Today, Friday 24^th May, MPs, Peers and representatives of the sporting industry have written to the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the Rt Hon Jeremy Wright MP, to raise their concerns about secondary ticket touts for sporting events and call on the Government to ensure that the relevant agencies are sustainably funded to enforce current consumer legislation.

The letter highlights concerns raised by members of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Ticket Abuse at a recent meeting in Parliament, including secondary ticket touts operating outside of the law and unofficial resale websites being legitimised by their position on Google Ads.

The letter calls for the Government to fund agencies, such as National Trading Standards and the Competition and Markets Authority, to ensure that current consumer legislation is enforced. It also calls for a consumer education programme, to ensure that customers are aware of what ticket information secondary websites should provide (including the block, seat and row number, the original face value price of each ticket and, if the event organiser demands it, the unique ticket ID number) as well as advising consumers not to make a purchase if the site does not provide those details.

The Government Minister for Digital and the Creative Industries, Margot James MP, and Chair of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, Damian Collins MP have both warned consumers against using Viagogo to buy tickets, but fans are still falling victim to the website and pay way above face value for invalid tickets.

The letter highlights several examples of ticket touts, including a case for a Cricket World Cup match when India play Pakistan at Old Trafford on 16^th June. The face value for the tickets are £70, but are being sold, in breach of the Consumer Rights Act, for £264 on Viagogo.

Several Royal Ascot tickets for this year are being advertised with the incorrect face value and misleading information about the availability while the lack of a unique ticket ID number makes it extremely difficult to identify the ticket sellers disregarding the law.

You can read a copy of the letter here

Sharon Hodgson MP, who Co-Chairs the APPG on Ticket Abuse said:

“The APPG has been predominantly focussed on the music industry, but as the summer sporting events approached we turned our focus to sports and found that much of the issues are the same as in music.

“The legislation to protect consumers exists, but what is seriously lacking is enforcement. Touts are getting the message that they can break the law without any repercussions. That is why the Government must ensure that enforcement agencies are sufficiently funded so that consumers can be protected.”

Dr Philip Lee MP, who Chairs the APPG on Sport said:

"There is clearly more that can be done to protect sports fans from being ripped off in this way.

"Two ways we can tackle this are more effective enforcement of the current rules and greater awareness of the potential pitfalls of buying tickets on the secondary market.

That is why consumer education is vital to ensure that sports fans know what to look for when buying tickets from these websites."

Adam Webb, Campaign Manager of FanFair Alliance and secretariat to the APPG on Ticket Abuse said:

“If consumer protection legislation is not adequately enforced, then sports and music fans will continue to be scammed by unscrupulous secondary ticketing sites and large-scale ticket touts. This Government has helped support some major reforms of this market, particularly for live music events, but there is clearly more to be done.”

Lisa Wainwright, Chief Executive Officer of the Sport and Recreation Alliance and secretariat to the APPG on Sport said:

“It is simply unfair that those wanting to watch sporting events are being scammed in this way by secondary ticketing sales. It is not only unfair to them but unfair also on individual sports themselves. It should not be for sports bodies themselves to police these ticket organisations and we think it is vital to strengthen enforcement. Watching sport is an important way of inspiring participation particularly among children and young people and those selling tickets in this way are not only damaging people’s enjoyment of sport but are increasing barriers to participation as well.

“It is also important that entire communities benefit from being able to watch sporting events, this includes those from low socio-economic backgrounds. These touted tickets - often being sold at well above face value - are continuing to make watching sport the preserve of those who can afford to pay these exorbitant costs.”

Claire Turnham MBE, Victim of Viagogo said:

“For the love of music, sport and the arts fans deserve more. Despite improvements, we still see British consumers ripped off on a daily basis. The laws are in place but they mean nothing unless put into action through education and enforcement. This is imperative to seeing a positive change within the secondary ticketing market.“

Juliet Slot, Chief Commercial Officer, Ascot Racecourse said:

“Secondary market websites and touts are routinely exploiting customers with tickets on sale above face value and without the required information as listed by the Consumer Rights Act. In the run up to Royal Ascot, we are fighting against Google ads which often give prominence to these websites that claim the event is sold out when it is not so they can charge significantly above the face value.

“It is not just customers who suffer, but the racing industry as a whole with lost revenue that could be invested in prize money for the sport’s participants, alongside welfare and integrity measures. We will be working closely with the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead and Thames Valley Police again this year to minimise the impact of touts during Royal Ascot, ensuring that all our customers have a safe and enjoyable experience.

“We welcome the work of the APPG for Ticket Abuse and are pleased to be taking a stand with our colleagues from other sports. Ascot enforces the right to refuse entry to any person purchasing a ticket from an unofficial source and urges all customers to be aware of the risks. Anybody looking to buy tickets should do so through our official channels.”

ENDS

Sharon received a response from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport on 18th June. You can view the response here.

Read Sharon's latest Sunderland Echo column below or by going to the Sunderland Echo website.

Today, the UK goes to the polls to vote in the European Parliamentary elections.

After the UK voted to leave the European Union (EU) in the 2016 referendum, no one envisaged we would be voting in an EU election ever again.

The blame for this lies squarely with the Conservative Government for failing to secure an agreement that Parliament can support.

Their botched Brexit deal fails to: protect jobs, secure workers’ rights, environmental protections, and guarantee the frictionless trade that our manufacturing industry relies upon.

But whilst the Conservative Party has been failing to secure a deal that works for everyone and the country has been arguing over remain and leave or hard and soft Brexit, we have been guilty of missing something much more important and problematic for future generations: child poverty.

Last week, the End Child Poverty coalition released new statistics which found that half a million more children are having their lives blighted by poverty today than at the start of the decade; two thirds of which are growing up in working households.

In some constituencies across the UK, more than 50% of children are living in poverty.

In my constituency, Washington and Sunderland West, 39% of children are growing up in poverty.

That is almost 9,000 of our local children going to school hungry, being poorly clothed and suffering in the cold during winter.

Poverty instantly disadvantages children from their more affluent peers in every aspect of their life: health and wellbeing, education and future employment.

That so many children throughout the UK are growing up in poverty should shame this Government into action.

Yet, when confronted with the issue that millions of households across the country face, the Conservative Government are quick to dismiss it as an anomaly.

But this is a reality for far too many.

We have a duty to ensure that every child has the same opportunity to grow up into a healthy adult.

But we risk losing a generation to poverty, fuelled by the Conservative Government’s callous austerity policies and ignorance to the real issues families face.

As the UK goes to the polls today, we must remember what really matters.

Brexit may be important, but sadly it is proving to be a huge distraction from national scandals such as child poverty.

These children deserve better.

You can visit the Sunderland echo website here.

Sharon Hodgson, Member of Parliament for Washington and Sunderland West, today (Wednesday 15th May) raised food insecurity with Theresa May during Prime Minister’s Question Time and asked her to meet with young food ambassadors who have experienced food insecurity themselves.

Sharon, who Co-Chaired the Children’s Future Food Inquiry, used the opportunity to raise figures published today by the End Poverty Coalition showing that 500,000 more children are having their lives blighted by poverty today than at the start of the decade.

The Children’s Future Food Inquiry was the first inquiry about food insecurity amongst young people that included children and young people in the discussions and recommendations.

The young food ambassadors published a #Right2Food Charter which outlines what they believe should be done to tackle food poverty and insecurity.

The Inquiry’s Committee, made up of cross-party politicians and charities, recommended that the Government set up an Independent Children’s Food Watchdog to cost some of the policies that could help tackle food insecurity and hunger.

Sharon asked the Prime Minister:
“Three weeks ago, the Prime Minister received a copy of the Children’s Future Food Inquiry report, delivered to No.10 by Dame Emma Thompson and six young food ambassadors who have all experienced food poverty.

“On her Government’s watch, the End Child Poverty Coalition have found that half a million more children are having their lives blighted by poverty today than at the start of this decade.

Will the Prime Minister meet with these young food ambassadors to discuss their #Right2Food Children’s Charter as soon as possible?”

In her response, the Prime Minister said:
“I haven’t actually seen the Charter yet, so I will look very carefully at that Charter.

“But as I have said in response to a number of questions on this issue: what is important is that we have in this country an economy that enables people to get into good jobs.

“That is what we are delivering as a Conservative Party in Government. That is what enables people to have that stability in their income. That is what enables people to be able to care for their children.”

Following PMQs, Sharon said:
“I am disappointed that the Prime Minister would not commit to meeting with the young food ambassadors, who have been so brave in sharing their experiences of food insecurity with politicians.

“At a time when we see poverty increasing, the Government must take food insecurity seriously or we risk losing an entire generation of young people to hunger. But it is clear that the Government is not able to grasp the nuances of poverty and food insecurity.

“I will continue to bring this issue to the Government’s attention until they take meaningful action to tackle this problem.”

ENDS

Notes to editor:

• You can watch Sharon’s question and the Prime Minister’s response here.
• The Children’s Future Food Inquiry report can be found here.
• The #Right2Food Charter can be found here.
• More information about the Children’s Future Food Inquiry can be found here.
• You can read the End Child Poverty Coalition’s press release here.

During a debate in the House of Commons on TV licences, Sharon set out why TV licences for over 75s are so important to the elderly and called on the Government to take responsibility and ensure that TV licences for over 75s remain.

You can read the debate here

You can watch Sharon's speech here

You can read Sharon's speech below:

Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Sunderland West):

I welcome the opportunity to debate free TV licences for over-75s. My mam, who I know will be watching, as a lot of pensioners do—I am sure lots of people besides our mams will be watching the Parliament channel—is very passionate about this issue because ​she is turning 75 in January. To her, this is personal, as she keeps telling me. She feels it has been done deliberately to give her a hard time. It is also personal to the thousands of pensioners who will be worse off if the free TV licence for over-75s is revoked, curtailed or means-tested.

In March, I hosted and addressed the National Pensioners Convention in Parliament for its rally on the BBC’s consultation. I share all of their frustrations about these proposed changes, because I know—I heard this at the rally, from the pensioners—how important their TVs are to their everyday lives. That is why I contributed to the BBC’s consultation in February this year. I have received notification that my letter will be included in the consultation document, so I hope all my points will be taken on board by the BBC and, in turn, listened to by the Government.

The introduction of free TV licences in 2000 for those aged over 75 was one of the many great achievements of the last Labour Government. That is why I and many of my colleagues opposed the Conservative Government’s outsourcing of this social benefit to the BBC as part of its 2015 royal charter. As we have heard, the cost to the BBC is roughly equivalent to the total it currently spends on all of BBC Two, BBC Three, BBC Four, the BBC News Channel, CBBC and CBeebies, so I strongly disagree with what the Prime Minister said at last week’s Prime Minister’s questions in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry South (Mr Cunningham). She said that

“there is no reason why the BBC, with the money made available to it, is not able to continue that.”—[Official Report, 1 May 2019; Vol. 659, c. 203.]

I am incredulous that the Prime Minister really believes the BBC can fund all of this without detriment. Even to try to do so would be extremely detrimental to the content the BBC is able to offer, and risks causing immense damage to the quality of the service that we all currently enjoy.

I agree with BECTU—the Broadcasting, Entertainment, Cinematograph and Theatre Union—which has said, in opposing the proposals to scrap or limit free TV licences:

“as a welfare benefit, meeting the cost of free licence fees should be the duty of the government”.

It is a disgrace that the Government not only feel able to wash their hands of the responsibility for providing this welfare policy, but are now refusing to rule out breaking the commitment they made in the 2017 Conservative manifesto to maintain free TV licences for the over-75s up to 2022. More than 5,000 households in my constituency are eligible for a free TV licence as they have someone over the age of 75. I am sure that those households will feel let down and unable to trust the Conservative Government if their free TV licence is taken away.

Alex Sobel (Leeds North West):

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. The BBC is under a lot of pressure in respect of new services, and has introduced BBC Sounds, on-demand services and social media services. These services are less likely to be used by the over-75s, but the Government expect the BBC to introduce these services and take away the benefit for over-75s or take the costs. This cannot stand. Does she not agree that the Government need to pay for this, because the BBC needs to continue to innovate?

Sharon Hodgson:

Exactly. I am pleased that my hon. Friend has made that intervention to make that point. The BBC needs to innovate, move forward and get better. This move would be to its detriment. It would be a huge backward step in terms of what the BBC would be able to provide in the future, and it just makes no sense.

As we have heard over and over again from Members in all parts of the House, the BBC is much more than just entertainment. Loneliness is blighting the lives of people across the country, with four in 10 people saying that their television is their main source of company. If the Government were serious about tackling the issue of social isolation, they would not be continuing their devastating programme of austerity cuts that affect the most vulnerable in our society. If free TV licences are ended, curtailed or means-tested, millions of older people, who suffer disproportionately from social isolation, will have to pay to keep the little company they have. I feel as though the Minister, his Parliamentary Private Secretary and the Whip are suffering social isolation today in this Chamber, because, as you will notice, Madam Deputy Speaker, they are the only ones here—here because of their roles. I do not think we could have any fewer Conservatives in the Chamber and be allowed to continue!

As with so many of the Government’s policies, this is yet another cruel attack on the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. The Government must be honest with the country: austerity is not over. That is proved by the fact that the Minister said in her opening remarks that this policy change was dreamed up under the original austerity plans of Osborne—or rather, the former Chancellor—and it is just being implemented now. If austerity is really over, why can the Government not just drop this hugely unpopular and unfair cut?

As we have heard, the licence fee concession was guaranteed to be safe until at least 2022 in the Conservative manifesto. The Government are shirking their responsibility, breaking their promises and punishing pensioners. They must stop passing the buck, accept their basic moral duty, and stick by the manifesto commitment on which all Government Members were elected. That is probably why the majority of them are not present to front this up—because they cannot. The Government need to properly fund TV licences for the over-75s, and they need to do it now.

ENDS

Sharon Hodgson MP's report - News from Westminster - Apr-May 2019 number 117

Click on the image above to download the file.

Read Sharon's latest Sunderland Echo column below or on the Sunderland Echo website.

Last Thursday, The Trussell Trust, a nationwide network of foodbanks, released its latest figures.

A shocking 1.6 million emergency food parcels were given to people in crisis by Trussell Trust foodbanks between April 2018 and March 2019. More than half a million of these went to children.

In Sunderland, 4,821 three-day emergency food supplies were given to local people in crisis. 1,234 of these went to children.

These figures, which do not account for every foodbank in the country, show that the number of food parcels given out across the UK has soared by 73% in the last five years.

In February this year, I raised a question in the House of Commons with the Secretary of State for the Department of Work and Pensions, Amber Rudd, about the link between Universal Credit and the rise of foodbanks.

For the first time, the Government admitted that there was a link between Universal Credit and the rise in foodbanks; but it shouldn’t have taken them so long to make the connection.

For over a year, I have been Co-Chairing an Inquiry into food insecurity and hunger amongst young people, entitled “The Children’s Future Food Inquiry”, which published its report on Thursday last week.

The inquiry heard from children and young people about their own experiences of food at home and at school. We heard worrying stories of limited access to free water provision in schools; pupils spending their free school meals money on water is outrageous, especially when they are trying to stretch it far enough so they don’t go hungry. We also heard about young people rationing their own food at home, to make it stretch.

All this in the world’s fifth richest economy. The Government should be ashamed.

As the Co-Chair of the Inquiry, I am calling on the Government to establish an independent food watchdog that will consider the costings of policies that could prevent us losing a generation to hunger and its consequences in this country.

A Labour Government will end the benefits freeze, stop the rollout of Universal Credit and ensure that our social security system supports any one of us should we need it.

Hunger and high foodbank use should have no place in the 21st century.

The Government must urgently recognise these stark figures as yet another red flag that proves their welfare reforms, and particularly Universal Credit, are hurting too many people and simply not working.

Sunderland Echo website

I want to start by saying that I know that many people are hugely frustrated with the Brexit process and how this Government has handled our exit from the European Union (EU).

It has been clear for many months now that the Prime Minister's deal does not have the support of Parliament and it has been rejected on multiple occasions. As I am sure you will be aware, I have been voting against the Prime Minister's deal as I believe it is deeply flawed. It will not protect jobs, workplace rights or environmental standards, and it will not ensure frictionless trade for British businesses, something hugely important to the manufacturing industry in our region of the North East.

You can also see how I voted in the indicative votes process here: http://www.sharonhodgson.org/brexit_update_april5th

Talks are now taking place between the Labour Party and the Government to try and find a solution to this ongoing impasse. This is something that the Government should have done years ago, and their failure to reach out across the political spectrum is in part why we find ourselves where we do now. These talks are covering customs, services, workers’ rights, environmental protections, entrenchment of commitments, a confirmatory public vote, and the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

In recent days, the Prime Minister has agreed a further extension to the Brexit process. Although the new deadline is now the 31st of October 2019, there is still a possibility of leaving before then if Parliament can agree on a deal. I appreciate that for many people, the fact that we are still in the EU almost 3 years after voting to leave it will be concerning, particularly if we do end up taking part in the European Elections.

Although this situation is not ideal, it is in my view preferable to leaving either with the Prime Minister’s bad deal, or crashing out with ‘No-Deal’. It is incumbent on the Government now to drop their red lines and compromise to find a way forward that people can unite around.

There remains a huge variety of opinions on Brexit and what should happen next. I want to make it clear that I will always do what I think is in the best interests of my constituents, and would consider all options (including a Public Vote) to ensure that we do not end up leaving the EU in a way in which would damage livelihoods, workers’ rights, environmental protections, or jobs.

People feel passionately about this issue, and I empathise with the Brexit fatigue that many people are no doubt experiencing. I want to assure you that despite Brexit dominating the news, I am continuing to campaign on important local and national issues. Whether it’s opposing cuts to Public Health Funding and tackling the obesity crisis or bringing the Metro to Washington and opposing the new Waste Incinerator.

It has been yet another challenging and fast-moving week when it comes to Brexit. I know that many of my constituents are hugely frustrated by the ongoing deadlock in Parliament, and the way in which this process has been handled by the Conservative Government over the past few years.

I have received a significant amount of correspondence over the past few weeks and as such there is currently a short delay in responses to queries regarding Brexit. I hope this update provides some information in the meantime, but please note all constituents will receive a full reply.

At the bottom of this post you will find a breakdown of my voting record for the recent indicative Brexit votes that took place in Parliament. I approached the indicative votes process in the spirit of compromise and therefore supported all options that were in line with Labour Party Policy, even if they did not fully align with our position.

It is no exaggeration to say that we are now in the middle of a full-blown political crisis, with time running out. I am therefore open to supporting a range of options that would break the deadlock and allow us to move forward as a country.

As many people will know, I have consistently opposed the idea of leaving the EU without a deal as I believe it would be a disastrous outcome for our country, and particularly the manufacturing industry in our region of the North East.

With that in mind I supported Yvette Cooper MP & Sir Oliver Letwin MP’s Bill this week, which aims to avoid a No Deal Brexit on the 12th April 2019. It is now being considered by the Lords and this process will continue Monday of next week.

The Prime Minister’s approach to Brexit has been chaotic. She has stuck to unnecessary red lines and refused to pursue a cross-party approach until such a time when she had no other options left. This process is now, finally, taking place with talks between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn (and their teams).

Jeremy and his negotiating team have discussed customs arrangements, single market alignment including rights and protections, agencies and programmes, internal security, legal underpinning to any agreements and a confirmatory vote. They are now expecting to hear more from the Government, who have also requested a further extension of Article 50 from the EU.

It is more important now than ever that we work together in order to find a path through this complicated period for our country that works for everyone and brings people together. I will continue to update constituents as this process moves forward.

Indicative Votes

Due to the Government’s failure to secure a Brexit deal that could secure a majority, MPs took control of the order paper and organised two rounds of indicative votes to see if there were any options that could find majority support.

First Round – 27th March 2019

Voted For

Motion D - Common Market 2.0
Proposed membership of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the European Economic Area (EEA). It allows for continued participation in the single market and a ‘comprehensive customs arrangement’.

Motion J – Customs Union
Required a commitment to negotiate a permanent and comprehensive UK-wide Customs Union with the EU in any Brexit deal.

Motion K – Labour Plan
Our plan for a close economic relationship with the EU including a comprehensive customs union and close alignment with the single market in order to secure rights and protections.

Motion M – Confirmatory Public Vote
Would require a public vote to confirm any Brexit deal passed by Parliament before its ratification.

Voted Against

Motion B – Leaving the EU without a deal
Proposed leaving the EU without a deal on the 12th April 2019.

Motion H – EEA / EFTA without a Customs Unions
Proposed remaining within the EEA and re-joining EFTA, but remaining outside a customs union with the European Union (EU).

Motion O – Contingent preferential arrangements
Called on the Government to try and secure preferential trade arrangements with the EU in case we are unable to implement a withdrawal agreement.

Abstained

Motion L – Revoke article 50
Proposal in which if the Government failed to pass its Withdrawal agreement it would have to then hold a vote on No Deal, two sitting days before the date of departure. If No Deal was voted down by MPs, the Prime Minister would need to revoking article 50.

Second Round – 1st April 2019

Voted For

Motion C – Customs Union
Required any Brexit deal to include a commitment to negotiate a “permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union with the EU”. No major change from the first round (Motion J).

Motion D – Common Market 2.0 / Norway
Very similar to the Motion tabled previously (Motion D) with some minor changes relating to the UK having a say on future EU trade deals and protocols relating to frictionless agri-food trade.

Motion E – Confirmatory Public Vote
Same as in first round (Motion M).

Abstained

Motion G – Parliamentary Supremacy
Very similar to Motion tabled in the first round (Motion L) with some changes. Namely that if Article 50 was revoked as a result, a public inquiry would then be set up to find a Brexit option that could secure public support.

Photo Credit: NK-Photography, 2017

Nominations for the NHS Parliamentary Awards are now open.

I was thrilled to be able to showcase some of the brilliant NHS staff and their achievements in my constituency and across the North East last year, and hope to do so again for 2019.

For the last 70 years, NHS staff have been there for us all. This includes doctors, pharmacists, nurses, scientists, clerical staff, cleaners and porters. Without their contributions, the NHS wouldn’t exist.

All our NHS staff, volunteers and society’s carers deserve recognition, but there are many that go above and beyond the call of duty to make the NHS a better service - with hard graft, exciting new ideas and simply by putting patients first.

The NHS Parliamentary Awards give us an opportunity to say thank you for those NHS staff who go above and beyond for their local community, and to recognise the talent, creativity and dedication of NHS staff in Washington and Sunderland West.

If you know anyone working with and for health and care organisations in Washington and Sunderland West who deserves national recognition please send me your nominations. You can download the nomination form here.

Nominations close at midnight on April 26th, so please get them to me as soon as possible by filling in the form and sending it to [email protected]

There are ten categories, covering key areas such as mental health and primary care, as well as a Lifetime Achievement award for someone who has contributed to the success of the NHS for 40 years or more.

More information on how to nominate is available at http://www.nhsparliamentaryawards.co.uk/how-nominate-0

Sharon Hodgson MP's report - Mar-Apr 2019 number 116 Brexit update

Click on the picture above to read Sharon Hodgson MP's report - Mar-Apr 2019 number 116 Brexit update