English Rugby Union: Governance

Debate between Perran Moon and Luke Evans

Tuesday 11th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the governance of English rugby union.

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond, for what I hope is the first of many times. I come to this place as a rugby union fan, an ex-coach and ex-referee. I also declare an interest—my brother is a long-standing director of rugby at London Cornish rugby club. I am delighted to see the west country, an excellent servant of English rugby union, well represented here today.

As a Cornish MP, it is hard for me to adequately express just how important our grassroots rugby clubs are to the fabric of our communities. Some of the communities in Camborne, Redruth and Hayle in my constituency suffer from extremes of poverty and deprivation. Life for many is a day-to-day struggle to feed the kids, heat the home and balance challenging working hours. For many, it is a case of muddling through. The one constant is our grassroots rugby clubs, offering children from all backgrounds that life-enhancing schooling in discipline, respect, teamwork, the joy of winning and how to bounce back from defeat. For many children, our clubs offer a vital controlled outlet for pent-up frustrations from challenging home and school lives.

I have used the word “grassroots” several times so far, and I do so intentionally. While others may wish to contribute by voicing governance concerns relating to clubs in higher leagues, I am focusing largely on the concerns that have been expressed to me from dozens of clubs below the first two tiers of the English men’s game. I am focusing on the men’s game because, in my view, the health of the women’s game—although still under-represented in terms of grassroots facilities—has come a huge way over the last 10 years. Credit where credit is due—those responsible for its development should be commended, although there is still much work to be done to support the women’s game.

I am acutely aware that while there are profound concerns with the financial state of some clubs in the premiership and the championship, grassroots rugby is facing an existential crisis. I will focus on three areas: governance, player welfare and funding. Although I refer to examples, the entire focus of the debate should be on how we work together, cross-party, looking forwards, to create the sustainable environment for our great game to not just survive, but thrive.

On governance, I noted with interest the recent Rugby Football Union consultation and the resulting document, “Our track record and areas of focus”, which was circulated to RFU members. I have to admit that it left me slightly bemused. It seemed to be suggesting that all is pretty hunky-dory with English rugby—a little bit of tinkering here and there, and we are all good. There was not the slightest hint of contrition or even an acceptance that many clubs are on the brink.

Maybe I have been talking to the wrong clubs, but in my conversations—admittedly, considerably fewer than the 400 that are reported to have been consulted for the RFU document—there are profound concerns about the direction of grassroots English rugby, the voices of which have for too long been drowned out by muscular lobbying from vested interests. There is no better indication that all is not well than the number of grassroots clubs right across England that I spoke with that, although happy to talk to me in detail about their own club’s circumstances, wanted to remain anonymous.

Let us look more specifically at governance. Part of the problem is the almost total lack of recent grassroots men’s coaching or administration experience on some of the key governance bodies. Of the nine members of the RFU board, only one has had experience in the past five years of either coaching or administering an adult men’s 15 side. On the RFU council, only a handful of members have recent experience of the adult men’s game below the national leagues. That means the largest single group of clubs is simply not adequately represented on either of those bodies, which are essential to the health and wellbeing of the game nationally. There is a community game board, although it is very hard to work out who they are, but I very much hope that they are taken from the current administrators and coaches of clubs beneath the national leagues. Their remit and responsibility should be made much clearer to all stakeholders.

Why is the representation so important? Let me give Members a couple of graphic examples. Three seasons ago a league reorganisation was imposed by someone that did not have a rugby union background. The failure is perhaps best demonstrated by the 12-team Counties 1 Surrey/Sussex league where seven teams could go down at the end of the season. If a team was promoted, they could land in one of four different leagues, stretching from Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire to Thurrock in Essex and Bournemouth down on the south coast. This is for amateur clubs, where players have to balance work and family life. With no clear lines of promotion or relegation, club administrators simply cannot plan ahead and nor can the amateur players who are also, as I have mentioned, trying to balance the day job and family commitments. I talked to one club that is already in its fourth league in four seasons, having been relegated during that time just once.

Turning to player welfare, I would like to cite the contentious changes to the tackle height law, which was introduced in July 2023 for the start of the 2023-24 season, just two months later. It allowed almost no time for amateur players to adapt from lifelong tackling habits. It should be deeply concerning to all of us who love the game to learn that no data has ever been made public that acts as a baseline against which to measure success. Perhaps even more worrying still is that data is not routinely collected from across the grassroots game to provide proof as to whether the change is helping in terms of concussions, with only a voluntary submission being rolled out.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

The hon. Gentleman is making an excellent point about welfare, but there is a wider issue when it comes to rugby union in terms of participation. If the rules are constantly changing and the game is different every time we watch it every season, why would people join if there is a risk of the rules changing and of injury? As a rugby enthusiast, I want to see young people joining because of what it gave me. Does he share the same concerns about the wider implications of not understanding the game being played?

[Perran Moon]

Yes, I do, and I thank the hon. Member for that point. It is absolutely the case that the rules and laws of rugby are constantly being reviewed. I can understand to a certain extent that the game is trying to find a formula that is as attractive as possible to ensure that more and more people come to watch, but it makes it very hard for players, administrators and coaches to manage when there is a constant change in the rules. He makes a very good point—I should say the laws, not the rules.

Anecdotally, some clubs are experiencing an increase in concussions. Worse still, the concussions are more severe than previously, because players are now required to put their heads against knees and hip bones, and the tackle area has been much reduced. Two-player tackles mean head-on-head collisions appear to be increasing. As I say, because we are not routinely collecting data, this is anecdotal, so we must start routinely collecting that data. The situation would be significantly mitigated through competent and sympathetic implementation and governance from people with experience of the grassroots game.

On funding, I was pretty shocked to learn that our grassroots rugby clubs are largely left to fend for themselves while funding is held at the very top of the game. There is a massive financial premium placed on the success of the England rugby team. This is a high risk strategy over which the grassroots game has no control. If the last 14 years taught us anything at all, it is that the theory of trickle-down economics has been debunked. Poorer organisations that are required to value every single pound are far more likely to spend wisely than bloated and complacent functions at the top of the game. The crumbs from the captain’s table approach of providing tickets to England matches as a means of raising revenue is simply not one that provides the financial security that grassroots clubs need.

The only point I will raise about championship clubs is the deeply concerning issue of the covid loans. Over the last five years, championship teams had funding unilaterally cut from £625,000 per championship club, to the current level of £103,000. In plans introduced in the weeks before the first lockdown, a reduction to £288,000 by the beginning of the 2022-23 season was imposed, but a one-year emergency cut to £150,000 was imposed later in 2020 because of the impact of covid.

Championship clubs fully expected and were promised a reinstatement of the pre-covid phased reduction, but that funding has failed to materialise, with authorities claiming a lack of available cash. Championship clubs were not consulted on those changes, despite the severe impact on the chances of survival for many. Having spoken with several championship clubs, there is now a clear and present danger that several of them will not survive.

Competent governance is essential to the safeguarding of the game that we all love. That includes proper consultation and communication; relevant experience at the top of the game; a coherent and transparent funding model; and sympathetic implementation of law changes, which consider the practicalities of the amateur game and the safeguarding of players.