Government Prepares For Fight With Tory Lords Over Football Bill
Lisa Nandy is the Culture Secretary and in charge of the Football Governance Bill (Alamy)
5 min read
Exclusive: The Government has accused Tory peers of “extraordinary” and cynical behaviour to slow down the Football Governance Bill's progress in the Lords.
The bill, introduced into the House of Lords in October, will set up an independent football regulator as part of plans to improve financial security of English clubs.
The previous Conservative government promised plans to reform English football but did not have time to legislate for it prior to the July General Election. Labour leader Keir Starmer promised to bring the legislation back to Parliament if elected as prime minister.
A number of Tory peers want to turn the Football Governance Bill into a hybrid bill, which would significantly reduce the speed at which it would pass through Parliament and end up on the statute books.
Hybrid bills must go through a petitioning period, which would allow stakeholders who will be affected by the proposed regulator to submit a petition to Parliament outlining their opposition. Tory peers told PoliticsHome they were looking to discuss this measure at committee stage on Wednesday afternoon.
A Government source told PoliticsHome: “This is extraordinary behaviour, cynically trying to delay and frustrate a government manifesto commitment that had cross party support. It shows a total lack of respect for the millions of football fans across the country who want to see action taken on this.”
Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy told the culture, media and sport committee on 10 December that it was "high time" the Bill was passed and criticised peers who were trying to frustrate the legislation.
"This is a bill that has had cross-party consensus for a long time," Nandy said. "It was a manifesto commitment from this Government, and it is high time that we got on with it.
"It is not acceptable to use parliamentary procedures to try to block a piece of legislation on which so many hopes and dreams rest that was clearly something that we committed to before the election."
Niall Couper, the CEO of FairGame, told PoliticsHome he believed it appeared to be an “orchestrated” attempt to “kill the Bill”.
“What is so scary about fair financial flow, good governance and an end to vested interests?” he said.
“It is time to put the fans, well-run clubs and their communities first. The Government cannot be held to ransom by a bunch of rogue peers who have little interest in delivering a fairer future for football.”
Tracey Crouch, a former sports minister, told PoliticsHome that while she respected the views of the Lords she believed it was, in essence, a "wrecking amendment" to bring down the football bill.
"While I entirely respect the views of their lordships and appreciate that the amendment was no doubt tabled with good intent, it is, in essence, a wrecking amendment and contrary to the manifesto commitments of all the main parties to protect football for the future," she said.
"I would encourage peers to vote against the amendment and move forward with their scrutiny of the bill so that the football ecosystem of clubs, fans, and entire communities benefit from a long term sustainable future."
Kevin Miles, the chief executive of Football Supporters’ Association, democratic representative body on behalf of fans, said: “The amendments being proposed by a handful of Tory peers are a cynical and orchestrated attempt to sabotage the progress of a Bill that has the support of football fans, was a government manifesto commitment and was supported by their own party both before and in the course of the last election.
“Parliamentary manoeuvres of this sort are usually resorted to by people who’ve lost the argument, and the case for independent regulation of football is well-established and becomes stronger daily”.
Conservative peers Lord Hayward and Lord Goodman prior to Thursday put down a separate amendment which would give the Football Bill an expiry date of five years if it did not hit its objectives.
The sunset clause is popular among some Tory peers but is likely to be less disruptive and controversial than the proposals to make it a hybrid bill.
Lord Goodman said only a “tiny percentage” of the nation’s 33 million football fans are aware of the potential introduction of a football regulator – and warned the Bill needed more scrutiny.
“To which ministers are being pressed to add: women’s football, net zero, carbon footprints, player welfare, fan safety, human rights and modern slavery,” he said.
“Like it or not, this means upheaval for the game - which is why I’ve tabled a sunset clause to the bill to find out in due course if the regulator’s working.”
Lord Hayward, a Conservative peer, told PoliticsHome in November that there was "little evidence" regulators had achieved their objective and a "fair number" had "failed".
“There's no proposal to reduce the size of the regulator. They're just saying the regulator will continue. So, you're going to impose a burden on the football clubs, even though there's no need for it.”
Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative Party leader, suggested to The Times in September the British government should concentrate on tackling the threat of China, Russia and Iran rather than implementing a football regulator. She told the newspaper the idea was an example of "not very serious" politics.
Stuart Andrew, her shadow culture secretary, was the sports minister in the previous Conservative government. The Football Bill was said to be a top priority for the previous government in the Culture department.
PoliticsHome Newsletters
PoliticsHome provides the most comprehensive coverage of UK politics anywhere on the web, offering high quality original reporting and analysis: Subscribe
