On July 8^th the Football Governance Bill (“the Bill”) took an important step towards becoming the Football Governance Act 2025 when it passed in the House of Commons by a substantial majority of 415 votes to 98.  The Bill will return to the House of Lords on July 15^th for consideration of the Commons’ amendments and the reasons for them, but it is hoped the Bill will receive Royal Assent and become law before the Parliamentary summer recess begins on July 22^nd.

The number of truly substantive amendments made by the Commons was relatively limited.  However, the key change to the revenue distribution resolution process – whereby, should mediation fail, the Independent Football Regulator (“IFR”) can implement its own proposals for revenue distribution if it believes they are more likely to facilitate achievement of the IFR’s statutory objectives than those submitted by the competition organisers – has been incorporated into the Bill.

Once enacted the legal requirements will be overseen by the IFR,  with their key features including:

• A licensing system for clubs requiring them to meet defined mandatory conditions.  One of these is a fan consultation condition relating to the club’s strategic direction and business priorities, operational and match-day issues (including ticket pricing), the club’s heritage (including its home, badge, colours and name) and plans relating to additional fan engagement.
• More robust procedures to determine the suitability of prospective new owners and officers of football clubs and powers granted to the IFR to disqualify persons from owning or acting as officers of clubs where they have been determined to be unsuitable.
• The imposition of duties on clubs that include not entering teams into prohibited competitions and not disposing of home grounds, relocating home games or changing their colours, badge or name without approval.  In determining whether a competition is to be prohibited, the IFR will apply defined criteria that would have rendered the proposed European Super League a prohibited competition.
• As referred to above, a mechanism designed to achieve the sharing of broadcast revenues (including parachute payments) in a way that benefits the pyramid below the Premier League, through the intervention of the IFR when competition organisers are not able to reach agreement.

It is clear these changes are regarded as necessary by much of the football community.  As Baggy Shanker, the MP for Derby South said in the Commons: “the EFL wants this Bill.  Most clubs across the English leagues support this Bill.  Most importantly fans want this Bill.”  To demonstrate the latter Mr Shanker spoke of how deeply Derby County FC runs through the heart of our city, describing it as “more than just a team” but a representation of “our identity, our pride and the strength of our community” and of what it feels like when that identity is put at risk.  While Derby is currently in a much better place, he also made it clear that the underlying issues remain, as sadly evidenced by the case of Sheffield Wednesday, where again a club’s future has been mortgaged against a payday that hasn’t come and the ability or willingness of its owner to continue to fund its operations is on the wane.

Recent indications of financial issues at Hull City, another club with an owner that has made a number of controversial interventions reflecting Premier League ambitions, offer further evidence of English football’s problems.  These problems reflect the financial imbalance between the PL and the rest of the pyramid, but the news that Aston Villa has sold its women’s team to its own holding company for £60 million as a means of meeting profit and sustainability requirements, suggests that even at the highest level the game’s current financial landscape is unstable.

The interests of fans and the communities from which they come are well represented in the Bill – as the aforementioned fan consultation condition and requirements designed to preserve the English game’s essential character show.  In her closing statement to the House, Lisa Nandy, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport addressed football fans directly when she said:

“We are doing this for you, because for too long you have been treated as an afterthought at best, or as a nuisance at worst, in a game that is only great because of you.  This Bill is for Macclesfield, for Wigan, for Bury, for Bolton, for Derby, for Reading, for Sheffield Wednesday, for Morecambe and for many, many more clubs that have had to endure the misery of being put last when they should have been put first.”

Fans treated as an afterthought or even as a nuisance is a prevailing impression.  It was implicit in the 39^th game and European Super league proposals, and continues in the restricted rights of season ticket holders at certain Premier League clubs in favour of so-called “football tourists”.  Only last week plans to play a Serie A game in Australia were in the news and while the PL claims to have no similar plans it is reasonable to assume that the temptation to do so will reappear if the Italian plan goes ahead.

It is obvious then that this legislation comes at a critical time and represents a crucial opportunity for football fans to have a meaningful voice in shaping the game of the future, in order to protect their interests and the sustainability of their clubs.  It is now up to fans to take advantage of this opportunity and while we are fortunate at Derby that the Club’s owners and officers are committed to meaningful fan engagement, this is not the case everywhere.  As such fans will hopefully not wait to be invited in, but will push against the doors that this legislation should unlock.