MPs support football governance reforms amid Tory ‘crony' warning over regulator
MPs voted 342 to 70, majority 272, to approve the Football Governance Bill at second reading on Monday evening.
The Bill would introduce an independent regulator for the top five tiers of the men's game to ensure clubs are run sustainably and are accountable to their fans.
Uefa has confirmed in writing to the shadow secretary of state and the FA confirmed directly to peers that the Bill as drafted does not breach Uefa statutes Sports minister Stephanie Peacock
The regulator will also have 'backstop' powers to impose a financial settlement between the English Football League (EFL) and the Premier League if they cannot agree one themselves.
But the Conservatives raised concerns about the risk of the regulator being viewed as state interference by footballing governing bodies Uefa and Fifa and risked domestic clubs and the England team being barred from their competitions.
The Government's preferred candidate to lead the new watchdog is David Kogan, who previously advised the Premier League and the EFL on television rights deals in a 45-year career as a media executive, business leader and corporate adviser.
Mr Kogan also has links to the Labour Party, including making financial donations to individual MPs, and he stood down as chairman of the independent website LabourList to take on the role with the regulator.
In May 2024, the Premier League warned that English football risks the threat of sanctions from Fifa and Uefa if the Government does not ensure the game's new regulator is truly independent.
The fact is Uefa would have made a statement about this by now - they have not. They have not opposed mirrored legislation in Spain or Italy. It's not going to happen, they're not going to ban English clubs from European competition Labour MP Chris Evans
Last September, a leaked letter revealed European football's governing body Uefa also outlined concerns that an independent regulator could constitute government interference in sport.
Speaking as MPs considered the Bill, sports minister Stephanie Peacock said: 'Uefa has confirmed in writing to the shadow secretary of state and the FA confirmed directly to peers that the Bill as drafted does not breach Uefa statutes.
'The regulator will be operationally independent of the Government and will not exert undue influence on the FA's ability to govern the game. The extent of its statutory powers and duties will simply not allow it to do so.'
Shadow culture secretary Stuart Andrew earlier highlighted Uefa's previous concerns and said: 'That was before the Government sought to install a Labour crony at the helm of the football regulator.'
He added the proposal to appoint Mr Kogan 'drives a coach and horses through the independence of the football regulator', to which Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy shouted: 'You approached him.'
The Bill has fundamentally altered to a point where it threatens to do far more harm than good Shadow culture secretary Stuart Andrew
Mr Andrew continued: 'Does she not understand that the appointment of Mr Kogan only exacerbates the risk that the introduction of the regulator could lead to England being excluded from European competitions?'
Labour MP Chris Evans (Caerphilly) countered: 'He has made another claim that Uefa are going to ban English teams from competition as a result of perceived Government interference – he knows that is wrong.
'The fact is Uefa would have made a statement about this by now – they have not. They have not opposed mirrored legislation in Spain or Italy. It's not going to happen, they're not going to ban English clubs from European competition.'
Mr Andrew helped introduce the original version of the Bill under the previous Conservative government, which he said was aimed at 'securing the future of football clubs for the benefit of both communities and fans' after the fan-led review.
But he said Labour's version was 'not the same', adding: 'It has fundamentally altered to a point where it threatens to do far more harm than good.'
Lisa Nandy (Jack Taylor/PA)
Ms Nandy said Mr Kogan was on the list she had inherited from the Conservative Party.
She said: 'David Kogan is by far one of the most qualified people in football to take up this role.
'Not only has David Kogan negotiated billions of pounds worth of broadcasting rights and advised the Premier League, the EFL, Uefa, the NFL and Scottish Premier League amongst others, but also he was on the list I inherited from the previous government, who had head hunted him directly to ask him to apply for the job.
'Not only that, but top of the list was somebody who had donated over £50,000 to the Conservative Party, so I will take no lectures from the opposite side.'
The Bill has already cleared the House of Lords and will undergo further scrutiny in the Commons at a later stage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
35 minutes ago
- Reuters
Pakistan likely to hike defence spending but slash overall budget in 2025-26
ISLAMABAD, June 10 (Reuters) - Pakistan will unveil its annual federal budget for the coming fiscal year later on Tuesday, seeking to kickstart growth while finding resources for an expected hike in defence expenditure following the conflict with India last month. Islamabad will also have to contend with remaining within the discipline of its International Monetary Fund programme and the uncertainty from new trade tariffs being imposed by the United States, its biggest export market. Media reports say the government is likely to present a 17.6 trillion rupee ($62.45 billion) budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, down 6.7% from this fiscal year. It has projected a fiscal deficit of 4.8% of GDP, against a targeted 5.9% deficit in 2024-25, the reports say. Analysts said they expect an increase of around 20% in the defence budget, likely offset by cuts in development spending. Pakistan allocated 2.1 trillion Pakistani rupees($7.45 billion) for defence in the outgoing fiscal year, including $2 billion for equipment and other assets. An additional 563 billion rupees ($1.99 billion) was set aside for military pensions, which are not counted within the official defence budget. India's defence spending in its 2025–26 (April-March) fiscal year was set at $78.7 billion, a 9.5% increase from the previous year, including pensions and $21 billion earmarked for equipment. It has indicated it will step up expenditure following the May conflict with Pakistan. The government of Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has projected 4.2% economic growth in 2025-26, saying it has steadied the economy, which had looked at risk of defaulting on its debts as recently as 2023. Growth this fiscal year is likely to be 2.7%, against an initial target of 3.6% set in the budget last year. Pakistan's growth lags far behind the region. In 2024, South Asian countries grew by an average of 5.8% and 6.0% growth is expected in 2025, according to the Asian Development Bank. Expansion of the economy should be aided by a sharp drop in the cost of borrowing, the government says, after a succession of interest rate cuts by the central bank. But economists warn that monetary policy alone may not be enough, with fiscal constraints and IMF-mandated reforms still weighing on investment. Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb said on Monday that he wanted to avoid Pakistan's boom and bust cycles of the past. 'The macroeconomic stability that we have achieved, we want to absolutely stay the course,' he said. 'This time around we are very, very clear that we do not want to squander the opportunity.' The budget is expected to prioritize expanding the tax base, enforcing agriculture income tax laws, and reducing government subsidies to industry, to meet the terms of a $7 billion IMF bailout signed last summer. Just 1.3% of the population paid income tax in 2024, according to the tax authorities, with agriculture and the retail sector largely outside of the tax net. The IMF has urged Pakistan to widen the tax base through reforms which include taxing agriculture, retail, and real estate. Ahmad Mobeen, senior economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said that he expected the revenue target for 2025-26 will be missed. 'The shortfall will mostly be owing to lack of optimal implementation of announced measures as well as absence of meaningful structural reforms to widen the tax net in general,' said Mobeen. ($1 = 281.8400 Pakistani rupees)
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Rachel Reeves spending review: What will be in the spending review and what does it mean for Scotland?
The Spending Review will be delivered by Chancellor Rachel Reeves on Wednesday. Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Chancellor Rachel Reeves will deliver the Spending Review on Wednesday, in what is expected to lead to a significant amount of money for Scotland. While some areas with the greatest uptick in spending are devolved, the nature of the Barnett Formula means the Scottish Government will be allocated extra funds, in what The Scotsman understands will be a significant increase. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Reform UK has suggested the Barnett Formula and block funding grant from Westminster should go to be replaced with more tax powers for the Scottish Parliament The formula is used to work out the level of public spending for each of the devolved administrations. The Barnett Formula aims to be fair mechanism by giving each of the devolved administrations the same pounds-per-person change in funding. Here's what is expected to be in the spending review and what it means for Scotland. Winter fuel Scottish pensioners now face being worse off than those in England and Wales after the UK government confirmed its U-turn over the winter fuel payment. The Chancellor announced on Monday the payment, worth up to £300 for each recipient, will be restored to the vast majority of pensioners who previously received it because anyone with an income of under £35,000 a year will now get the payment automatically. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad However, Scotland has already created a devolved benefit of £100 for all pensioner households, which is less generous than the UK government version, potentially leaving hundreds of thousands of Scots worse off than their English and Welsh counterparts. With Holyrood being sent more money through the Barnett Formula, Scottish Labour has urged the Government at Holyrood to increase its payments. Energy UK energy secretary Ed Miliband endured a battle with the Treasury over funding, but is now expecting several big announcements. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer (centre), Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar (right) and Ed Miliband, Energy Security and Net Zero Secretary (left), during a visit to St Fergus Gas Terminal, a clean power facility in AberdeenshirePicture: Jeff J Mitchell/PA Wire Most notably, the UK government has announced a £14.2 billion investment to build the Sizewell C nuclear plant in Suffolk - a project that could boost energy in Scotland, despite being based elsewhere. For Scotland, it is also understood the government is set to commit to a multi-decade, multi-billion redevelopment of HMNB Clyde, with funding in the hundreds of millions for the next few years. There are also hopes the Chancellor could finally sign off on the Acorn project. Based near Peterhead, it has been in the pipeline for years and would allow fossil fuels to continue to be burnt without, in theory, releasing harmful carbon emissions. The project is seen as key to scaling up the low-carbon hydrogen sector in Scotland and future plans for Grangemouth, but the technology has not yet been demonstrated at commercial scale. One way or the other, a decision is expected during the spending review. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Health Wes Streeting's department is expected to get one of the biggest funding boosts, which will in turn lead to more money for Scotland through the Barnett Formula. Shortly after the statement from Ms Reeves, the UK government will publish groundwork for its NHS ten-year plan. This will give an idea of the financial boost to Scotland and also what Labour might try to do to NHS Scotland if they win the Holyrood election next year.
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
The Tories must do more than apologise for Liz Truss
Photograph by Henry Nicholls - Pool/Getty Images. Better late than never, and better something than nothing. The Conservative Party should have distanced itself from Liz Truss at the first opportunity – emphatically, unequivocally and ruthlessly. On the steps of Downing Street on 25 October 2022, as his first act as Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak should have condemned the mini-Budget, apologised to the nation and made it clear that Truss would never be a Conservative parliamentary candidate again. It would have been a justified response to the chaos of the preceding few weeks and a signal that the party had changed. It did not happen. Sunak acknowledged that 'mistakes were made' but left it at that. He was too cautious about splitting his party. The membership had voted for Truss (he should have announced his intention to remove their rights to elect the leader, too) and a large minority of the parliamentary party had backed her. It would have been a bold gamble, and the case for such a move becomes more persuasive when one knows for certain of the electoral obliteration that lies ahead. Maybe we should not be too harsh on the last Conservative prime minister but we do now know how the infamous mini-Budget was brought up at every opportunity in last year's general election, and is continually referenced by Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves. This is not just out of habit but will be a consequence of extensive polling research. The public remain furious at the chaos and uncertainty that was unleashed. Mortgage-holders, in particular, will not be quick to forgive. The Tories can survive many accusations, and still win elections. But they cannot win while being perceived as economically reckless. Not only is it a political vulnerability, but the Truss experience prevents them from delivering effective criticism of their opponents. At a time when Nigel Farage is advocating turning on the spending taps while also implementing massive tax cuts, the Conservatives are right to say he is being fiscally irresponsible. But when they say he is 'Liz Truss on steroids', it sounds amiss coming from Truss's party (especially when the line is delivered by those who served her loyally). And if the fears that the bond market vigilantes will turn against the UK come to pass, the Tory attack on Labour will also lack real punch. These factors resulted in the most substantial criticism of the mini-Budget from the Conservative frontbench. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride acknowledged that it had damaged the Tories' economic credibility, and that the party should show contrition. Stride – a reassuring figure who was critical of the mini-Budget at the time – was right to do so, but even then there was too much equivocation. Despite the advance briefing, there was no explicit apology. The language was characteristically measured and thoughtful, but what was needed was something a little more eye-catching and memorable. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Better still, the sentiments should have been expressed by the party leader, not the shadow chancellor. But when Kemi Badenoch was asked subsequently about the mini-Budget, she equivocated. She started to make the argument that the problem was the higher spending on energy support announced on 8 September, not the unfunded tax cuts set out on 23 September (she should check the dates of the market turmoil) and stated that she 'did not want to be commenting on previous prime ministers'. The strategy of distancing the Tory Party from Truss had been watered down after just a day. It is not good enough. Having left any serious criticisms for too long (31 months too long), this is no time for half measures. If the Conservatives want the right to be heard again by those voters who prioritise economic stability, they need to do this properly. Emphatically, unequivocally and ruthlessly. That means not just taking on Truss, but the thinking behind the mini-Budget. Contrary to the arguments made by the Trussites, tax cuts generally do not pay for themselves. Fiscal responsibility should come before tax cuts. Independent institutions such as the Bank of England and the Office for Budget Responsibility are not to blame for our economic difficulties. The events of autumn 2022 were not the result of a conspiracy but incompetence. The leadership of the Conservative Party should be making and winning those arguments now. This means that it will be impossible to offer unfunded tax cuts at the next general election as part of a retail offer, but that is the price that must be paid to recover economic credibility. While they are at it, there are other aspects of the party's recent history that should be addressed. The Conservatives were deeply damaged by the partygate scandal and the impression that the rules that applied to everyone else did not apply to them. According to a parliamentary committee on which there was a Tory majority, Boris Johnson misled the House of Commons about this matter and a 90-day suspension from the Commons would have been recommended had he not resigned as an MP. If the Tories want a reputation for economic competence and integrity (and that should not be too much to ask), they should make it clear that both Johnson's and Truss's days as Conservative parliamentary candidates are over. When distancing themselves from those aspects of their past that alienate the voters they need, what is required from the Tories are confident strides, not small, tentative steps. They have at least made a start, but it would be a grave mistake to think that the job is done. Related
