment of £75 per day, in addition to expenses. Sony UK will fund a bespoke new songwriter support programme, in partnership with the Ivors Academy, to provide financial support and assistance to songwriters; these payments will not be charged as a recoupable cost from their advance. For session musicians, the support includes an increase in session fees, agreed at the end of last year, and a commitment to reviewing their income from broadcast and public performance.

The principles announced today will complement the industry code of good practice on transparency, and the industry agreement on metadata, which we published in 2024. They mark a major milestone in the Government’s work with the music industry in response to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s 2021 report on the economics of music streaming. Some concerns remain with regard to the deal for session musicians, which is why I will convene a further meeting with industry to discuss those issues.

We want these measures to be delivered in full, so that artists see real improvements. The Secretary of State and I want legacy artists to see their work revitalised and introduced to new audiences, and to have their unrecouped balances disregarded and their contracts renegotiated. In order to track progress and measure success, we will work closely with members of the creator remuneration working group, including the Council of Music Makers, on implementing a robust monitoring process, through which we can evaluate the extent to which the principles improve earnings, as intended. The Government will then assess the need for further intervention to ensure that this package delivers on its objective of bringing about real change for creators.

This is neither the end of the road nor the lifting of the needle on the record, but it is a pivotal point. If the principles we have discussed are truly implemented, they have the potential to improve the lives of artists across the UK. I am deeply grateful to the BPI, the major labels and the Association of Independent Music for engaging with this work. I want to recognise the dedication of the Council of Music Makers, which includes the Featured Artists Coalition, the Ivors Academy, the Music Managers Forum, the Music Producers Guild and the Musicians’ Union, for its tireless commitment to its members. Finally, my thanks go to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee and its predecessor Committees for shining a powerful light on this issue. I commend this statement to the House.

A love of music is something we all share. All of us have favourite songs that make up the soundtrack to the most meaningful moments in our lives—moments of joy and sorrow. They are songs that live forever. Our music industry is a true global success story; it has global stars like Adele, Ed Sheeran, and my favourite band, Oasis, and world-class cultural institutions such as the Royal Academy of Music and the London Symphony Orchestra.

Our music industry remains one of our greatest and strongest exports to the world. It not only showcases our talent on the world stage, but contributes £8 billion to our economy. It is truly a jewel in the crown of our thriving creative sectors. As the Minister has noted, streaming has transformed the music industry, benefiting both listeners and artists. Audiences now have access to more music than ever before, and artists can reach listeners on a scale they could only dream of in the past. However, as the Minister identifies, there is concern about whether artists receive a fair deal in this delicate ecosystem, and the Opposition share that concern. Although contracts between artists, labels and streaming platforms are private commercial agreements, I know that Members on both sides of the House agree that the success of streaming should not come at the expense of artists’ livelihoods.

In 2022, the previous Conservative Government asked the Competition and Markets Authority to conduct a study into the music and streaming services. I was encouraged to learn that the CMA found no evidence of publishing revenues being suppressed by distorted or restricted competition, and that the share of streaming revenues going to publishers and songwriters has increased from 8% in 2008 to 15% in recent years. However, concerns remain, especially around the use of artificial intelligence across the creative industries. I know that the Government have commissioned independent research on the impact on creators, performers and the wider industry of potential changes to copyright law in the areas of equitable remuneration, contract adjustment and rights reversion. Furthermore, the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation has completed research on the playlisting algorithms used by streaming services.

Incidentally, I see that the former shadow Secretary of State is here, the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew), now shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. We wish him well in his new job.

It is a great delight to hear from the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French), but he is always so grumpy when he actually wants to say, “Well done.” I do not know about you, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I sometimes think of the Conservatives as the “all fur coat and nothing else” party, because they make nice statements but never actually do anything. It is fascinating to hear him say, “We have a concern about the remuneration of musicians.” Why did they do absolutely nothing on this subject when they were in government? It has taken a Labour Government to sit down with industry and creators to make sure that we delivered a change for people.

The hon. Gentleman asks what happens if people fail to comply. I am absolutely confident that all the labels that we are talking about will want to adopt the principles, because they have been part of the negotiating process. We had to have tough conversations at various points, but they have signed up to the principles and will deliver on them. I am confident that if any legacy artist says to their label, “I want to renegotiate my contract,” they will have a chance to renegotiate, although the precise terms of that renegotiation will of course be a matter for the artist and the label.

Some people who signed a contract before streaming came into existence might have been on a rate of something like 8%, 9%, 10% or 11%. They will be able to negotiate that up to a digital right more like 20%, 25% or 30%. That will make a significant difference to legacy artists. Many people have made the very strong point that it is all very well increasing the number of streams of a legacy artist’s work, but if they do not get any more money as a result, that will not really benefit either the record label or the legacy artist. I am very confident that this package will deliver.

On famous names, I call Paul Waugh.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. First, I declare an interest, in that my son Fin is a member of the band Big Huge New Circle, whose latest single “Pearl” is out on Spotify, and is recommended by Clash magazine, which calls it “beautifully complex”.

I welcome today’s announcement, particularly the introduction of per diems and the session musician uplifts. I thank the former Member for Cardiff West, who is sitting in the Peers’ Gallery, for all his work on this. It is hugely welcome, and perfectly timed for the Musicians’ Union delegate conference this week. Given the widespread concern about fair pay for streaming, and how long it has been since our Select Committee first reported on this, can the Minister explain what further powers the Government hold to intervene if these industry-led measures fall short?

First of all, can I wish—was it Big Huge New Circle? [Interruption.] Yes, Big Huge New Circle. So we have got it in Hansard three times now. I will take my fee later—10% obviously. Or 15%; it is 15% for lots of agents these days.

Obviously, the future of the music industry in the UK depends on having a pipeline. The single most important thing we can do is make sure that every single child has an opportunity to be a musician at school. Creative education in our schools not only delivers by providing musicians, but is a force multiplier for lots of other forms of education. That is something on which I am working very closely with the Department for Education.

I note that Lord Brennan is up in the Gallery—that is another song from music hall, I think. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that Lord Brennan, who was on the Select Committee, was one of the driving forces making sure that there was not only a first report, but a second report in the last Parliament; he held the Government’s feet to the fire. I am determined to do precisely the same when it comes to the record labels. I honestly believe that we will now have one of the best arrangements in the world for the remuneration of artists from streaming, and I am sure that the record labels will stick with the arrangement.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Britain’s musicians have long been our most beloved cultural treasures. In the crowded field of excellence in our creative sectors, our musicians are some of our proudest exports. They are part of a £124 billion industry that drives our economy, so support for our legacy and session musicians is completely overdue and very welcome. The musicians covered include the Devines in Berkhamsted, upcoming artists like Myles Smith, and national treasures like Elton John—I agree that Adele is one of our national treasures—and, as was mentioned, all those around them: songwriters, producers, and those who support them.

Technological change means that online streaming now constitutes the vast bulk of music consumption, and 120,000 new tracks a day are uploaded to music platforms. This often leaves a hole in musicians’ income, so it is absolutely right that the Government are taking this issue seriously. We simply need to get this right, so I ask the Minister to clarify for the House how much confidence we can really have that the principles he is spelling out will finally lead to a more equitable distribution of streaming revenue. Ultimately, this is a label-led, voluntary framework; where is the independent oversight? Crucially, what guarantees are there of consistency or enforcement across the industry?

We have raised this issue many times in the past, but it remains true that if we are serious about protecting artists’ right to remuneration, we need to ensure that copyright, which has underpinned success for decades, works in our digitally evolving world. Musicians and creatives face an AI tsunami, which could pose a threat to their livelihoods; we need to tackle it seriously. I conclude by asking the Minister once more to consider swifter action from the Government on copyright and data mining, in order to support our musicians and creatives, as well as innovation across the UK.

I think the hon. Member is in danger of becoming a national treasure herself. [Interruption.] Oh, I see that I have not united the House on that, but—[Interruption.] The right hon. Member for Daventry cannot keep heckling; he is the shadow Health Secretary now.

The important point is that the hon. Member for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins) asked what confidence we can have that this will be adhered to, and I am very confident that it will. I have had face-to-face conversations with all the chief executives of the major record labels, and although sometimes I have been asking them to go further, they have gone that extra mile, and I am absolutely sure that they will deliver on this. I am confident that any legacy artist who wants to renegotiate their contract will be able to do so. We will be looking at precisely how that happens.

If anybody is not happy with their renegotiation, we have included in the principles a means of appealing. That is obviously a major role of the Musicians’ Union, but if by the autumn we suddenly find that lots of musicians are saying, “Excuse me, but I haven’t managed to renegotiate with my label”, then we will be returning to this issue. The record labels are fully aware of that, but they are determined: each is going to put together a bespoke package to try to revitalise legacy work. They are also looking at wiping off unrecouped balances and making sure people can earn more into the future.

The one thing I have always been nervous about it is that I do not think Governments should be writing contracts. This is really important. Julie Andrews, when she took the role of Maria in “The Sound of Music”, decided—or this is how the negotiation ended up—that she would just take an up-front free, and she never got paid any royalties thereafter. That was probably a poor decision, or she was not given any other choice. However, I think Schwarzenegger, when he made movies, quite often decided to take the royalties and did not take any up-front fees. Different artists will enter renegotiation in different ways, but we wanted to rebalance the equation so that it is more in the interests of the musicians, and that is what we have done.

I welcome this statement; it is brilliant. Three weeks ago, I had the most fantastic visit to Universal Music—thanks to Charlotte Allan for sorting that out. I also spoke to the chief executive, Dickon. Their support, love and continued passion for bringing in new artists was really transparent and obvious to me, so to hear this arrangement for legacy artists is just wonderful. It was not done in a timely enough manner, but it is wonderful that, just over a year after getting into power, we have effected this change; I thank the Minister for that. I am also very pleased to see in the statement a commitment to having more conversations with session musicians on ensuring that they get the recognition they should be getting. Will he give me some idea of the timeframes for those next steps?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what she said about Dickon. He was really very helpful at Universal in the process of getting us to this place, particularly on the issue of per diems—the £75 a day—which was one of the major asks of the Ivors Academy, and I am really pleased we were able to do that. She is right that we need to look at session musicians, and of one of the undertakings I have made is that I will be getting the BPI and the Musicians’ Union together to discuss that matter again this autumn. I hope that will be in the first couple of weeks of September.

Given the Minister’s helpful references of a sartorial nature to his opposite number, may I congratulate him on his carefully understated choice of necktie today? I shall certainly remember to bring my dark glasses next time he is on parade. Can he explain to me—as an ardent Swiftie myself—what protection performers, such as the son of the hon. Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh), have against their tracks being uploaded by anyone to a service such as YouTube, whereby it is possible for people to enjoy their music without apparently paying them any royalties at all?

I am grateful for the comments about my tie. I would say that it is understated compared to some of the other ties I have worn, so I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his commendation on my sartorial elegance. But he is wrong about YouTube. YouTube is one of the streaming services and people are remunerated. One could argue that they should be remunerated more, but if people are breaching copyright, that is an offence and it needs to be pursued. Record labels are pretty keen on doing so on behalf of their artists, but, as I say, YouTube is one of the streaming outlets.

I welcome the Minister’s statement and his work along with the Government. We will now be among world leaders in supporting our creative industries, especially on streaming remuneration. Will he outline how he will ensure the changes fairly benefit all artists, including legacy performers, session musicians and those outside major labels? What steps will be taken to enforce industry-wide implementation, especially if voluntary measures fall short?

The argument for doing this is partly because all musicians simply do not earn enough to make a living. That is the truth of the matter. Having 12 million streamings might equate to earning a theoretical amount of money, but the musician will not earn that amount because it will be diluted by the various processes it goes through—the money the agent takes and all the rest of it. Maybe that is why so many artists have produced songs about poverty—even Destiny’s Child, with “Bills, Bills, Bills”. It has been an obsession for many artists. There is sometimes the impression that an artist, in music or in any other creative industry, can only be really good if they have struggled a bit, but the truth is that we want people to be able to make a living out of their creative industry. A key part of being a Labour Government is being able to deliver that.

May I invite the Minister to congratulate Isle of Wight band Wet Leg on reaching the top of the albums chart, a particular achievement given that it has beaten Oasis, which I know has personally disappointed my hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French)?