Football’s Future at Risk: The Battle for Independent Regulation

The debate over football regulation has intensified after Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch stated that she no longer supports an independent football regulator, despite previous endorsements of the proposal. The Football Supporters’ Association (FSA) was quick to respond, branding her reversal an "own goal" and questioning her motivations for abandoning a key policy that was originally backed by her own party.

The FSA’s Response

In a strongly worded statement, the FSA highlighted Badenoch’s inconsistency, citing correspondence in which she had previously expressed support for regulatory reforms. The FSA remarked:

“We’d also remind her that the Football Governance Bill was a Conservative Party proposal, which featured in their last manifesto, and many of her colleagues did excellent work on the Bill. She’s throwing that on the scrap heap to gain favour with a few rich club owners.”

The FSA also pointed to the financial burden currently faced by clubs in legal fees, arguing that an independent regulator would be far more cost-effective than the Premier League’s ongoing expenditure of £50m per year on legal battles (Football Supporters' Association, 2024).

Why Football Needs an Independent Regulator

The need for football regulation extends beyond just financial stability. The influx of foreign ownership, while bringing investment, has also introduced governance concerns. Some owners have prioritised commercialisation over community values, leading to decisions that alienate long-time supporters. From sudden managerial changes to controversial sponsorship deals, the influence of foreign capital has shifted priorities away from the grassroots nature of football clubs.

Additionally, the Fan-Led Review of Football Governance, led by Dame Tracey Crouch, exposed significant failings in club management, financial stability, and fan engagement. Many clubs, particularly in the EFL, have suffered severe financial distress due to mismanagement and reckless spending (Football Supporters' Association, 2024).

Key issues include:

• Foreign ownership concerns – While some foreign investors are committed custodians, others have treated clubs as business ventures, disregarding local traditions and fan concerns.
• Financial sustainability – The Premier League retains approximately 84% of all broadcast revenue, with just 8% trickling down to the Championship and lower leagues.
• Parachute payments – These disproportionately benefit recently relegated clubs, creating an uneven playing field.
• Fan engagement – Many club decisions, from ownership changes to stadium relocations, occur with minimal consultation with supporters.
• Regulatory failures – Existing governing bodies (Premier League, FA, and EFL) have failed to prevent financial collapses like those seen at Bury, Derby County, and Reading.

For more information, visit the Football Supporters' Association website.

Lisa Nandy: Blocking Regulation is ‘Not Acceptable’

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has condemned attempts to obstruct the bill in the House of Lords. Addressing the Culture, Media, and Sport Committee, she stated:

"It is not acceptable to use parliamentary procedures to try to block a piece of legislation on which so many hopes and dreams rest."

Her remarks follow allegations that certain peers, including West Ham’s Baroness Brady, are attempting to stall the bill through excessive amendments. Former Labour Cabinet Minister Lord Blunkett went further, accusing some peers of orchestrating a filibuster to derail the legislation.

Tories in Turmoil: Lords Scrutinising or Filibustering?

The Football Governance Bill is currently being debated in the House of Lords, where some Conservative peers appear to be contradicting their party’s own manifesto pledge. Labour’s Lord Blunkett has directly blamed the Premier League for using its influence and resources to delay the Bill, accusing it of engaging in “filibustering.”

Despite the Premier League stating in January 2024 that it would not lobby against a regulator, it quickly reversed course within three months, publicly warning of the so-called “unintended consequences” of regulation.

The filibustering attempts by some Tory peers have led to a series of bizarre and contradictory arguments, many of which fail under scrutiny:

• Lord Moynihan proposed exempting diplomats, government ministers, and heads of state from club ownership tests. This theoretically could allow figures such as Vladimir Putin or Kim Jong Un to purchase a football club.
• Baroness Brady passionately defended season ticket holders as the heart of football, despite her own actions at West Ham attacking concessions for children and pensioners.
• Lord Markham compared football finances to tennis prize money at Wimbledon, failing to recognise that Wimbledon actually distributes more funds to lower-ranked players than the Premier League does to lower-tier clubs.
• Lord Hannan questioned the purpose of the bill, seemingly forgetting that it was introduced to prevent another European Super League and was part of his party’s own 2019 manifesto.
• Lord Maude claimed the regulator would impose unnecessary costs, despite the Premier League already spending £45m per year on legal fees, much of it fighting its own clubs. A regulator would actually reduce those costs.

These arguments appear increasingly flimsy, exposing a reluctance among some Conservative peers to implement the very reforms their party once championed.

The Football Governance Bill: What’s at Stake?

The Football Governance Bill seeks to rectify these issues by introducing an Independent Football Regulator (IFR) with statutory powers to:

• Oversee club finances to prevent reckless spending.
• Ensure fairer distribution of revenue, reducing financial disparities that disadvantage lower-league clubs.
• Safeguard club heritage by enforcing fan consultation on key issues, including identity and stadium relocations.
• Block breakaway leagues like the European Super League.

The Future of Football Regulation

Will Badenoch’s reversal stand, or will pressure from fans, clubs, and Parliament force a reconsideration? The case for independent regulation has never been clearer. Policymakers must now decide whether to prioritise the interests of the football pyramid over those of a wealthy few.

For Barnsley fans and EFL supporters, this is more than a policy debate—it is about securing the future of fair competition, financial stability, and fan influence in football. The Football Governance Bill represents a rare opportunity to reform the game—but only if it is enacted in full.

Now is the time for football fans to make their voices heard.