Relief at 'new era' for Reading FC as club is sold to fresh owner
In this monthly letter, Yuan Yang, the Labour MP for Earley and Woodley, celebrates the news that Reading FC has been sold. The stadium is in her constituency. Ms Yang writes:
"We've got our Reading back!' That was the chant at the last match of the season on the May Day Bank Holiday weekend.
After two years of fan protests, points deductions, winding-up petitions, unpaid wages, parliamentary lobbying and constant worry about the future of the club, Reading Football Club is finally being sold to a new owner!
The sale represents the chance for a new era at Reading. The club's development must now come with a more sustainable business model – the 'Reading Way' of previous decades. The new buyer, Rob Couhig, has a track record of doing this. Wycombe fans agree that he left their club in a better place than he found it. I look forward to working with Mr. Couhig to ensure that fans' voices are heard and that the club becomes community-focused once again.
I've been joking with the fans I've worked with at Sell Before We Dai and the Supporters' Trust At Reading that we won't know what to do with our time now we're no longer worrying about ownership 24/7. I can definitely say my parliamentary staff and I can breathe a sigh of relief knowing we won't be having more late-night phone conferences on this particular topic! But I already know there's a lot I want to do to ensure the distress suffered by Reading fans can never be allowed to happen again.
No football club should need their MPs to make repeated interventions in Parliament, lobby government ministers, or gather 10,000 signatures on a petition, just to fight for their survival; we need to have stronger rules against absent and neglectful owners.
The Football Governance Bill is currently making its way through Parliament, and I am confident that this will start to fix football's governance problem. The 'New Ownership Test' and the new licensing rules within the Bill would have been so helpful when Dai Yongge was buying the club. I look forward to the Bill becoming law, as well as the new Independent Football Regulator starting their work. Football is a huge part of British life and shouldn't be used to manage the debt, or service the assets, of distant billionaires with no presence at the clubs they buy. Clubs must once again serve the communities that they are part of.
The future is bright for Reading FC – after an incredible season on the pitch, I can't wait to see how we do under better ownership next year. And while we rightly celebrate the performance of the men's team; we shouldn't forget about the parts of the club that receive less media coverage. The Reading Football Club Community Trust do brilliant work, and I've seen first-hand their impact on young people through community 'kick sessions' and educational provision. It's vital that they have the resources to continue this work. It is also important to ensure that the women's team is properly funded and can start to climb the divisions again after they withdrew from the women's Championship last year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Al Qaida terrorists tried to poison UK water supply, says ex-security minister
An al Qaida militant cell sought to poison London's water supplies but were thwarted by the security services, a former counter-terrorism minister has revealed. Details of the foiled 2008 extremist plot were given by Lord West of Spithead, who was in office at the time, as the Government was tackled at Westminster over steps to protect the Britain's reservoirs against attack by hostile forces. It follows the publication of comprehensive military plans to safeguard the UK in the face of threats from Vladimir Putin's Russia and China. Sir Keir Starmer said the strategic defence review (SDR), published earlier this week, would create a 'battle-ready, armour-clad' nation. The move comes against the backdrop of ongoing concerns about the vulnerability of critical national infrastructure to attack. Pressed in Parliament over whether there had ever been an attempt or a plan uncovered to contaminate the UK's water supply, environment minister Baroness Hayman of Ullock said: 'My understanding is that there has not been such an incident, but that does not mean that we should be complacent. 'We know that our water and energy infrastructure are both potentially vulnerable to hostile attacks.' But moving to correct his frontbench colleague, Lord West, who served as Home Office minister for security and counter-terrorism from 2007 to 2010, said: 'In 2008 there was an attempt by eight al Qaida operatives to poison north London water supplies. 'I am pleased to say that our agencies worked brilliantly to stop it happening.' The former Navy chief, who sits on Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, added: 'As a result, in the Home Office we put in hand a whole series of work on police response times, indicators of where the outflows from reservoirs went and new barriers. 'Where has all that work gone? These things somehow seem to disappear. There should be some reports, and hopefully someone did something about it.' Responding, Lady Hayman said: 'That is extremely interesting and very helpful of my noble friend. I will certainly look into it, because it is an important point.' Earlier, the minister told peers: 'The Government's first duty is to protect our national security and keep our country safe. 'Defra (the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) recognises that the drinking water supply is a potential target for hostile actors. 'It works with water companies and partners across Government to understand and monitor threats to water supply and to consider responses as appropriate to protect the security of our water system.' But Labour peer Lord Harris of Haringey, who is chairman of the National Preparedness Commission, said: 'I wonder whether her department is being a tad complacent in talking simply about monitoring the threat rather than looking at what practical arrangements can be made. 'For example, how do we deal with a drone which is flown over a reservoir and deposits something in there? 'The panic effects of that being known to have happened and not necessarily knowing what the substance is would be enormous.' Lady Hayman said: 'Tackling the diverse range of state threats – not just drones but many other threats – requires a cross-government and cross-society response. 'We need to draw on the skills, the resources and the remits of different departments and operational partners. 'In Defra, we work closely to look at the threats and the appropriate levels of response, specifically drawing on expert advice from the National Protective Security Authority, the National Cyber Security Centre and the Home Office, as well as carrying out threat assessment with policing partners.' Former Metropolitan Police chief Lord Hogan-Howe, who led the UK's largest force from 2011 to 2017, said: 'For about 15 years, I have been worried about the water supply – the large and small reservoirs, the pipes that connect them and, of course, the water treatment plants. 'I worry that there is sometimes confusion between the Home Office, Defra and others about who is looking after security.' The independent crossbencher added: 'It needs to be higher in the priorities than it presently appears.' In reply, the minister said: 'I can assure him that we discuss these matters with the Home Office. 'One thing that we have been trying hard to do in Defra and other departments since we came into government is to work better across Government.' The Home Office has been contacted for comment.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Musk brands Trump's flagship Bill ‘a disgusting abomination'
Elon Musk has trashed Donald Trump's much-vaulted Big Beautiful Bill as a 'pork-filled disgusting abomination'. The tech billionaire, who left his role in the White House last week, savaged the president's flagship spending bill as 'outrageous' while criticising lawmakers for burdening Americans with 'unsustainable debt'. He wrote on X: It is the latest in a series of scathing attacks on the Bill by Mr Musk, who has warned that the package of sweeping tax cuts will compromise cost-saving measures carried out by his Department of Government Efficiency (Doge). Mr Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill has promised to deliver $4.5 trillion (£3.3 trillion) worth of tax cuts while significantly increasing America's deficit. The Tesla founder has previously warned that America was going 'bankrupt' as a result of its $36.2 trillion debt pile, echoing similar concerns made by economists. According to the Congressional Budget Office, Mr Trump's Big Beautiful Bill will increase America's bulging deficit by $3.8 trillion by 2034. It has drawn criticism from a number of Republicans, and the Bill passed through the US House last month by just a single vote. 'It will massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit to $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt,' Mr Musk added. The White House has lashed out at anyone who has voiced concern about the debt snowballing under Mr Trump. 'The president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this Bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is One Big Beautiful Bill, and he's sticking to it,' Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary said. The tax and spending cuts that passed the House last month would add more than $5 trillion to the national debt in the coming decade if all of them are allowed to continue, according to the Committee for a Responsible Financial Budget. The national debt is a much bigger problem now than it was eight years ago. Investors are demanding the government pay a higher premium to keep borrowing. The White House Council of Economic Advisers argues that its policies will unleash so much rapid growth that the annual budget deficits will shrink in size relative to the overall economy, putting the US government on a fiscally sustainable path. Mr Musk, 53, the world's richest man, became a central figure in the Trump White House, often clashing with senior members of the president's cabinet. The two quickly formed a close working relationship during last year's election campaign. At its peak, Mr Musk even lived in a cottage on the Mar-a-Lago estate where he fleshed out his plans for a tech-led effort to slash the federal bureaucracy. He often stood quietly next to Mr Trump as reporters peppered him with questions over his aggressive Doge cuts, which at times risked becoming the flashpoint of the president's first 100 days in office. Aside from the Big Beautiful Bill, the Tesla boss has also voiced his concerns over Mr Trump's sweeping tariffs. By the end of his time in the administration, he was rarely seen with the president. Despite this, Mr Trump has credited Mr Musk with 'a colossal change in the old ways of doing business in Washington' and on his departure handed him a golden key. As a special government employee, Mr Musk's position was designed to be temporary. However, he had speculated about staying 'indefinitely,' working part time for the administration, if Trump still wanted his help. His departure from the White House last week marked the end of a turbulent chapter that included thousands of layoffs of federal staff and the evisceration of government agencies. The billionaire entrepreneur is perceived as struggling in the unfamiliar environment of Washington, and he accomplished far less than he hoped. He dramatically reduced his target for cutting spending – from $2 trillion to $1 trillion to $150 billion – and increasingly expressed frustration about resistance to his goals. At times, he clashed with other top members of Mr Trump's administration, who chafed at the newcomer's efforts to reshape their departments. 'Congress is making America bankrupt,' he wrote in a separate post on X. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Boston Globe
11 hours ago
- Boston Globe
He launched modern conservatism, but what do we really know about William F. Buckley?
The sixth of 10 children born to a self-made Texan oilman and his wife, a New Orleans patrician and ardent Anglophobe, Buckley spent his early years abroad until the clan settled into a Connecticut estate, Great Elm, tended to by a retinue of servants. He later claimed he spoke Spanish and French before English; his trademark lockjaws blended Romance inflections with a Southern drawl inherited from his parents, and elocution lessons. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Related : Throughout the Roaring Twenties William F. Buckley Sr, or Will, raked in a fortune on Wall Street, diversifying his portfolio wisely; the family navigated the Depression in suburban comfort. A skinny, sickly boy with a passion for music, Bill stood out with his gift for gab and yen for combative debate. The Buckleys were adamant isolationists, anti-New Deal, scorning financial regulations and programs for the poor. Bill followed his older brothers to Millbrook, a boarding school, then a stint in the military at the tail end of World War II, which entrenched his commitment to caste. At Yale he soared as scholar and impresario, a quick study. 'Those who got to know Buckley noticed the disjunction between Buckley the ideologue and Buckley the friend,' Tanenhaus notes. 'He was unsparing in debate, harsh, even malicious, but during those contests 'he got rid of all his aggressions, said a classmate. And what was left over, among friends, was very mellow.'' Advertisement From these opening chapters the narrative flows briskly: Tanenhaus streamlines decades of research and interviews, punctuated by episodes such as Bill's courtship of Vancouver heiress Pat Taylor: taller (in heels), wealthier, and more right-wing than her husband, the Anglican queen to his Catholic king. The author's account of their extravagant wedding carries a whiff of the society columnist, dutifully chronicling the soirées that bookended the ceremony. Their son Christopher, born in 1952, rounded out the family. Journalism beckoned: in 1955 Buckley debuted the National Review, a weekly free-markets doppelganger to the Communist-adjacent Partisan Review and forum for exchanges on government, economics, foreign policy, and what the founder envisioned as the voice for a proper hierarchy. As befits a former editor of the New York Times Book Review, Tanenhaus meticulously depicts the high tide of postwar print reportage, writers poised for celebrity, ready for their close-ups — Buckley protégés like The lavish set pieces are all there, familiar yet graced with fresh insights: Buckley's espousal of Related : Advertisement The Kennedy administration offered novel assaults on liberalism. The reactionary Buckleys mirrored the progressive Massachusetts dynasty — Wall Street tycoons as patriarchs, a rough-and-tumble household, heated discourse on global events — but with conflicting views on public service. (Bill was just four days younger than Robert F. Kennedy, a champion of racial equality.) When the Republican center of gravity migrated toward the Sun Belt, Buckley embraced Barry Goldwater, sensing the Arizona maverick was shifting the Overton Window. Those Great Elm affectations did not always fit amid a party whose emerging power brokers tried to connect with middle- and working-class white voters. As Tanenhaus writes, 'Bill Buckley had been a great figure. But that time had passed. A new ideological battle was forming — rather, a new cultural battle' among the ranks of the GOP, the genteel National Review 'outmoded,' 'Blue Bloods' receding before 'Blue Collars.' Yet this realignment presented unexpected opportunities for the ruling caste, 'through pro-business policies of deregulation and reduced corporate taxes.' Advertisement Tanenhaus's Buckley is less an ironclad ideologue than a professional contrarian, performative to his core. His beliefs evolved; after the Six-Day War he walked back overt antisemitism, for instance, and fervidly advocated for Israel. Clear-eyed about its protagonist's merits and moral defects, 'Buckley' is, of course, a biography not just of a prominent influencer but also of a potent movement, fomented in both National Journal and Bill's long-running PBS show, Firing Line, a precursor to podcasts . He remained vigorous until his death in 2008, and if alive today would no doubt opine fulsomely on divisive issues, as Tanenhaus links the Cold War's disinformation campaigns with social media, Buckley's brand of blacklists and censorship with the current pall over prestigious institutions such as Yale, Harvard, and Columbia. Related : At his best Buckley was an audacious provocateur, a shock to a complacent system; yet his story is incomplete without the rancor he spread like gospel. Tanenhaus is fair to this complicated pundit — more than fair — and the payoff is worth it. 'Buckley' is a milestone contribution to our understanding of the American Century. BUCKLEY: The Life and the Revolution That Changed America By Sam Tanenhaus Random House, 1,040 pages, $40 Hamilton Cain is a book critic and the author of a memoir, 'This Boy's Faith: Notes from a Southern Baptist Upbringing.'
