Reform group Fair Game has called for a clause in the new Football Governance Bill to be scrapped over fears it could allow states to buy English clubs.
The clause says the regulator should “have regard to the foreign and trade policy objectives” of the Government when making decisions on who can own and run clubs. But Fair Game argues this goes against the regulator’s core mission of making clubs sustainable.
The group’s analysis of the Bill says that, if such a clause is kept in, “the Bill must also explicitly rule out state-ownership of football clubs, which would instantly become vulnerable to the whims of the Government of the day”. It added: “The alternative would be to remove the clause entirely.”
The clause appears on the face of it to give a stronger chance of success to a proposed buyout linked to a country which the UK has positive diplomatic and trade relations with, and when determining whether existing club owners linked to such a country are suitable to hold that position.
Fair Game’s concern, though, is understood to centre more on the impact on a club’s sustainability if relations between the UK and a state owning an English club take a dramatic turn for the worse. The group has pointed out the financial troubles Chelsea, while not state-owned, faced when their former owner Roman Abramovich was sanctioned over his ties to the Russian state in March 2022, during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Some people have wondered if a truly independent regulator should have to think about Government goals when deciding if someone is fit to run a football club. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) didn’t say anything about the clause, but sources told the Press Association news agency it was meant to lower the risk of unsuitable owners without scaring off investment.
READ MORE: White, Partey and the 12 Arsenal players Mikel Arteta is working with during international break
READ MORE: Ramsdale signs for Chelsea, Smith Rowe to Newcastle – 4 summer deals Arsenal may regret
They said the regulator shouldn’t get involved in issues about foreign policy, or have a role in setting them, and shouldn’t be making its own judgement on what countries are suitable, but should instead consider the Government’s position.
Last year, The Athletic reported that UK Government officials had worried in emails in 2020 that there would be an “immediate risk” to Britain’s relations with Saudi Arabia if the Premier League didn’t approve the takeover of Newcastle by the country’s sovereign wealth fund.
In the end, the Premier League gave the deal the go-ahead in October 2021, saying it had received “legally-binding assurances” that there would be no state involvement in running Newcastle.
Court documents from the United States early last year labelled the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF), which holds the majority of Newcastle’s shares, as an “instrumentality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia”. They also referred to Newcastle’s chairman and PIF governor Yasir Al Rumayyan as “a sitting minister of the Saudi government”.
Richard Masters, the Premier League’s chief executive, did not respond when MPs asked him in March last year if his organisation had started an investigation into Newcastle’s ownership after these documents were revealed.
football.london Arsenal WhatsApp channel
Want to keep up to date with the breaking and important Arsenal stories whilst on the move? Well now you can!
Click this link to follow the football.london Arsenal WhatsApp channel, where you’ll be kept up to date on the latest Gunners news wherever you are.
Just remember to turn on the notifications once you’ve followed, and you won’t miss a beat!
