The Football Governance Bill has received its first reading in the House of Commons after passing its final stage in the House of Lords.

We have previously commented on the Bill here. Having originally been proposed by the previous government in response to the Fan Led Review of Football Governance, a ‘strengthened’ version was introduced to Parliament at the end of last year.

The Bill establishes an Independent Football Regulator (“IFR”) for the first time in English men’s elite football which would be charged with three primary objectives: (1) protecting and promoting the financial sustainability of individual clubs; (2) improving the “systemic financial resilience” of English football through the management of “systemic risks and structural issues” such as the distribution of revenue through the so-called ‘pyramid’; and (3) safeguarding the “traditional features of English football that matter most to the fans and local communities of clubs”.

The IFR would also be responsible for administering a licensing system under which all the top five tiers of men’s English football would operate. In so doing, it would be empowered, for example, to require prospective owners and directors of clubs to pass a series of tests to demonstrate their suitability as custodians of clubs, and to prevent English clubs from joining breakaway competitions such as the European Super League. Additionally, it would oversee the financial plans of clubs and be able to intervene if there are worrying levels of financial risk, placing bespoke conditions on clubs where necessary. Intervention may also occur in the event of agreement not being reached on the distribution of broadcast revenue, subject to certain thresholds being met.

Measures that were introduced by the Government to ‘strengthen’ the Bill further included (1) a requirement for clubs to provide ‘effective engagement’ with their supporters on ticket prices and proposals to relocate the club’s home ground; (2) the ability of the IFR to take into account and assess so-called parachute payments if it considers them to be of systemic risk to financial sustainability; and (3) the IFR being empowered to “compel clubs to democratically select the fan representatives the club must engage with, rather than clubs making a unilateral decision”.

The Bill continues to be not without its critics. Despite enjoying cross-party support when it was initially tabled, Kemi Badenoch recently stated that the IFR will be a “waste of money”. Others have complained about a lack of consultation, the potential costs of regulation, and a loss of autonomy, particularly in the light of a drive elsewhere in government for simpler and less onerous regulation (on which we have commented here).

Those criticisms (and many others) found voice in the House of Lords, where some 375 amendments to the Bill were proposed. Most significant, and potentially existential, was a move for the Bill to become a so-called ‘hybrid bill’ which would considerably delay its progress.

Ultimately, these attempts – described by the Sports Minister Stephanie Peacock as the actions of “a loud minority seeking to derail the debate, promote untruths and preserve the status quo” – proved unsuccessful. The Bill emerged from the House of Lords relatively unscathed, after all of the opposition attempts to amend it failed. However, a number of number of amendments were made by the Government (see here), including (1) adding ‘the financial growth of English football’ to the matters that the IFR must have regard to as part of its secondary duties; (2) adding players, fans and others who may be affected by the IFR’s decisions to the list of persons with whom the IFR should engage; and (3) requiring the Secretary of State to review the legislation and its impact on the industry within five years of the commencement of the licensing regime.

It is expected that the Bill will enjoy a smoother passage through the House of Commons than it did in the Lords, with some even predicting that it could become law by the summer. Nevertheless, there remain a number of opportunities for amendments to be proposed and debated as the Bill progresses through the various stages in the House of Commons.

To read more about the Bill, click here.