Summary
Our predecessor committee’s report into misogyny in music, published in January 2024, found that women in the industry faced a culture of misogyny and discrimination. Sexual harassment and abuse were found to be rife and being self-employed - as most in the industry are - left women more vulnerable to abuses of power. Despite the report being well received across the industry, most of its recommendations were rejected by the then Government.
A year after its publication, little has changed, with women in music still facing significant barriers, including unequal pay, ageism, and being the more likely to take on childcare duties. Sexual harassment remains pervasive, especially among women from minority backgrounds, disabled women, and LGBTQ+ women, with reporting rates low due to fear of retaliation. The need for Government intervention is clear. There remains an overwhelming case for the Government to implement the measures set out in our predecessors’ report, and the updated recommendations set out in this report. The benefits of many of our recommendations would not be limited to those working in music but would extend to women across all sectors.
Legal protections for freelance musicians, who make up the majority of the industry’s workforce, remain inadequate. The Equality Act 2010 does not clearly extend to freelancers or those working under informal arrangements, such as “depping” (substituting for another musician). Although the Employment Rights Bill proposes stronger protections against third-party harassment, there is concern that freelancers may still be excluded. The Government should amend both the Equality Act and the Employment Rights Bill to ensure freelancers are fully protected, as well as bring Section 14 of the former into force, to allow claims based on combined characteristics.
The misuse of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) is a major concern. NDAs are frequently used to silence victims of harassment and abuse, often under coercive circumstances. The psychological toll these agreements take and the power imbalances that make them particularly harmful in the music industry is evident. The Government should ban NDAs in cases involving sexual misconduct, bullying, or discrimination.
We strongly support the formation of the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA), a new body designed to address misconduct across the creative sectors. CIISA aims to provide a trusted, independent avenue for complaints, advice, and dispute resolution. However, its success depends on sustainable funding and a supportive legal framework. While some industry players have committed to funding CIISA, others have been reluctant or have attempted to impose conditions. We support the idea of a mandatory levy if voluntary contributions from the industry prove insufficient or difficult to obtain.
Parents and carers face challenges in the music industry. Freelancers, in particular, struggle with inadequate maternity support and the high cost of childcare. The current rules around Maternity Allowance are unfair, especially when compared to the more flexible arrangements available to employed women. The Government should align Maternity Allowance with Statutory Maternity Pay to allow self-employed women greater flexibility during maternity leave.
Misogyny remains deeply rooted in the music industry. Meaningful change requires both cultural and structural reform. Many dream of working in music - for too many it becomes a nightmare. Women in the industry feel rightly frustrated at the lack of support from the Government in tackling the challenges they face. The Government should accept the recommendations in this report and help set the music industry on a path of lasting change free from discrimination, harassment and fear.
1 Introduction
The previous committee’s inquiry into misogyny in music
1. In January 2024, the previous Women and Equalities Committee published a report into misogyny in the music industry. During their inquiry our predecessors found that women pursuing careers in music face “endemic” misogyny, discrimination, and gendered power imbalances in a sector where most people are self-employed. The report laid bare a “boys’ club” where sexual harassment and abuse is common, and the non-reporting of such incidents is high. The committee heard that victims who do speak out struggle to be believed or may find that their career ends as a consequence.
2. The report set out steps for the then Government to take to help tackle some of these concerns. These included:
a. amending the Equality Act to better protect freelancers from discrimination and bringing section 14 of the Act, which provides protection from discrimination based on a combination of two relevant protected characteristics, into force.
b. bringing forward legislation to prohibit the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and other forms of confidentiality agreements in cases involving sexual abuse, sexual harassment or misconduct, bullying or harassment, and discrimination relating to a protected characteristic.
c. for the Government to support the formation of the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA), a non-statutory standards authority designed “to improve standards of behaviour across the creative industries and to prevent and tackle all forms of bullying and harassment”.1
3. The report was well received by the music industry, with widespread agreement that, if implemented, the committee’s recommendations could help reduce the pervasive misogyny and discrimination in the sector. The Musicians’ Union wrote that “the overwhelming feedback on the report from the industry was the acknowledgment that misogyny is endemic”.2 Their General Secretary told us that the “recommendations in the previous report were so good we would just love to see them implemented”.3 The Independent Society of Musicians (ISM) said that they “welcomed the recommendations”,4 and that the report “graphically portrays the discrimination and harassment that women and others have been subjected to in the music sector for many years”.5 Dr Charisse Beaumont of Black Lives in Music said that “we need the report to be actioned”.6
4. While some sector bodies stepped up and committed to bringing forward changes recommended by the committee, the response from the then Government was largely negative, with few of the committee’s recommendations accepted. Their response described some recommendations as “unnecessary”.7 In the case of other recommendations it had “no plans to implement” them,8 or stated that the Government “continues to look closely”9 at the specific issue. The ISM told us they were “deeply disappointed that the government chose to ignore [the recommendations]”.10
Our committee’s follow up work
5. One year after the publication of our predecessor’s report, we held a follow-up evidence session. Its purpose was to explore whether anything had changed in the sector’s treatment of women over the last 12 months and to examine what further challenges remain.
6. We heard from two separate panels of witnesses, the first consisting of:
- Lucy Cox, a classically trained and touring professional soprano singer who recently returned to the industry after giving birth to her first child.
- Laura Snapes, Deputy Music Editor at The Guardian newspaper.
- Dr Charisse Beaumont, Chief Executive at Black Lives in Music (BLiM), which was founded to promote equality for Black and ethnically diverse musicians.
- Celeste Waite, a singer/songwriter nominated for three BRIT awards, an Academy Award for Best Original Song, and the Mercury Prize.
The second panel consisted of:
- Jen Smith, Chief Executive Officer at CIISA.
- Deborah Annetts, Chief Executive Officer of the Independent Society of Musicians (ISM), the largest representative non-union body for musicians, and a former employment lawyer specialising in discrimination law.
- Naomi Pohl, the General Secretary of the Musicians’ Union (MU), which represents over 35 000 musicians across the UK music industry.
Little has changed
7. Data from the MU’s “Women Musicians Insight Report”, published in the months following the committee’s report, showed that female musicians are still paid less, more likely to suffer age discrimination and expected to do more childcare than male musicians.11 Despite 51% of the women surveyed experiencing gender discrimination and 47% of surveyed women from the Global Majority12 experiencing racism, only 11% and 8% of those women, respectively, reported it.13 32% of women musicians had been sexually harassed while working, with Global Majority, disabled, and LGBT+ women all more likely to experience it.14 23% of disabled musicians had been sexually harassed.
8. Musicians spoke of the challenges in changing the culture of the industry. Lucy Cox described the music industry as “a very small world, and it has been normalised that misogyny and bullying are taking place in the industry all the time”, adding that it is “very difficult to challenge”.15 Celeste Waite observed that “what is most prevalent in the daily experience of being female in the music industry is this idea of an ingrained bias, or even an unconscious, sexist bias.”16 Naomi Pohl, the MU’s General Secretary, told us that, since the report’s publication, the MU had “not seen major change in the industry”.17 Their written submission stated that support for women musicians does exist in the form of small organisations that rely on funding and the work of volunteers. However, it argued that such initiatives “still exist within a system that doesn’t prioritise women’s safety and none of the organisations have the power to change that culture”.18
9. Industry representatives pressed the need for action on the part of Government. Deborah Annetts, the ISM CEO, called for a three-prong solution that focused on: strengthening legislation, the creation of the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA), and efforts to change the industry’s culture.19 Dr Charisse Beaumont spoke to the frustration women in the industry feel that “not enough is being done about bullying and harassment. All we have are these reports”.20 Dr Beaumont argued that Government intervention in the sector is crucial:
I have heard from the top […] of the music industry, and they have told me categorically […] the only thing that will move them to change is the Government […] We need the Government to get involved […] We do not need any more reports. We need the [previous committee’s] report to be actioned.21
Deborah Annetts called for the report’s recommendations to be restated to the new Government. She explained:
this is an opportunity to restate those recommendations and, given that we have an Employment Rights Bill out there and given that protected characteristics are being looked at, as well as the equalities legislation, it is such an opportunity for this committee to make a real impact.22
We note that in September 2024, the Labour Party Conference passed a motion calling on the Government to implement the recommendations from the committee’s report in full.23
10. conclusion
One year on from its publication, and having heard from key witnesses, we find that there remains an overwhelming case for the Government to implement the measures set out in our predecessors’ report to capitalise on the pockets of momentum that do exist in the industry and help produce lasting change for women in music.
11. In this report we summarise and, where necessary, update those recommendations where we would most like to see Government action. They centre on CIISA, equality legislation and better protections for freelancers, non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and parental leave. Many of the recommendations, if implemented, will benefit not just women in music but all women who experience workplace discrimination and harassment.
2 Employment law and the Equality Act 2010
Protections for freelance musicians
12. Approximately 70% of the music industry workforce are thought to be freelancers.24 This, combined with the concentration of small and micro businesses operating within it, means it can be difficult to apply standards against which people operating within the sector can be held to account. Witnesses we spoke to told us that this situation was compounded by a lack of enforceable rights.25 Part 5 of the Equality Act 2010 provides various protections against discrimination for employees, job applicants and contract workers in the context of work. However, the duty on employers to take reasonable steps to prevent the sexual harassment of their employees in the course of their employment only applies to people working under a contract of employment or a “contract personally to do work”.26 The Department for Culture, Media and Sport confirmed to our predecessors that, “many freelance musicians are exempt from legal protections from sexual harassment at work because of their employment status”.27 Deborah Annetts explained:
[…] you have to have, at the very base, rights that you can enforce. At the moment, if you are a freelancer, there is a lack of rights, which means you are excluded from the equalities legislation […] we still have not sorted out third-party harassment and, at the moment, what has been drafted in the Employment Rights Bill is predicated on an employment relationship. Within music […] it is largely a freelance relationship so that simply will not meet the challenge.28
13. The ISM described to us the practice of “depping” in the music workforce where a professional musician sends a substitute (a ‘deputy’) of their choice to take their place, so that they can fulfil a different professional commitment.29 They argued that the Equality Act 2010 fails to protect women that engage in this practice:
For many years, this practice of ‘depping’ has left these women without protection because of the restrictive language used in section 83(2) of the Equality Act (the section of the Act that says who is entitled to protection). In recent years, employment tribunals have stepped in to try to plug some of this gap in protection, for at least some women, depending on the facts of each case.
However, the language of the Act has not changed, leaving organisations uncertain of their obligations, and women uncertain as to their rights […] We have been calling for many years for the language of section 83(2) of the Equality Act to be strengthened so as to spell out clearly that all freelance musicians are protected from sexual harassment and discrimination.30
14. As well as lacking many of the protections and access to support and advice available to those with more formal working arrangements, freelancers can find it difficult to report incidents of discrimination and harassment, or to gain mediation or other resolutions. This is particularly true in cases where the perpetrator of the abuse is also a freelancer.31 Without a robust framework, women are unlikely to report what has happened to them. Over two thirds of respondents to the ISM Dignity at work survey who said that they had been a victim of sexual harassment did not report it due to fear of victimisation.32 While the introduction of CIISA will provide a means of reporting and potentially of resolution, concern remains that protections against sexual harassment remain inadequate.
15. Our predecessors called on the then Government to bring forward protections against harassment from third parties, such as attacks on musicians by audience members. The Government declined to do so. We are pleased to note that such provisions are included in the current Government’s Employment Rights Bill, which would require an employer to take all reasonable steps to prevent a third party from harassing their employee in the course of their employment. The Bill also raises the bar of the existing duty on employers regarding sexual harassment of their employees: employers will be required to take “all reasonable steps” to prevent sexual harassment of their employees, rather than the current threshold of “reasonable steps”.33 However, concern has been raised with us that freelancers are potentially excluded from these protections.34 Debroah Annetts explained:
We need the third-party harassment provisions to be broad enough to cover our sector because third-party harassment is really prevalent within our sector. Again, our model just does not fit the way employment works within the Employment Rights Bill. I wrote to the Cabinet Office after I had a meeting with them in October of last year and said, “These are the things that we need you to take on board,” and they all came out of Dignity at work 2. So far, we have not heard anything positive back. I chased them yesterday and they confirmed that no action has happened as yet. I would invite this Committee to perhaps follow up in relation to these provisions which would be of real value to our sector […].35
16. recommendation
The Government should amend the Equality Act 2010 so that the protections relating to the prevention of third-party discrimination and harassment clearly include freelancers and those who are standing in (‘depping’) for another musician
17. recommendation
The Government should amend the proposed duty on employers to take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment (clause 19 of the Employment Rights Bill) to ensure freelancers are within its scope.
18. recommendation
The Government should amend the proposed new rights to protection from third-party harassment (clause 20 of the Employment Rights Bill) to ensure that they extend to freelancers.
Tribunal time limits
19. Our predecessor committee raised concern at the length of time available to victims of workplace discrimination or harassment to bring forward claims to the Employment Tribunal on the basis of the Equality Act 2010. They recommended doubling the limit from three to six months. Despite the overwhelming support for such a change from those who gave evidence to our predecessor’s inquiry, the then Minister for Media, Tourism and Creative Industries argued that such a change was not desirable. We support our predecessor’s findings and are pleased to note that the Employment Rights Bill will extend the time limit to bring a case before the Employment Tribunal to six months.36
Intersectionality
20. The ISM’s most recent report into discrimination in the music sector described intersectionality as “the impact of experiencing multiple systems of oppression”. The Musicians’ Union’s 2022 snapshot survey found that more than 65% of respondents who had experienced misogyny and/or sexism said it was linked to another characteristic. Women are more likely to face age discrimination; almost a third of women responding to an MU survey reported being discriminated against due to their age compared to a fifth of men.37 Dr Charisse Beaumont of BLiM indicated to us the intersectional nature of the abuse that black women in music face:
Our data, the [MU] data, the [MU] census and Help Musicians’ data say that black women are bullied and sexually harassed more than any other group of people. There is a correlation; we are seeing something here. That is why something needs to be done. However, we are also the most likely to not be believed.38
21. 29% of LGBTQ+ respondents to a Help Musicians Census reported experiencing sexual harassment, impacting their ability to work and their career progression. Dr Beaumont set out her data, reporting that 74% of LGBTQI artists and 69% of artists with a disability had sought counselling because of how they are being treated in the music industry, while 41% of black women had seen their mental health decline.39
22. Industry bodies have called on the Government to review the limit of two characteristics within section 14 of the Equality Act 2010.40 Section 14 of the Equality Act has never been brought into force. It provides for protection from discrimination because of a combination of two characteristics. Our predecessors recommended that the then Government commenced section 14 in its 2022 report on support for women experiencing the menopause,41 as it also did in the original report on misogyny in music.42 In both instances, the Government rejected the recommendation, stating in its response to the latter that:
Section 14 is considered unnecessary, since the 2010 Act provides robust protection across a range of protected characteristics and an employee or service user may bring a claim under more than one ground.43
23. The current Government has said that it will publish a call for evidence on equality law, with a view to possible equality law reform.44 The call for evidence stated that the Government has committed to “commencing section 14 of the Equality Act”, adding that this would:
help to ensure that the full reality of claimants’ experience is recognised, and that discrimination law can better address the disadvantage suffered by people who experience combined discrimination. We are giving careful consideration to how we bring this provision into force and are seeking evidence and views on the prevalence of discrimination because of a combination of protected characteristics and the existing scope of the provision.45
24. recommendation
The Government should fulfil its commitment to bring section 14 of the Equality Act 2010 into force and do so by the end of the next parliamentary session at the latest.
Non-disclosure agreements
25. Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are legally binding contracts that prohibit one or more party to the contract from sharing specified information with anyone else. They are routinely used by businesses in matters to do with commercially sensitive information.46
26. Our predecessor committee heard that NDAs are also being used to prevent victims of discrimination, harassment and abuse from speaking about their experiences or from pursuing a resolution via the Employment Tribunal. Women the committee spoke to described how they were coerced into signing by businesses who threatened to ruin them financially or reputationally if they refused. Legally, NDAs cannot prevent people from reporting a crime, yet it is clear that they do act as deterrent from doing so.
27. Power imbalances in the music sector mean that victims of unacceptable behaviour have little agency in the process of deciding whether to sign an NDA. A victim of sexual discrimination told our predecessors that the process of negotiating a settlement was “arduous and heavily stacked against me […] despite having done nothing wrong.”47 The committee was given examples of businesses that had invented counter charges against an individual and threatened to pursue them through the courts knowing that they could not afford to defend themselves and who then ‘offered’ to drop the charges in exchange for a signature on the NDA. Dr Charisse Beaumont told us:
NDAs ethically depend on the context and how they are implemented, but right now they allow the powerful people to bully, stifle and block the truth from being known. We need to look at all structures around abusers and give them no place to hide.48
28. Can’t Buy My Silence, a global not-for-profit campaign founded by Zelda Perkins and Professor Julie Macfarlane after their own experiences of the harmful use of NDAs, explained that “NDAs are disproportionately used in precarious industries, where freelance contracts exacerbate existing power dynamics”.49 They reported the following statistics regarding NDAs:
a. 93% of those signing an NDA report mental health consequences
b. five times as many women have signed an NDA as men
c. A higher proportion of black female respondents to the survey had signed NDAs compared to white women (55% vs 40%).
d. 34% of respondents did not file a formal complaint, because they anticipated being asked to sign an NDA, and did not want to.50
29. Opponents to banning NDAs suggest that survivors of discrimination or harassment should have the choice whether to enter into one. However, witnesses to our inquiry were clear that concerns about their misuse outweighed any such benefits. Naomi Pohl observed:
what worries me is how coercive the industry is where there is a power imbalance. In my experience, it is much more likely that an NDA would be used to silence the survivor rather than the survivor looking to the NDA for protection.51
30. Witnesses were in agreement that NDAs should be banned for the purposes that we have discussed. Jen Smith, CEO of CIISA, said a ban would show “absolutely decisive leadership by the Government” describing such a move as “an immediate opportunity to make lasting and meaningful change which would prevent many future harms in the music industry and beyond […] it would make a seismic immediate impact”.52 Deborah Annetts suggested a ban would be “a game changer for the music sector”.53
Legislative context
31. The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 will, once commenced, prohibit the use of NDAs in higher education (specifically in relation to staff, students and visiting speakers) regarding complaints of sexual misconduct, bullying and harassment. Can’t Buy My Silence argued that this principle should be extended to all employees, not just those in higher education.54 Our predecessors recommended:
The Government should urgently bring forward legislative proposals to prohibit the use of non-disclosure and other forms of confidentiality agreements in cases involving (a) sexual abuse, sexual harassment or sexual misconduct; (b) bullying or harassment not falling within (a) and (c) discrimination relating to a protected characteristic.55
32. Despite bringing in a similar provision for the higher education sector, the then Government rejected the committee’s recommendation, instead saying that it was working on proposals “to clarify that non-disclosure agreements cannot be legally enforced if they prevent victims from reporting a crime and to ensure information related to criminal conduct can be discussed”.56 We note that the current Government’s Employment Rights Bill does not contain any measures on NDAs. Earlier this year, a Government spokesperson said:
We are aware of concerns about the misuse of NDAs to intimidate and silence victims of crime, or other types of misconduct such as harassment, discrimination, and bullying, and are taking a fresh look at these issues to identify the right approach.57
While this is an encouraging sign, we have yet to see any commitment to legislative proposals.
33. recommendation
The Government should urgently bring forward legislative proposals to prohibit the use of non-disclosure and other forms of confidentiality agreements in cases involving (a) sexual abuse, sexual harassment or sexual misconduct; (b) bullying or harassment not falling within (a), and (c) discrimination relating to a protected characteristic. Doing so would demonstrate decisive leadership by the Government that the silencing of victims of abuse will no longer be tolerated.
3 Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority
34. An industry initiative, CIISA is a non-statutory standards authority that is in the process of being established “to improve standards of behaviour across the creative industries and to prevent and tackle all forms of bullying and harassment”.58 Creative industry professionals will be able to use CIISA to make complaints or seek advice relating to bad behaviour if the behaviour has taken place in relation to work in the creative industries and if they were conducting paid work. Jen Smith, CIISA’s CEO, has described its creation as a “much needed circuit breaker and trusted source of knowledge and expertise for employers, member bodies and crucially freelancers.”59
35. Reflecting on the evidence we received, Jen Smith observed:
The need for CIISA is evident. This is demonstrated not just in individuals who are coming to us desperately in need of help and support but also from smaller employers who are challenged as they grapple with these difficult issues and are looking for independent impartial support and guidance. We have now reached this tipping point where there is irreversible insight that, despite all best efforts, there is a persistent problem with behaviours in the music industry and CIISA has a significant role to play in addressing that.
36. CIISA will offer a number of services, including the ability for individuals to report discriminatory behaviour that has happened to them or to a colleague; access to advice; support with the criminal justice system; early dispute resolution and mediation; best practice, data and insights into the industry (also available to the general public); an in-house investigations service; and access to an independent adjudication panel investigation service. Freelancers will be able to access all services other than the in-house investigation service. CIISA will cover a disparate range of sectors. It aims to take a phased approach to building up its services.60
37. Jen Smith described the gap in knowledge that CIISA had the potential to bridge, from both individuals and organisations in the industry:
There is an urgent and fundamental gap in provision. Yes, there are lots of places you can go, but there is no front-door service that joins the dots. People fall through those gaps… they are also concerned about repercussions and the genuine safety and confidentiality of what they will bring to us… it is not just individuals coming to us, it is SMEs saying, “We do not know what to do. We have a code of conduct; we have no investigations procedure. What are the steps that we should take as a responsible employer?” So, the gap is evident, the need is evident, the urgency is evident.61
38. CIISA’s effectiveness will, among other things, depend on sustainable funding and an effective legislative framework to underpin it. Dr Beaumont told us, “The only recommendation I see that brings true consequences to the actions of bullying and harassment is CIISA being sustained and invested into.”62
Funding
39. CIISA operates a two-company model, like the Advertising Standards Authority, funded by contributions from the creative industries (specifically music, TV, film and theatre), with funds collected by a finance board to guarantee CIISA’s independence. The finance board, a parent company, sits separately to the CIISA board to ensure that the latter can “investigate without fear or favour”. The funding model is the same across the aforementioned creative industries. No organisation will pay more than 0.1% of turnover under this model and those with a turnover of less than £100k will not be required to contribute.63
40. CIISA has asked organisations to commit to providing funding for at least the first two years. This is to allow CIISA to identify the scale of resources it will have as it develops as a regulator and aims to become sustainable. Currently, contributions are voluntary, unlike with Ofgem and Ofwat, which are funded by compulsory licence fees levied on organisations in their sectors.
41. While many organisations have willingly committed to providing the funding, others have required much persuasion, tried to impose conditions, only committed to one year or refused to commit funding altogether. This has led to CIISA having to consider alternative funding models:
One of the challenges we have on funding is that people are trying to set conditions on our operational scope. For example, “We will fund you, but only if you only do training,”. Obviously, as an independent body, we cannot accept conditions on our funding. It is a new relationship that we are building with industry to understand that an independent body is different.
We all sat down and agreed with representatives from the [British Phonographic Industry, the trade body representing the UK’s recorded music industry] and others that the agreed tariff model would be 0.1% [of UK turnover], and that would be a two-year tie-in commitment. So, this was agreed with the sector and yet it is taking longer than we thought for people to commit to it, hence we are exploring alternative models.64
42. Jen Smith said it “would be a great shame in the face of undeniable evidence of need and undeniable evidence of harms if, collectively, voluntarily, the industry cannot show leadership on this”, and said that a mandated levy is an option that should be kept on the table:
we watch with interest what has recently been addressed in the gambling sector where there is a mandated levy […] we certainly would visit all options because this is absolutely essential.65
MU General Secretary Naomi Pohl went further, saying funding CIISA should be mandatory: “It needs to be mandatory. If people can […] they will opt out”.66
43. The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, the Rt. Hon. Lisa Nandy MP, told the Culture, Media and Sport Committee that she is “prepared to take further action” to compel organisations to engage with CIISA’s work.67 We note that the CMS Committee recently called on the Government to “explore all options for funding CIISA in case the industry does not deliver a voluntary solution, including having industries under CIISA’s remit be subject to a levy to fund its work”.68
Legislative framework
44. We questioned Jen Smith on whether there were any legislative impediments to CIISA’s work. In evidence to our predecessors, CIISA drew attention to issues around GDPR, the need to be a prescribed person in relation to section 43F of the Employment Rights Act 1996—which allows individuals to make protected disclosures in the public interest without the fear of facing unfair treatment or being dismissed—and other potential legal barriers. Jen Smith told us that conversations were ongoing between CIISA and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on these matters.69
Need for CIISA to sit alongside improved statutory protections
45. Deborah Annetts argued that the risk with CIISA is that victims reporting will be punished for doing so by not getting work in future, and hence the need for a robust statutory framework with “clearly drawn employment rights” and “free to access employment tribunal(s)”:
when we take a sex discrimination case and, theoretically, women are protected in relation to victimisation under the equalities legislation, they still end up not getting more work because they have reported. That is the problem, and it is one of my concerns around CIISA. I absolutely welcome the idea of people being able to go there, but there is still the risk that if people come forward, it could be at detriment to their own careers, and that is why we need a rigorous statutory framework to work within.70
46. Less than a third of women who experience harassment and abuse report it and few see any action, yet by reporting, as Dr Beaumont explained, “they have had to risk their careers, their reputation and their mortgages on their house, they will lose gigs, work and their family in some cases.”71 For Dr Beaumont a key issue is belief, referring to a case in the US she noted that women should be believed “the first time”:
You have thousands of women, you have this panel, you have had loads of panels over the last year, thousands of pieces of evidence, women saying, “This is happening,” and it is being reported, yet we are not believed. […]. People are taking a risk, and nothing is being done.72
47. While the film industry has had its ‘MeToo’ moment—and noting there is debate to be had on whether it has produced the lasting change people hoped—there is doubt that anything similar will happen in music and, as Guardian journalist Laura Snapes told us, neither should we be waiting for one: “it is a little passive and maybe limited to perceive the problem as something that one day might explode, rather than an ongoing process of ensuring safety and respect”. Laura Snapes drew attention to the effect of increased mainstreaming of misogynistic views as a counter for the idea that there will be “some kind of future moment”.73
48. Annetts, a former employment lawyer, argued that the way to achieve cultural change in the music industry was for victims to sue the perpetrators:
I actually think you need to sue people. You need to sue companies, and you need to sue senior managers to shift culture. That sounds tremendously aggressive, but the culture of this sector is not going to shift just with CIISA. We need a better statutory framework, and then we need to have some test cases.74
The ISM also wrote to us in support of this idea:
organisations need to understand that engaging in unlawful discrimination or harassment can have serious and costly reputational consequences – for the organisation and the perpetrator. In all workplaces, but perhaps most acutely, in our creative industry space, there is a profound imbalance between the bargaining power of organisations and individuals. An individual’s ability to access justice by enforcing statutory equality rights is an essential part of […] attempting to right this power imbalance.75
The ISM noted that such statutory rights must also sit alongside “access to good quality information for individuals about their rights and proper support in enforcing them” and “strong internal policies and reporting mechanisms for organisations, along with good quality guidance and training”.76 The MU agreed on the importance on an enhanced legislative framework but maintained that CIISA is “crucial”.77 They argued CIISA would be a “game changer”, partly because it would enable a freelancer to make a report about another freelancer; this is important given that the industry involves people often taking on very short-term contracts, where it can be very difficult to identify the correct reporting mechanism.78
49. conclusion
We support the creation of the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA). Crucially, it will be a single, recognisable body that anyone in the industry can turn to for support and advice. It is well placed to help effect cultural change in the industry once it is fully operational. It can only do so, however, if underpinned by the necessary legal provisions and sustainable funding.
50. conclusion
We agree with the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s conclusion that, for it to operate effectively, the industry must see supporting CIISA financially and ideologically to be a fundamental part of operating in the UK.
51. recommendation
We urge the Government to accept the recommendation from the Culture, Media and Sport Committee that: “All parts of the creative industries under CIISA’s remit should commit to unconditional, long-term funding within six months. In the meantime, the Government should explore all options for funding CIISA in case the industry does not deliver a voluntary solution, including having industries under CIISA’s remit be subject to a levy to fund its work.”
52. recommendation
CIISA has been several years in development. It is therefore surprising that discussions with Government over the necessary legal framework for it to operate effectively are still ongoing. The Government needs to demonstrate its full support for CIISA and get on with providing it with the legal assurances it needs to undertake its crucial work.
4 Maternity and the music industry
53. Parents and carers are underrepresented in the music industry: 29% of people in the music industry have caring responsibilities, compared with 44% of the UK population.79 Soprano Lucy Cox described to us a “feeling that you have ended your job by having a child”:
in the very first audition I did, I was told that I would need to wait for somebody to become pregnant or die in order to start getting any work as a classical singer […] somebody who provides lots of my work […] was telling me what a shame he thought it was that women did not stay in the industry if they took a gap of a year or two to have children, and he advised me to take on as much as I could.80
54. It can be difficult for parents to maintain a career in a sector which involves late hours, freelance work and insecure working environments.81 Concerns raised with our predecessors focused on the effect of pregnancy on job retention, the adequacy of maternity support, and childcare availability.82
55. There is a marked difference in the way that parents who are employed are treated, particularly in larger organisations with HR functions, compared to those who are freelance. Senior executives from the major record labels set out to the previous committee their companies’ progressive policies on maternity and childcare and the positive effect they are having on retention.83 Such policies contrast starkly with the support available to freelancers.
56. Our predecessors heard how expectant mothers in the freelance sector have lost their job directly or lost their role more covertly due to pregnancy and that rules around maternity and paternity leave provided insufficient support and protection.84 Dr Beaumont told us that:
Nine out of 10 classical music musicians are turning down work because of parent and carer responsibilities, self-employed mothers and female carers in classical music experience an £8,000 pay penalty, only 4% of people working in classical music referenced a supportive employer, and 40% of parents working in classical music are thinking about leaving their careers.85
Maternity Allowance
57. When self-employed people have families, only the mother qualifies for paid leave (Maternity Allowance (MA), claimed through DWP). Also, strict rules govern the amount of work the mother can do while claiming MA. The ISM wrote to us to explain the situation:
Our legal team are regularly contacted by pregnant freelance musicians who are struggling to get to grips with the Maternity Allowance system, which has not been reformed for many years and which has failed to keep pace with changes in the way women work.
A key source of unfairness for our members is that whereas employed women on maternity leave are free to do self-employed work (beyond their 10 Keeping in Touch days) while still being paid Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP) by their employer, self-employed women in receipt of [MA] are not permitted to do any work at all, beyond the 10 KIT days.
[…] in the music sector, this creates a specific unfairness because of the very high proportion of freelance women. They find themselves having to weigh up whether to mothball their businesses in order to receive MA, unable to supplement their income in financial ways that are available to their employed counterparts.86
This effectively places the entire burden of childcare in the first year on the mother, removing her from the workplace.87 Lucy Cox spoke to us about this in-built unfairness, as well as the insufficiency of MA itself:
[MA] for self-employed people is inadequate, especially given the cost of living crisis; there was no way that I could have survived on that. I ended up working until I was about 37 weeks pregnant […] and then I went back to work when she was eight weeks old […] You are constantly trying to balance this new responsibility of having a baby with needing to earn and not wanting to give up on the career that we are all doing because we love it.88
She also drew attention to the lack of paternity leave for self-employed fathers, as further increasing the burden on the mother. We will consider the issue of paternity leave separately in our forthcoming report on reforms to shared parental leave and paternity leave.
Childcare
58. Lucy Cox also spoke about the problems posed by the expense of having to arrange childcare whilst working in the industry, combined with the pressure to keep working:
A lot of my life before having a baby was going on longer tours. It is not financially viable to take her because it involves taking another caring adult. That means my husband cannot work and we are looking at paying for flights and accommodation for him as well, let alone the practicalities of it, which is a whole load of work that then becomes unavailable to me. But as I mentioned, there is also enormous pressure to keep on trying to make these tours work. I am thinking in the future of carting the baby off to Europe on various different occasions and making a loss. It is something that I feel I have to do in order to maintain my foothold because, as we have said, if you do not do the work then somebody else might well do it, and then you might not get invited back.89
59. Naomi Pohl spoke of how the burden of childcare falls much more heavily on women, posing a career barrier for them in a greater way than it does for men: 29% described family commitments as a barrier, whereas only 18% of men said the same.90 The MU support childcare being made tax-deductible for the self-employed “so that women can actually see that recognised as a cost of doing their jobs”.91 We have received similar representations in our separate inquiry into support for female entrepreneurs and will consider this proposition in more detail in that inquiry.92
60. recommendation
The Employment Rights Bill should be amended to bring Maternity Allowance into line with Statutory Maternity Pay. This would remove the inherent unfairness that means that, during maternity leave, women in employment can undertake unlimited self-employed work but restricts the ability for freelancers to do so for any more than their 10 keeping in touch days.
Conclusions and recommendations
Introduction
1. One year on from its publication, and having heard from key witnesses, we find that there remains an overwhelming case for the Government to implement the measures set out in our predecessors’ report to capitalise on the pockets of momentum that do exist in the industry and help produce lasting change for women in music. (Conclusion, Paragraph 10)
Employment law and the Equality Act 2010
2. The Government should amend the Equality Act 2010 so that the protections relating to the prevention of third-party discrimination and harassment clearly include freelancers and those who are standing in (‘depping’) for another musician. (Recommendation, Paragraph 16)
3. The Government should amend the proposed duty on employers to take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment (clause 19 of the Employment Rights Bill) to ensure freelancers are within its scope. (Recommendation, Paragraph 17)
4. The Government should amend the proposed new rights to protection from third-party harassment (clause 20 of the Employment Rights Bill) to ensure that they extend to freelancers. (Recommendation, Paragraph 18)
5. The Government should fulfil its commitment to bring section 14 of the Equality Act 2010 into force and do so by the end of the next parliamentary session at the latest. (Recommendation, Paragraph 24)
6. The Government should urgently bring forward legislative proposals to prohibit the use of non-disclosure and other forms of confidentiality agreements in cases involving (a) sexual abuse, sexual harassment or sexual misconduct; (b) bullying or harassment not falling within (a), and (c) discrimination relating to a protected characteristic. Doing so would demonstrate decisive leadership by the Government that the silencing of victims of abuse will no longer be tolerated. (Recommendation, Paragraph 33)
Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority
7. We support the creation of the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA). Crucially, it will be a single, recognisable body that anyone in the industry can turn to for support and advice. It is well placed to help effect cultural change in the industry once it is fully operational. It can only do so, however, if underpinned by the necessary legal provisions and sustainable funding. (Conclusion, Paragraph 49)
8. We agree with the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s conclusion that, for it to operate effectively, the industry must see supporting CIISA financially and ideologically to be a fundamental part of operating in the UK. (Conclusion, Paragraph 50)
9. We urge the Government to accept the recommendation from the Culture, Media and Sport Committee that: “All parts of the creative industries under CIISA’s remit should commit to unconditional, long-term funding within six months. In the meantime, the Government should explore all options for funding CIISA in case the industry does not deliver a voluntary solution, including having industries under CIISA’s remit be subject to a levy to fund its work.” (Recommendation, Paragraph 51)
10. CIISA has been several years in development. It is therefore surprising that discussions with Government over the necessary legal framework for it to operate effectively are still ongoing. The Government needs to demonstrate its full support for CIISA and get on with providing it with the legal assurances it needs to undertake its crucial work. (Recommendation, Paragraph 52)
Maternity and the music industry
11. The Employment Rights Bill should be amended to bring Maternity Allowance into line with Statutory Maternity Pay. This would remove the inherent unfairness that means that, during maternity leave, women in employment can undertake unlimited self-employed work but restricts the ability for freelancers to do so for any more than their 10 keeping in touch days. (Recommendation, Paragraph 60)
Formal minutes
Wednesday 21 May 2025
Members present:
Sarah Owen, in the Chair
Alex Brewer
David Burton-Sampson
Natalie Fleet
Catherine Fookes
Christine Jardine
Rachel Taylor
Misogyny in music: on repeat
Draft Report (Misogyny in music: on repeat), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph. Paragraphs 1 to 60 read and agreed to.
Summary agreed to.
Resolved, That the Report be the Fifth Report of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.
Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 134.
Adjournment
Adjourned till Wednesday 4 June at 2.00pm.
Witnesses
The following witnesses gave evidence. Transcripts can be viewed on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.
Tuesday 28 January 2025
Laura Snapes, Deputy Music Editor, The Guardian; Lucy Cox, Freelance soprano singer; Dr Charisse Beaumont, Chief Executive Officer, Black Lives in Music; Celeste Waite, Singer/SongwriterQ1–30
Deborah Annetts, Chief Executive, Independent Society of Musicians (ISM); Jen Smith, Chief Executive, Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority; Naomi Pohl, General Secretary, Musicians’ UnionQ31–56
Published written evidence
The following written evidence was received and can be viewed on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.
MiM numbers are generated by the evidence processing system and so may not be complete.
1 Black Lives in Music MiM0006
2 CIISA MiM0005
3 Can’t Buy My Silence MiM0004
4 Independent Society of Musicians MiM0001
5 Musicians Union MiM0003
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament
All publications from the Committee are available on the publications page of the Committee’s website.
Session 2024–25
|
Number |
Title |
Reference |
|
4th |
Tackling non-consensual intimate image abuse |
HC 336 |
|
3rd |
The rights of older people |
HC 414 |
|
2nd |
Equality at work: Miscarriage and bereavement leave |
HC 335 |
|
1st |
Women’s reproductive health conditions |
HC 337 |
|
4th |
Tackling non-consensual intimate image abuse: Government Response |
HC 911 |
|
3rd |
The rights of older people: Responses from Government, Advertising Standards Authority, Ofcom and IPSO |
HC 910 |
|
2nd |
The prevalence of sexually transmitted infections in young people and other high risk groups: Government Response |
HC 865 |
|
1st |
Equality at work: Miscarriage and bereavement leave: Government Response |
HC 803 |
Footnotes
1 Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority, Our Purpose and Vision, accessed 19 April 2025
5 Independent Society of Musicians, ISM welcomes Misogyny in Music report, 30 Jan 2024
7 Women and Equalities Committee, Third Special Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music: Government, CIISA and Office for Students responses, HC: 331, pg 4
8 Women and Equalities Committee, Third Special Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music: Government, CIISA and Office for Students responses, HC: 331, pg 4
9 Women and Equalities Committee, Third Special Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music: Government, CIISA and Office for Students responses, HC: 331, pg 6
11 Musicians’ Census, Women Musicians Insight Report, March 2024
12 According to the above report, Global Majority refers to people who are Black, Asian, Brown, dual-heritage, indigenous to the global south, and/or have been referred to as “ethnic minorities”
13 Musicians’ Census, Women Musicians Insight Report, March 2024
14 Musicians’ Census, Women Musicians Insight Report, March 2024
23 Musicians’ Union, MU Policies on AI and Misogyny in Music Adopted at Labour Party Conference, 26 September 2024
24 F-List for Music CIC (MiM0034);
26 Equality Act 2010, s.83, Written evidence received for the Committee’s inquiry into Enforcing the Equality Act: the law and the role of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Incorporated Society of Musicians (EEA0036), para 16, July 2018
27 Department for Culture, Media and Sport (MiM0039)
33 For the existing sexual harassment duty, see Equality Act 2010, s.40A
36 Employment Rights Bill [HL] (as brought from the Commons), Bill 81, Schedule 12, pg 147
40 Ivors Academy of Music Creators (MiM0022); UK Music (MiM0037); Music Managers Forum (MiM0017); Musicians’ Union (MiM0020)
41 Women and Equalities Committee, Menopause and the workplace, First Report of Session 2022–23, HC 91
42 Women and Equalities Committee, Second Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music, HC: 129, pg 17
43 Women and Equalities Committee, Third Special Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music: Government, CIISA and Office for Students responses, HC: 331, pg 4
44 Letter from the Minister of Equalities regarding the publication of a call for evidence on equality law, 4 April 2025
45 Office for Equality and Opportunity, Call for Evidence - Equality Law, gov.uk, (accessed 13 May 2025)
46 Can’t Buy My Silence (MiM0056)
47 Evidence submitted in confidence
49 Can’t Buy My Silence (MiM0056)
50 Can’t Buy My Silence [MiM0004]
54 Can’t Buy My Silence [MiM0004]
55 Women and Equalities Committee, Second Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music, HC: 129, pg 56
56 Women and Equalities Committee, Third Special Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music: Government, CIISA and Office for Students responses, HC: 331, pg 16
57 The Guardian, Labour considering ban on use of NDAs to hush up sexual misconduct at work, 17 Jan 2025
58 CIISA, The Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority, accessed on 12 May 2025
59 CIISA, Summary document provided to the Committee
60 CIISA, CIISA’s Services, March 2025
63 CIISA, CIISA funding model Frequently Asked Questions, October 2024
67 Oral evidence taken by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee on 10 December 2024, The Work of the Department, HC 330, Q13
68 Culture, Media and Sport Committee, First Report of Session 2024–25, British film and high-end television, HC 328, pg 60
75 Independent Society of Musicians [MiM0001]
76 Independent Society of Musicians [MiM0001]
77 The Musician’s Union [MiM0003]
79 Oral evidence taken on 19 April 2023, Q133 [Jamie Njoku-Goodwin]
80 See for example, Independent Society of Music (MiM0009); Music Producers Guild (MiM0031); UK Music (MiM0037) ; Women in CTRL (MiM0033)
81 See for example, Independent Society of Music (MiM0009); Music Producers Guild (MiM0031); UK Music (MiM0037) ; Women in CTRL (MiM0033); Q133 [Jamie Njoku-Goodwin]; Qq193–7 [John Shortell]; Q64 [Vick Bain]
82 Women and Equalities Committee, Second Report of Session 2023–24, Misogyny in music, HC: 129, pg 22
83 Sony Music UK (MiM0052); Oral evidence taken on 28 June 2023, Q230 [Jessica Carsen]; Universal Music UK (MiM0048)
84 F-List for Music CIC (MiM0034); Incorporated Society of Musicians, Dignity at work 2: Discrimination in the music sector, September 2022
91 The Musician’s Union [MiM0003]
92 Women and Equalities Committee, Female entrepreneurship - Inquiry - UK Parliament, accessed on 13 May 2025