English Football: Financial Sustainability and Governance
Euan Stainbank Excerpts(3 days, 22 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing the debate. Of course, this is a debate on English football governance, but for the benefit of Hansard I put on record the undebatable fact that Scottish football is the best in the world, because it has the highest per capita live attendance at matches and because of the existence of Falkirk FC.
The Football Governance Bill goes a long way to redressing the competition issues that have stained the beautiful game down south. The independent review and the licensing powers to prevent corporate mismanagement will hopefully prevent situations like the one currently facing Reading from happening again, and resolve the runaway inequality in the game.
That runaway inequality is something that the Scottish game is definitely not immune to. Failures in corporate governance and financial mismanagement stem from that inequality, as well as from an over-reliance on single owners and, uniquely, the lack of diversification in sources of income in Scotland.
More recently, we have seen anti-competitive decisions, such as the Scottish professional football league banning artificial surfaces from only the top flight in Scotland in 2024. Artificial surfaces are far more common in Scotland. The ban will force clubs such as Falkirk, Hamilton or Livi, which is currently in the championship, to fork out �1.5 million extra simply for getting promoted. It will prevent community use and provide barriers for women�s teams and shared ground arrangements. On artificial surfaces, the SPFL must think again.