Sir Kier Starmer’s new Labour government has updated and improved the previous Conservative administration’s Football Governance Bill. The biggest changes cover the financial distributions between leagues, for example. Parachute payments will no longer be excluded so the future finances of relegated clubs are protected.
If no financial agreement can be reached between the Premier League and the rest of the football pyramid, the Independent Football Regulator (IFR) will now have the power to arbitrate. Crucially for fans, the provisions forcing clubs to consult with supporters have been strengthened.
Fans must in future be consulted on ticket prices – something previously excluded – and the regulator can overturn any fan rep appointments made by clubs nominating their own lickspittles. There will also be tougher owners’ and directors’ tests. Some rapscallions who have owned or run football clubs in the past would not pass the new tests.
And the IFR will have to report on its work much earlier – within 18 months of starting instead of three years, and then every three years instead of every five. There are several minor changes to make modification of the regulatory regime easier as the game or environment changes or as new competitions are discussed, they can either be banned or allowed without primary legislation.
The Expert Panel has been beefed up to allow for a bigger than expected workload, and clubs must report on their equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI). Because the bill has cross-party support, it was launched in the House of Lords on November 1. Its second reading in there will be on 13 November and, although Lady Brady has her name down to speak, she won’t be able to scupper it.
For non-political watchers, it appears complicated. In addition to the bill itself, the government published explanatory notes, an impact assessment and a fact sheet detailing the changes from the previous Tory bill. The committee stage will be in the Lords. The third reading in the Lords should be in February, when the bill will come before the Commons. It could have Royal Assent before the summer recess in July.
The new bill also sets out a staged building of the regulator, so it can get cracking faster, even if it hasn’t appointed all of its expert panel. What is missing from the Labour version that was in the old Tory one is a specific reference to supporter trusts.
But WHUST’s expert and former senior civil servant Nick Drane isn’t worried about that. Trusts are mentioned in the explanatory notes. It’s clear that trusts still take priority. The flexibility means clubs where there isn’t a trust don’t have to set one up. And if fans at other clubs already have another type of body, such as a cooperative or even a limited company, that might be deemed appropriate.
Premier League fans need to remember this bill is about all English football – that’s a minimum of five tiers. It’s very different for fans and clubs across the board. Some clubs are even owned by their fans’ trust. West Ham’s CEO Lady Brady and main shareholder David Sullivan have become not only increasingly isolated voices opposing regulation but also breathtakingly bizarre, childishly comparing having a football regulator to living in North Korea.
If they were angry 15-year-olds with new slogan T-shirts, they’d be laughed out of the playground. The regulator will make a difference. Some of the things done to football clubs in the past will never be allowed to happen.
It’s not just West Ham moving from Upton Park to Stratford or putting ‘London’ on the badge to help market matches to international tourists. Other clubs have been asset-stripped and bankrupted, cutting the soul out of local communities. All these things will be prevented and protected. And that’s a good thing.
WHUST’s Nick Drane says: ‘It’s not perfect, but it’s a better bill than the first one. It’s much stronger on fan engagement. The Football Supporters’ Association is still working with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport but it’s getting down to “what does this comma mean?” so really fans have won.’
Nick says there may be amendments to add trusts back in, so that, where there is a trust, it should be consulted. But that is already in the guidance notes and will be for the IFR to decide how it’s done anyway. ‘We’re striving to find things to worry about,’ Nick says.
But the regulator is just the start of the fightback by fans. West Ham supporters have other battle grounds. These include getting fan representation on Newham’s football Safety Advisory Group and scrapping the discriminatory legal system that gives out harsher sentences to football fans for the same offence.
There will be new pressures too – to play PL matches in the US, for example. The regulator is not a panacea, but it is practical progress.
Be the first to comment