Football regulator: Tory peers right to question changes, says Collins
Former Culture, Media and Sport select committee chair Damian Collins has defended Conservative peers’ thorough questioning of the Labour government’s beefed-up plans for an independent football regulator.
Sport Minister Stephanie Peacock last week accused some Tory peers of submitting amendments “cynically designed to dither, delay and block” the progress of the Football Governance Bill through the House of Lords.
Baroness Brady, who is also vice-chair of West Ham United, has contributed to the 375 amendments and is among the peers to have raised objections over the powers set to be vested in the football regulator.
But Collins, who was vocal on sports governance during 14 years as Conservative MP for Folkestone and Hythe, believes close scrutiny of Labour’s plan to enhance the scope of the bill set out by the previous government is legitimate.
“There are some changes to the bill between elections, not too major, but significant,” he told CityAM.
“And obviously in the Lords, you have people like Baroness Brady, who is both a member of Parliament and vice-chairman of a club, so you have a lot of expertise there too. So I think a lot of the questions in the Lords have been around how this is going to work in practice.”
Collins added: “The scope of the regulator has changed. I think some of the questions relate to changes in the bill that Labour have brought in, particularly on the backstop powers of the regulator to arbitrate in financial distribution between the Premier League and the Football League, and then bringing parachute payments within the scope of that.
Damian Collins: Football regulator doesn’t need sunset clause
“So how that’s going to work in practice, what the regulator should consider, what the scope for intervention should be, are clearly really important questions. Because it’s not just about confidence in the regime and how the regulator uses powers, but for the clubs involved themselves.”
Some Tory peers have backed the inclusion of a so-called sunset clause that could see the bill scrapped after five years, but Collins insists that isn’t necessary.
“Ultimately, Parliament can decide to abolish it. We don’t require an automatic reconsideration of that; that’s something Parliament has always got the power to consider,” he said.
“I think success is that we avoid more of the avoidable failures we’ve seen in the past – the collapse of Bury, or the near failure of clubs like Derby and Bolton. If we can avoid things like that in the future then I think the regulator will have done one of its big jobs. But it’s also got to do it in a way which doesn’t become overly intrusive.”