Lee Dillon MP: speeches

Speeches

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Butler. Clause 49 is an important part of the Bill, particularly if we look at recent history. We saw Cardiff City unilaterally changing the colour of their kit and the Leeds United club badge redesigned using something similar to Microsoft Paint. All that was done without consultation or agreement with fans. Both those decisions were met with overwhelming negative reaction from football fans. Our amendment would allow for fans to be properly consulted before such irresponsible and poorly supported changes even see the light of day. The regulator should be responsible for ensuring that the consultation of fans on such changes is independently observed in a fair and transparent process. In this morning’s debate, the hon. Member for Sheffield South East raised the point about what consultation and fan engagement mean. This amendment tries to get to that in some respect. It would be all too easy for some clubs to hand-pick a small group of fans that they know will agree with them and make an announcement claiming overwhelming support for a change. If the regulator is able to observe the process, fans can be reassured in the knowledge that the proposals will be given proper scrutiny and challenging views will be heard and considered.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We are happy to put the onus on the regulator to create a process by which it can reassure itself that a full consultation process has been undertaken. That consultation process could look different for different teams. A Premier League club has a country-wide fan base and a large amount of fans to engage with, whereas a smaller club might have a regional fan base and a smaller number of fans to engage with, so a different consultation method may be appropriate. We would be happy for the regulator to have that in its purview.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate the shadow Minister’s response to my previous intervention, but he did not answer how many clubs currently within scope of the Bill have fewer than 10 employees. Just out of interest, does he know how many would benefit from his amendment?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 140, in clause 49, page 40, line 31, at end insert— “(1A) A regulated club must notify the IFR if it is considering making any material changes under subsection (1) and the IFR must monitor the reasonable steps taken to independently establish that the changes are supported by a majority of the club’s fans.”. This amendment would require the IFR to take steps to independently oversee a club’s fan consultation process on the material changes specified.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Is the shadow Minister aware of how many clubs within the scope of the Bill currently have fewer than 10 full-time employees? Players are club employees, so they would need to be excluded from that number.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Ms Butler. I do not think we have withdrawn or taken a decision on the new clauses. I am happy to withdraw mine, but this is just for formality.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her response. Although the Bill tackles financial sustainability, it has a real ability to rebuild trust between fans and football clubs. I feel that all three amendments are still worthy of being pressed to a vote, and I commend amendment 140 to the Committee. Question put, That the amendment be made.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman’s amendments find support from the Liberal Democrats. He referenced training grounds, and Reading football club’s training ground, Bearwood Park, was actually in that exact position. The owner tried to sell it off because it was prime land for residential development. However, without that training facility, the club would clearly struggle to continue. There was even the potential to sell the training ground to rivals Wycombe Wanderers, so that they could then have an enhanced training ground. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Liberal Democrats have tabled new clause 11, which seeks to protect various assets of a football club, including the training ground, so he has our support.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Butler. Pre-season friendlies constitute cup competitions all the time. There is the Audi cup; any major brand we could name will have sponsored friendly cups. When the Minister gives the hon. Gentleman assurance on the Pyongyang cup, perhaps she might also cover the friendly cups that actually exist.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I seek some clarity on the relocation of a ground. White Hart Lane was demolished and rebuilt on a similar, but bigger footprint. Obviously, at Old Trafford, Manchester United’s owners are talking about building on land next to the stadium. Personally, I would not class either of those moves as the relocation of a ground. However, in the Bill would they count as relocation, because those new stadia are not on the same footprint as the original stadium?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I have sympathy with what the amendment is trying to achieve, but can the shadow Minister reflect on what it could do to transfers coming into the country? An agent working with Ronaldo could sell him either to an English club, where the fees are capped, or to an Italian, French or Spanish club, where the fees are not capped. Is there a concern that this would limit good players coming into the country?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) for tabling new clause 15. It is the result of close co-operation between local parliamentarians and the Supporters Trust at Reading, which I have mentioned previously. I thank it for its constructive approach to the Bill. The new clause mandates that individuals must notify the IFR if they are aware of any evidence that indicates a change in circumstances that could affect the ability of club owners or key personnel who are essential to the management and survival of football clubs to meet the statutory fitness criteria set forth in clause 26. It is widely recognised that whistleblowing is a vital tool for public scrutiny and accountability of individuals, and that wrongdoing and bad practice need to be called out. It is therefore essential that there are protections to encourage people to speak out. The new clause seeks to flesh out formal whistleblowing routes with regard to football ownership. Although I welcome and recognise the detail already included in the Bill on that, we need to go much further. We need to expand the list of groups and stakeholders who would be required to report any concerns that they have about the suitability of owners or officers, including the governing body for the relevant league, the football supporters’ trust and the Football Supporters’ Association. It is often the case that those stakeholders have more knowledge about the day-to-day operations inside a club than fans, due to their proximity to the club’s inner workings. As many fans do not have the same connection or influence as such organisations, it is vital to provide a strong and accessible voice for them when issues arise, particularly when evidence concerning the survival of a club comes to light. It is essential that the individuals listed in new clause 15 have the opportunity and route to escalate their concerns when necessary. If we take as an example my local EFL club, Reading, there may have been some people in the EFL and in the club itself who had suspicions about the deteriorating situation at the club long before those problems came to the surface and to the attention of the fanbase. If this new clause had been in place, it would have given stakeholders a formal route to raise such concerns and ensure that Dai Yongge was scrutinised properly. That could have gone some way to resolving the situation before the club ended up teetering on the brink; it is only recently that it has been sold and been able to recover. To conclude, new clause 15 would enable accountability and monitoring of owners during their time in charge. Football club owners are temporary custodians of heritage assets that are vital to our communities; at the very least they should face regular scrutiny. It is for those reasons that I hope new clause 15 is accepted.

• 10 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Given the assurances of the Minister, I am happy not to move new clause 15. I thank the hon. Member for Rushcliffe for seeking clarification about the atmosphere that will be created. Question put and agreed to . Clause 26 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill . Clause 27 Duties to notify IFR of prospective new owner or officer Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the Minister for her response, and I thank the hon. Member for Sheffield South East for drawing that conclusion from the Minister in his useful remarks. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I seek further clarification from the Minister. Subsection (1)(c) of both new clauses refers to “unregulated clubs who are reasonably likely to become regulated clubs in the next football season.” They would stand outside the remit of the Bill if unamended, but would the Minister’s view be that the regulator should engage with those clubs that may be just about to come into the regulated area?

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Minister may be coming to this point. His amendment states, “No football governance statement may have effect unless approved by resolution of both Houses of Parliament”, but on the other hand he argues for more independence for the regulator. Surely Parliament and, by extension, political parties having to vote for a resolution would introduce more politics into the independent regulator.

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Minister outlined a number of deadlines that come up, but another of the deadlines in football is transfer windows. The ability to be granted a provisional licence would allow clubs more certainty to make signings and not fall foul of deadlines.

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 139, in clause 10, page 7, line 22, at end insert— “(iia) supporters trusts, fan groups and individual fans;”. This amendment adds fans and fan organisations to the list of groups that the IFR must consult about a state of the game report. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. The amendment seeks to ensure that the heart of football, the fans are remembered and properly considered, and that their voices are heard throughout the Bill. The state of the game report is a key output of the new regulator. It will provide comprehensive assessment of how football is functioning. It will help to set the direction of future policy and regulation, and will be a key measure of accountability for the sport as a whole. Given that, it is essential that fans should have a say. Week in, week out, fans give their time, money and hearts to the clubs that they love, and yet too often they are the last to be consulted and the first to be overlooked when decisions are made about the future of our national game. The amendment is about changing that. It is about ensuring that the voices of supporters are formally recognised in the process of shaping the game’s future. Supporters trusts play a key role here. They are often the bridge between clubs and fans, with a working relationship on both sides. They are well placed to represent fans’ views in a constructive and organised way. I recently met STAR, the Supporters Trust at Reading, which represents Reading FC, the closest professional league club to my constituency. Over the years, I have been to many games as a fan, and I have seen at first hand how passionate and committed the supporters are to improve the club and represent their fellow fans. Supporters trusts such as STAR are well placed to act as that bridge between the clubs and their fanbase. We also recognise that not every fan may agree with their trust. That is why the amendment also allows for individual fans to be heard directly where necessary. It is vital that the Bill is amended to ensure that the independent football regulator listens to supporters when assessing the health and direction of the game through the state of the game report. By formally including fans and their organisations in the consultation process, we ensure that their lived experience, insight and passion are properly reflected in how the game is monitored and improved.

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Supporters’ trusts and football fan bodies across the country support the establishment of a regulator, because they can see what the greater good is. Does the hon. Gentleman not accept that, even if there was a small increase in ticket prices, fans across the country would rather that there was a regulator tackling the systematic issues of football and accept that a small charge might be added to tickets? Their driver is for fairness across the game.

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. By what measure will it be possible to work out that the cost of the Independent Football Regulator has a direct consequence on the price of tickets? For example, a club could look to recoup any losses from a regulator by increasing shirt sales, or by putting 10p on a pint on the commercial sales that they get as part of their matchday revenue. Is this amendment more politically motivated, to try to pass blame on to the IFR for any matchday ticket pricing, rather than to understand the true cost of the independent regulator to football clubs?

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I sold my shares in Manchester United to the phoenix fund, which exists to buy the club if it ever comes back on the market.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I have a football at home signed by Sir Geoff Hurst, so I know exactly how heavy those old balls were, particularly when they got wet. We have seen coaching improvements so that children no longer head the football. That has come about because of the experiences of footballers who played in the ’50s, ’60s, ’70s and ’80s. The Lib Dem spokesman referenced a game at Southampton in the early ’90s, when the football was not too dissimilar to the modern football. I can remember kicking it around at the park myself. I am not in favour of banning headers in games. I would like to see a fully funded and legally compelled scheme set up to protect footballers who have suffered from playing the beautiful game and to support their families. Footballers of previous generations were not paid anywhere near what current footballers are paid. I would also like more research on preventive measures. Without the players, there is no game. We have to support our former players while protecting our future ones.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Seb Coe is a successful leader of sports bodies in this country and of our 2012 Olympics. He is a former Conservative MP and peer. I saw him act with integrity and did not question his political past. Why can people not act with integrity and be members of political parties? This is looking to spin a political angle when there might not be one at play.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I rise in support of new clause 1, which starts by saying: “The IFR must establish and supervise a scheme aimed at providing…support to any person who has developed a neurodegenerative condition”. The hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup referred to an existing scheme run by the Premier League, which initially put £1 million into the pot, and I accept that £1.4 million may have been spent. However, Nobby Stiles’s care was £125,000 a year, so that fund would help only a handful of players. If we look at the money in the game, there is £10 billion in Premier League TV rights and the PFA has £50 million in cash assets. John Stiles, Nobby Stiles’s son, is on record as saying that the PFA is not working with them enough. The PFA union derives an income of £26 million a year, and shirt sales in this country generate £200 million a year. The money already exists within the game to fund this at an appropriate level—more than the Premier League agreed when it set up its fund. This scheme also has the support of the Football Supporters Association. We know from evidence that footballers are four to five times more likely to suffer devastating conditions such as Alzheimer’s, motor neurone disease, Parkinson’s and chronic traumatic encephalopathy, which was found to be the cause of death in Nobby Stiles’s post-mortem.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. Amendment 116 also says that the chairman must not campaign “on behalf of a candidate”, which also applies at a local authority level. The regulator could have a friend standing as an independent candidate for a council. That would not be party politics, but the regulator would be barred from canvassing at a super-local level on a “save our local hospital” campaign, which really has no relevance to the football governance role that they hold. Does the hon. Gentleman not feel that his amendment would too greatly impede the regulator’s ability to express their democratic rights in society while holding the role?