Lisa Nandy

Party	Office	Area	Period	Began	Ended	Source
Labour	MP	Wigan	6 May 2010 – present	elected	—	Party history

Latest on this tracker 570

26 Oct 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
The Enterprise Act 2002 (Specification of Additional Section 58 Consideration) Order 2026
I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the Enterprise Act 2002 (Specification of Additional Section 58 Consideration) Order 2026 (S.I., 2026, No. 1075). The order was laid before the House on 12 October. Colleagues will know that on Monday 5 October 2026, BT Group plc announced that it had acquired TalkTalk Telecom Group out of administration. As has been widely reported, TalkTalk had been seeking a buyer for its consumer and wholesale businesses for some time, but no deal was reached. TalkTalk has been responsible for, among other things, running telecare services to vulnerable customers. This created potential risk to life, in addition to potentially serious disruption to the continuity and stability of our telecommunications supply, with impacts on livelihoods, the wider economy and national security. That is why, following the announcement that BT and TalkTalk were to merge, I intervened to ensure that the Government act proactively to prevent any sudden disruption to these vital broadband and phone services, affecting millions of people. On 5 October, I issued a public interest intervention notice under the Enterprise Act 2002. This begins a process in which the Competition and Markets Authority investigates the sale and reports back to me on the effects of that sale on competition. I can then weigh up those considerations against other considerations, specified in the public interest intervention notice, before deciding whether the merger must be considered further or can proceed. The considerations that I specified in the public interest intervention notice of 5 October were, first, the need to maintain in the United Kingdom the capability to combat and to mitigate the effects of public health emergencies and, secondly, the need to maintain in the United Kingdom continuity of the supply of telecommunications services, for the purposes of preventing disruption to the economy and society of the United Kingdom, including, in particular, disruption to public services, critical national infrastructure and supply to customers who are or may be vulnerable. The first of those, relating to public health emergencies, is already specified in section 58 of the 2002 Act, whereas the second, relating to the need to maintain continuity of the supply of telecommunications services, is a new consideration, which I believe ought to be specified in the Act. If Parliament agrees, this will allow me to consider, alongside the effect on competition, the impact on society and the economy of widespread or significant prolonged disruption to connectivity. I believe it is right to consider the potential for disruption that would affect businesses, work and Government services and result in significant difficulties across the country. I also believe that Government must be able to fully consider the impact on vulnerable people, such as those who rely on telecare services, people with disabilities and health conditions, older people and people dependent on communication services to access emergency assistance. I believe that our legislative framework should reflect the importance of telecommunications in society and allow us to guard against the serious consequences that widespread disruption of this kind could have. In this age above all, the resilience of the public services that we all rely on, on which lives, livelihoods and critical national infrastructure depend, must be taken seriously by Governments across the world, and we intend to live up to that responsibility. The Competition and Markets Authority has now reported to me with an assessment of competition considerations and a summary of representations received on public interest considerations. In the coming days, I will consider its report alongside wider evidence on the public interest considerations, and on the basis of that evidence I will then decide whether to refer the case for a more detailed investigation on competition or public interest grounds, or both, or to clear the transaction without further investigation. The Government are committed to promoting competition in the broadband market as a route to protecting customers and driving investment. However, we also believe it is right to ensure that we have the ability to protect the public by stepping in in circumstances in which we believe it is necessary to prevent disruption to vital public services. By taking seriously our responsibility to safeguard the infrastructure that we depend on to keep us connected, we are enabling people to live their lives and keep working, and protecting our families, our communities and our country. I commend the order to the Committee.
Hansard source
26 Oct 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
The Enterprise Act 2002 (Specification of Additional Section 58 Consideration) Order 2026
I will try in the short time available to give comprehensive answers to those questions, but I will of course make myself available to all Members of the House to discuss this matter in further detail should they wish to do so. First, the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for North West Norfolk, asked whether the order gives me grounds to overrule the Competition and Markets Authority. It gives me additional considerations that I can take into account when I weigh up the competition issues that may be raised by the Competition and Markets Authority against other public interest considerations. I already have grounds, should I require them, to overrule competition concerns in the public interest, but it is my belief that the considerations that I am allowed to look at are too narrow for this case and potentially for many others in the future. The shadow Minister asked whether this outcome has been predetermined. I want to say to the Committee that it absolutely has not. Not only does the law preclude me from doing that, but, as was set out very well by the Chair of the Select Committee—I know the view will be shared by those on the Opposition Front Bench—there are of course risks of this deal unravelling, but there are also risks of harming the competitiveness of the sector where that competition has helped to drive down bills, protect consumers and drive investment into the industry, and helped protect the resilience of the industry. This is a genuine attempt to make sure that the Government can consider all these considerations in the round and come to a conclusion that is in the interests of the public as a whole. The shadow Minister asked whether we have interrogated to the fullest extent whether existing powers could be used. We absolutely have. The relevant Minister and I, and a specialist team in the Department, have looked at every different power available to us. What we found, having—a bit like the Chair of the Select Committee—had responsibility for this area for only a matter of weeks, was a great big gaping hole in the legislation. The order will not fill it in its entirety, but it will enable us at least to come to a good judgment, whatever that judgment may be, about what is in the public interest when it comes to this particular deal and deals like it. The shadow Minister asked whether we have considered introducing a supplier of last resort, and the hon. Member for Gosport asked a very similar question about whether we would consider new legislation where a provider fails and a new buyer cannot be found. There is nothing that we can find in existing legislation that allows the Government to intervene or to facilitate an intervention in that instance. I believe that is a problem. It is something that I am sure the Select Committee will want to look at, but I would be very happy to discuss it with the shadow Minister and the shadow Secretary of State as well. Telecoms is increasingly important to the way that we live, our national security, our energy infrastructure, and people’s lives and livelihoods. I think we do need a new approach to regulation in this area, not to be overburdensome and certainly not to harm competitiveness, but to make sure that we have the resilience that we need in a critical industry. The shadow Minister asked about the speed of the process, and whether the CMA had sufficient opportunity to consider the matter. I recognise that the speed with which we are doing this is not the way that we would normally seek to legislate. Those across the House who know me will know that I like to give Parliament time to fully consider what we are proposing, and there have been a number of instances when we have changed our approach as a consequence of the views of Members of both Houses, who have pointed out both technical deficiencies and policy issues with some of our original proposals. However, we did discuss this with the CMA. Obviously, it was acutely aware that the timing was very tight, but it felt that the time we gave it was manageable in order to give us a preliminary view that would enable me to proceed to the next stage and make a decision about whether further investigation was warranted. I intend to respond as quickly as possible; I would not have brought the order to the House with the urgency that I have done if I did not believe that we also need to act with urgency. I have to make the right decision, I have to balance all those considerations, and I have to fully consider the impact on the competitiveness of a market that is underpinned by decent competition. I cannot act with haste, but I can act with as much speed as is possible. The Chair of the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Gosport, asked why the existing legislation is deficient. Put simply, it is because in this case there was only one ground on which we could intervene: the public health emergency provisions. That may cover the existing telecare customers, but we do not believe that it would cover customers who are vulnerable and rely on being connected in order to access emergency services outside of that system. In any case, it would not cover the 1.5 million customers, many of whose livelihoods depend on this, or the critical national infrastructure that I talked about. The hon. Lady asked about the overall financial resilience of the sector. I am concerned about the fragility of the sector. Although we have a telecoms industry in this country to be proud of, and we have, over successive Governments, managed to drive investment into it, to retain competitiveness and to keep bills for consumers lower than in many comparable countries, I do think it warrants a fresh look from us all, collectively, as a House, at whether we have the resilience in the sector that we need. On whether we will consider setting out a framework for how this measure is used, I think that framework already exists. I would be happy to discuss that further with the hon. Lady, but I think the framework is already quite tightly defined by the process in the Enterprise Act under which I am required to operate. What are too tightly defined, in my view, are the considerations that a Government can take into account, which would have precluded me from taking into account a number of key areas of public interest and public benefit in this case. The hon. Lady asked what evidence I would need to see in order to intervene further. There are certainly circumstances in which the dominance of one player in a market could have major implications for the viability of that market. In those circumstances, I would need to be satisfied that, if a deal was detrimental to competition, that would not in itself lead to the outcomes that have driven me to bring these additional public interest considerations before the House. I want to be clear— I gave this commitment to the shadow Minister—that this is not in any sense a done deal or a predetermined outcome, but I do think we owe it to the public to ensure that, in coming to that decision, we take into account things that are of great interest and importance to them. On how I will assess competition issues, I will take account of the report handed to me just last week by the Competition and Markets Authority. I should say to the Committee that I have not yet had an opportunity to digest it, because officials are reading through it in technical detail and providing me with advice on it, but I will look at the report in full later this week, along with the advice I have been given, and do my best to come to a decision quickly. The hon. Lady asked about other current cases. I cannot comment on those currently, but I would be very happy to discuss with her the framework as a whole and how we ensure that it is as robust as possible. Finally, I reiterate that the pace with which we have acted is unusual. I do not believe that is an ideal way to legislate in ideal circumstances, but these are not ideal circumstances. We do not have the resilience in the legislation that we need to enable us to live up to our responsibilities, as a Government and as Parliament, to protect people and act in the public interest. The expanded scope will give me the opportunity to look at all these issues in the round and come to the right determination. I sincerely thank the House for its willingness to engage with us over the past couple of weeks since we laid the order to ensure that we have the powers we need to act in the public interest, and I welcome the opportunity to have a much more thorough debate and discussion about how we collectively shape the legislation surrounding this critical industry in the future. Question put and agreed to.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the next steps that this Government will be taking to protect children online. This Government’s ambition is to be the world leader in shaping an online environment that works for us. We intend to be an active Government that will help to create an online environment that is not just safe, but enabling and empowering. That starts with fixing the fundamentals, and this House can expect to see us acting more quickly and more decisively from now on to keep us safe online. In December last year, the Government published their action plan to tackle violence against women and girls. I would like to put on record my gratitude to my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), who are here today, for their clear ambition and determination that the UK would become the first country in the world where it would be impossible for children to take, share or view nude images online. In June, the Government challenged industry on a three-month timeline to work with us and set out road maps for how they would strengthen device-level protections for children with a view to preventing children from taking, sharing or viewing nude images on phones and tablets. Today I can update the House on the progress that has been made and the next steps that this Government will take to protect children. Since June, officials from my Department and the Home Office have overseen an unprecedented work programme with Apple and Google, working with senior leaders and engineers to explore new ways of preventing child sexual abuse and strengthening protections for children online. I can report that, following this engagement, Apple and Google have provided the Government with significant commitments. Both companies have developed meaningful changes at operating level to make it harder for children to share nude imagery. We have seen progress in the blocking, not blurring, of nude imagery on underage devices, and this builds on significant milestones already in implementation, including Apple’s roll-out earlier this year of operating system-level age assurance and tighter safety features preventing a child from receiving or sharing nude imagery on iMessage or FaceTime. These proposals are a step in the right direction. However, the truth is that they do not meet the scale of this crisis. Children are facing unacceptable levels of sexual harm online. They are being groomed, coerced and manipulated into creating and sharing intimate images across online services. The Internet Watch Foundation believes that 91% of these images are self-generated by children. They are used for blackmail and sexual extortion.[Official Report, 9 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 8WC.] (Correction) Each year, around 9,000 child sexual abuse offences involve an online element, with under-18s the subject of almost a quarter of online blackmail. I challenge anyone to listen to those statistics and come to the conclusion that the internet is a safe place for kids or that the Government should not get involved. This is not the first time in history that new forms of technology have up-ended society, but what is unique to this moment is that the technology has been developed almost exclusively in the private sphere. I am clear that there is a central role for Government in shaping that technology for good, not just to protect from harm—although that is a basic obligation of any Government—but to enable and empower. When it comes to the development of technology that affects our lives, we are not neutral. In no other walk of life would we tolerate this crisis harming our children, and we will not tolerate it online. For too long, technology companies have failed to protect children from some of the worst harms. To be frank, I am not prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt that progress will continue at the pace we need it to, while harm is being done now. For that reason, I make the following announcements to the House. First, the Government today commit to introducing primary legislation to require major tech platforms to build in device-level protections for children. We will introduce the legislation to Parliament as soon as we can, recognising the urgency of the issue while ensuring that we work with colleagues across the House to get it right. We want to see movement on this quickly. If platforms in scope of the draft legislation develop and implement technical solutions while our work is ongoing, we will of course reassess whether legislation is necessary. We know that this is a sector that can, when required, innovate at an extraordinary pace when the chips are down. Alongside the measures on devices, the Government will, as soon as possible, require that apps used by children prevent children from accessing or sharing nudity. We will explore what legislation is needed to implement that commitment, with a view to moving as quickly as possible. This will ensure that the whole ecosystem changes, tackling the means by which children are most often abused or groomed online. Put simply, we will give tech companies the chance to lead; we will not give them the chance to lag. These measures, taken together, will make Britain the first country in the world to go this far, and a world leader in online safety. The message we are sending to tech companies is clear: planning must now become implementation, and progress must translate into protections that make a real difference to children’s lives. I give my commitment to all Members of this House, and to anybody listening out there in the country who has been desperately worried about what is happening to our children online, that when it comes to children’s safety, we are not, and never will be, bystanders. I commend this statement to the House.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
I thank the hon. Member for the way that she has engaged with these proposals. I will try my best to briefly answer as many of her questions as possible. First, on the detail, I have instructed my officials today to begin working up legislation. I appreciate that it is frustrating when a Minister comes to the Dispatch Box and says, “We intend to do this imminently”—the hon. Lady’s party has been in government; they understand the difficulties—but I want to reassure her and the whole House that we intend to do this without delay. The only reason there is not a firm timetable at the moment is because we are the first country in the world to do it. There are a number of questions, some of which she posed, which we need to iron out to ensure that we get this right. On what would constitute sufficient progress that would rid us of the need to introduce legislation, I would much rather the technology companies move at pace to meet their own social and moral obligations, but in the absence of that, the Government will step up and act. Frankly, if we were able to reach a situation very quickly, which we should be able to do with the right will, where children were not able to take or share nude images, then the problem would be solved. But I have to say, based on what I have seen in progress over the last three months, it is almost certain that we will be legislating in this area. The hon. Lady asked about which devices. It is phones and tablets at a minimum, but I accept the point she makes, and we are exploring whether it is possible to extend this to other forms of technology. The hon. Lady asked what I meant when I talked about shaping technology for good. I am a big supporter of the action we are taking on social media for children. I say this as the mum of an 11-year-old and someone who is going through it at the moment and trying to help navigate that; I know all parents across the House will recognise the challenges. I would love us to get to a situation as a country where all people, including children, can be online and find good, trusted information and things that help them to be creative, to feel empowered and to enable them to live the richer, larger lives that they want to live. I think the Government have a right and proper role in helping that to happen. One of the ways in which we are already doing that, building on the great work of my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall), is in trying to use gov.uk as a pioneering service that really does help people to live better lives. The hon. Lady says that this Government had to be dragged kicking and screaming to doing this. Her party was in government for a very long time, and the amount of time it took them to try to introduce any legislation in this area at all was quite shameful. That is not to downplay the role that some members of the Conservative party played in ensuring that we got there, but if it was not for my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West, I do not think I would be standing here today in a position to make this announcement. We should give credit where credit is due: this is a Government who are leading the world in keeping children safe. The last thing the hon. Lady asked me about, which I know many colleagues are concerned about, is the social media ban that we announced earlier this year. I can reassure the House that we do intend to stick to both the spirit and the letter of what my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West set out earlier this year. We are on track to meet the timetable that she set out, to lay the first regulations by the end of this year and for the ban to come into force in the spring of 2027. We also intend to go somewhat further than our initial proposition statement, and I would welcome the opportunity to talk with the hon. Lady in more detail about that.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
Once again, I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend and thank her so much for all her support both when we worked together in government and since; she really is a class act. I am not in a position to give a firm timetable for the measures that my right hon. Friend mentioned, but I will commit to coming back to her with one, because I understand that Members across the House will want to know that there will be no delay in taking action on those things. We are also looking at a more comprehensive system, very much in the spirit of the reforms that she set out earlier this year, and we intend to move quickly on that without delay. I do not think we will be in a position to do the whole package by the end of the year, but I would be very disappointed if we had not made enormous progress by then, including meeting the commitments that she set out. I would be particularly disappointed if, by this time next year, we did not have a much more robust and comprehensive package of measures in place.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
I thank the hon. Lady for her support for these measures. She asks me a number of questions. Will the legislation be developed regardless of the action taken by companies? Yes, it will—my officials have begun drawing up that legislation today. Both she and the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) raised specific issues. We will want to discuss those issues with Opposition parties and colleagues on the Government Benches to ensure that our response is right, and privacy is one of those issues. It is not our intention to ignore or sideline the privacy concerns, and we believe that it is perfectly possible to do this without encroaching on privacy in any way. There is a particular challenge around end-to-end encrypted services, which the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine) will be aware of. I would welcome cross-party discussion about that; we have a number of potential solutions that we are currently exploring, so it would be good to discuss the matter further with her. Finally, the hon. Lady heard what I said about acting quickly and more decisively. Many colleagues will know that before I came to this place, I worked with children and young people. Keeping children safe is the first and most basic responsibility of any Government, and I am very pleased to hear such broad consensus on that across the House.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
My hon. Friend makes a typically well informed and well thought-out point. I thank her not just for her support, but for all the work she has done to ensure that we have got here. I know that she is appreciated not just by me, but by many of the incredible, brave families who I have had the privilege to get to know over the last few weeks and who have wanted to see action in this space for a very long time. I pay tribute to those families as well as to her. She has made an important point about working with Governments and other partners across the world to keep children safe. That is the promise of the UN convention on the rights of the child. A child harmed anywhere means that children can be harmed everywhere, and we have to take that really seriously. My hon. Friend should be encouraged—and I suspect that she is—by the fact that many Governments are now acting more decisively. They are stepping up and recognising that the development and regulation of new forms of technology cannot be left to the private sector alone. There is a clear role for active, empowering Governments working in this space, and my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) and I have not hesitated to reach out to like-minded Governments across the world to see what more we can do together.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
At the risk of spending the entire duration of this statement paying tribute to absolutely everybody, I thank the hon. Lady and her Committee for the work they have done on this issue, and that she has done in particular. I agree with her that it is a damning indictment if a country does not step up to keep its children safe, and I hope she is reassured by what she has heard today. The hon. Lady has asked a specific question about how this policy will be enforced, and I have heard loud and clear the concerns from across this House about the enforcement of the Online Safety Act. Before she left office, my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) appointed a new chair of Ofcom, and specifically tasked Ofcom with stepping up its enforcement work; I have picked up the baton on that work, and I continue it. When it comes to this specific issue, we are looking in particular at the making and selling of devices here in the UK that do not have technology enabled to prevent children from taking and sharing nude images. We are also looking at what we can do in relation to particular apps, especially where highly verified age assurance does not apply, to make sure that we close every loophole. Given that we are the first Government in the world to do this, the way I would describe it to the House is that we are taking a major problem—a crisis—and trying to come at it from every single angle in order to keep children as safe as possible. I look forward to working with the hon. Lady to develop the detail.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
Overnight, I was thinking about how to address the House on this issue. During the financial crash, there was a live debate about the moral and social responsibilities that companies have to citizens, to one another and to all of us. I think we have slightly lost that part of our public debate. Working with some of these companies, I have been struck by how seriously they take those obligations. I want us to bring back that sense that we are all in this together—that we all have a responsibility to keep children safe—and given that these are some of the most innovative, fast-moving and successful companies in the world, it cannot be beyond our collective wit to do this more quickly. Frankly, I do not think we should be in a position where a Secretary of State is standing at the Dispatch Box and announcing that we have to legislate in order to uphold our responsibilities to our own children; but, like I said, if we have to, of course we will.
Hansard source
8 Sep 2026ParliamentLisa Nandy
Online Safety
I should be happy to do so.
Hansard source

Candidate	Party	Votes	Share
Lisa Nandy	Labour	19,401	47.4%
Andy Dawber	Reform UK	9,852	24.1%
Henry Mitson	Conservative	4,310	10.5%
Maureen O'Bern	Independent	3,522	8.6%
Brian Crombie-Fisher	Liberal Democrat	1,692	4.1%
Jane Leicester	Green Party	1,629	4.0%
Jan Cunliffe	Independent	406	1.0%
The Zok	Independent	87	0.2%

Seat	Dates
WiganElected 1 time	4 Jul 2024 – present
WiganElected 4 times	6 May 2010 – 30 May 2024

Post	Dates
Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and SportDepartment for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport	20 Jul 2026 – present
Secretary of State for Culture, Media and SportDepartment for Culture, Media and Sport	5 Jul 2024 – 20 Jul 2026

Post	Dates
Shadow Minister (International Development)Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office	4 Sep 2023 – 30 May 2024
Shadow Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing, Communities & Local GovernmentDepartment for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities	29 Nov 2021 – 4 Sep 2023
Shadow Foreign SecretaryForeign, Commonwealth and Development Office	2 Sep 2020 – 29 Nov 2021
Shadow Foreign SecretaryForeign and Commonwealth Office	5 Apr 2020 – 2 Sep 2020
Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate ChangeDepartment of Energy and Climate Change	14 Sep 2015 – 27 Jun 2016
Shadow Minister (Cabinet Office)Cabinet Office	7 Oct 2013 – 14 Sep 2015
Shadow Minister (Education)Department for Education	18 Mar 2013 – 7 Oct 2013

Party affiliation

Register of interests

Latest on this tracker 570

The Enterprise Act 2002 (Specification of Additional Section 58 Consideration) Order 2026

The Enterprise Act 2002 (Specification of Additional Section 58 Consideration) Order 2026

Online Safety

Online Safety

Online Safety

Online Safety

Online Safety

Online Safety

Online Safety

Online Safety

2024 General Election: Wigan

Parliamentary career

Seats held

Government posts

Committee memberships

Published contact details