Max Wilkinson MP: speeches

Speeches

• 17 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Tenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn . New Clause 10 Fan representation: mandatory golden share “(1) A licensed club must, as a condition of holding a licence under section 15, issue a non-transferable golden share to a recognised Supporters’ Trust or equivalent democratic fan organisation. (2) The golden share must confer on its holder the right to veto any proposal by the club to— (a) relocate the club’s home ground outside its current local authority area, (b) change the club’s name, (c) materially alter the club’s primary colours or badge, or (d) enter into or withdraw from any competition not sanctioned by The Football Association, the Premier League, or the English Football League. (3) A licensed club must— (a) consult the holder of the golden share on any material changes to the club’s ownership, governance, or strategic direction, (b) provide the holder with access to relevant financial and governance information reasonably required to fulfil its function, and (c) facilitate structured and regular engagement between the club and the holder of the golden share. (4) The Regulator must monitor compliance with this section and may— (a) issue guidance to clubs and Supporters’ Trusts on the operation of the golden share, (b) impose licence conditions or financial penalties for non-compliance, and (c) take enforcement action where a club fails to uphold the rights associated with the golden share. (5) In this section— ‘Supporters’ Trust’ means a formally constituted, democratic, not-for-profit organisation that is recognised by the Regulator as representing the interests of a club’s supporters; ‘golden share’ means a special share or equivalent legal instrument issued to a Supporters’ Trust, entitling its holder to the rights and protections described in this section.”— (Max Wilkinson.) This new clause would give fans a veto on club proposals, exercised through a recognised Supporters’ Trust or equivalent democratic fan body. Brought up, and read the First time.

• 17 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Tenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

• 17 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Tenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I have heard what the Minister said. She seems to be implying that this issue can be dealt with by the Bill, and that the regulator will have an eye on these sorts of things. I am somewhat reassured, but I hope that when the regulator is introduced—and we hope it is introduced—it will be given a strong steer that it ought to make sure that the owners of clubs are not stripping assets. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 12 Duty not to stage home matches outside United Kingdom without approval “(1) A regulated club must not stage any home fixture in a competitive match at a venue outside the United Kingdom without the approval of the IFR. (2) The IFR may only grant approval under subsection (1) if the fixture is not part of a specified competition. (3) For the purposes of this section, a ‘home fixture’ means any fixture where the club is designated as the home team by the rules of the relevant competition.”— (Max Wilkinson.) This new clause would prevent a regulated club from staging a competitive home fixture outside of the United Kingdom. It will allow regulated clubs to stage non-competitive fixtures outside of the United Kingdom. Brought up, and read the First time .

• 17 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I rise to speak in support of amendment 141. The hon. Member for Sheffield South East has made a compelling case for its necessity. The Bill has a clear purpose, and we believe it broadly does the job. That is why we support it. Changing the previous version to include the parachute payments within scope is the right thing to do for redistribution of funds from those who can afford it, down to the smaller and lower league clubs that really need the help. Those are the people the hon. Member for Sheffield South East referred to. Those of us who represent football league clubs are being asked to do the right thing—to back the regulator to ensure that there is financial sustainability in the lower divisions.

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

  More

  I beg to move amendment 76, in clause 56, page 45, line 39, after “organisers” insert “or by a regulated club”.

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

  More

  The hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) once fell foul of this when he attempted to change the name of the Dell to the Friends Provident stadium. Perhaps we might consult him on his learnings from that experience after we have completed this Committee.

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

  More

  Clubs in the English football pyramid currently barter as a collective for funding from broadcasters, but it is not hard to imagine a future in which Liverpool, Manchester City, Arsenal, Chelsea—the hon. Member for Spelthorne has now gone so I can say that—or other big clubs decide that they are going to barter alone. That has happened in other European countries. In fact, Spain had to legislate to stop Barcelona and Real Madrid cashing in on their massive marketable machine that massively distorted the Spanish game. These amendments are fairly simple. They build in a future failsafe to stop the threat of that happening. If it does happen, the revenue gained by those clubs will be taken into account in the redistribution of funds in the game. It seems like a logical failsafe to introduce to the Bill, which we hope will be accepted.

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

  More

  We recognise the numbers—although we Liberal Democrats now outnumber the official Opposition—so we will not press this to a vote. However, it is worth considering that, in future, we might end up in a situation where some of our bigger clubs start to try to negotiate on their own for their broadcast revenue. The Minister did not reassure me that that could not happen. As I understand it, we do not have legislation that would stop that. There is nothing in the game to stop that apart from Arsenal, Manchester United, Chelsea and Manchester City deciding to play together nicely. Although we are not reassured, there is no point in forcing this to a vote. But we hope that the comments may be taken forward and taken into account by the regulator in future, and perhaps we will have this discussion again as and when those big clubs decide that they are going to kick up a stink and try to ruin the rest of football for everyone else. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. Earlier in our deliberations—I cannot remember how many sittings ago—the Liberal Democrats made the case for extending the Bill’s scope to the sixth tier, the National Leagues. Effectively, we feel that helping those clubs up the pyramid would be useful, and on a cross-party basis, we have discussed support for the National League’s 3UP campaign, which we can take forward after Committee as a group of Members who are interested in football. This amendment is quite simple, as it is about extending the Bill’s scope to the sixth tier. It would give clubs in National League North and National League South the opportunity to apply for an exemption from the levy, were it to be extended to that level. Clubs at that level may well not have the capacity to take on the administration associated with regulation. Such increased financial protections for lower-league clubs—those in the National League and National Leagues North and South—would align with the principles of the Bill.

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

  More

  We have seen in the past things such as the renaming of St James’ Park in Newcastle to the Sports Direct Arena, and other fans groups around the country have been furious when historic stadium names have been changed to sponsors’ names. Would the shadow Minister extend the sentiment that he is now expressing to those circumstances as well?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  Cyber-security will be a key pillar in the industrial strategy. That is welcome news in my constituency of Cheltenham, which is already a centre of excellence in the sector. We are on the cusp of unlocking £1 billion-worth of investment at the Golden Valley development in west Cheltenham. I know Ministers are aware of that, as are their colleagues in many other Departments. A planning application is expected very soon. Will Ministers join me in urging the two councils—the borough council and the county council—to get on with it and unlock that investment, which will bring growth to Cheltenham and the nation and, crucially, support defence as well?

• 11 Jun 2025 · Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister congratulate innovators such as my constituent James Hygate, who was recently awarded an OBE for his work on green fuels? Over genteel tea and cake—as the House can imagine, this happens all the time in Cheltenham—he told me of his plans to turn human faeces into SAF. He is an innovator at the leading edge, and he says that the Minister might be able to work with his friends in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to solve some of the problems that we have with sewage in our rivers, by taking it out at source. Is the Minister considering that as part of this legislation?

• 11 Jun 2025 · Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Only three?

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

  More

  I beg to move amendment 75, in clause 26, page 19, line 20, at end insert— “(c) respects and promotes the protection of human rights and prevents modern slavery (as set out in section [Human rights and modern slavery considerations]).” This amendment is linked to NC8.

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

  More

  I am reassured by what the Minister has said. The points raised by Conservative Members are all valid and we will take them on board. On the point about honour and integrity, I suggest that the kind of people who commit these crimes will not admit to them readily. In cases that may arise, it may be obvious that something has happened only after some time, and individuals who we know have been doing something might end up owning football clubs. If that were to occur in the near future, we might reflect on today’s discussion and the powers that the regulator might have had. We do not intend to press the amendment to a vote—we recognise the numbers in the room—but I am glad that we have put the debate on the record. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed , That the clause stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. The amendment would prohibit individuals with a record of human rights abuses from club ownership. Our national game is a source of huge pride to our country and everyone in this room. It should not be exploited by individuals and regimes that want to launder their reputations using some of our greatest cultural and sporting assets. Strengthening the proprietary tests for prospective owners and directors, with clear tests about human rights, would enable UK football to promote and protect what we know is special about our game and would promote and protect the liberal and democratic western values that we all hold so dear. It is wrong that we allow football to roll out the red carpet for despots. Let us consider a future in which the owner or potential owner of a football club is also the head of a state or a Minister in the Government of a foreign state that suppresses its own people or is involved in illegal military action, perhaps in a failed state. That owner is also clearly financially linked to activities that involve the plunder of that failed state’s mineral wealth. If that person were to be linked directly to such action, which breaches international human rights laws, would this Government, football and this country accept it? We think that we should not, and that is why we have tabled the amendment and the new clause.

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

  More

  The shadow Minister referenced Forest Green Rovers, which is the rival club to my town’s club, Cheltenham Town. I have nothing against Forest Green Rovers. They have vegan catering, and many people view veganism as a political statement. That is, of course, a business choice that Forest Green Rovers made and it has served them well. Based on a previous amendment the shadow Minister tabled, would he suggest that the fans should have been consulted on the move from meat to vegan food being served in the grounds?

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

  More

  I have a really important point about a referendum.

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

  More

  Some would regard wearing rainbow laces for Pride as a political statement. In the hon. Member’s ideal world of football governance, would a club have to go to a referendum of its fans to work out whether its players and the club could wear rainbow laces for Pride, for example? Would that not be more pointless bureaucracy?

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

  More

  New clause 16 specifically says that the club must establish that there is support from “a majority of the club’s fans in England and Wales.” That is really difficult to establish. Committee members will have been in football grounds and heard a number of opinions expressed in vociferous terms from the stands. I challenge anyone to say that it is possible to establish that a majority of fans either support or do not support any kind of political statement that might be made by a club. I just do not think the new clause works.

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

  More

  Is the Minister concerned about inhibiting the free speech of Members of the House of Lords, for example Baroness Brady, who made significant and very valuable comments in the debate on the Bill in the other place, and then repeatedly made similar statements in the press and other media? She is, of course, a representative of West Ham and the Conservative party, as was noted by the hon. Member for Portsmouth North. Would we seek to retain her freedom of speech and freedom of expression by voting down new clause 16?

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

  More

  Would this new clause preclude the owner or chairman, or some other executive officer or member of staff, of a football club from standing for election? I can think of one example: a former chairman of my club Southampton, the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe). He stood for the Referendum party in the Cotswolds in 1997, shortly after he had become the chairman of Southampton football club, and he is rumoured to be joining those on the Conservative Benches soon. I wonder whether the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup would be against that sort of thing.

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

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

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

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler—it is appropriate that you are chairing given that, as I understand it, the road to Wembley runs right through your constituency. I will say only that we support both amendments. The principles that the hon. Member for Sheffield South East stated apply, and more regular reporting will clearly help the regulator to hold itself and clubs to account. On whether it should be 12 or 18 months, I think the sooner it is done, the better, and then we can get on with sorting out the state of football.

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

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I reassure the Government Whips that the hon. Member for Sheffield South East and I have not been collaborating, but we have clearly been speaking to the same fans’ groups, who are very supportive of the Bill. There is a very simple principle here: some clubs may struggle with the regulatory burden, as has, I think, been expressed by all Members during the discussion. The way of solving that is not to take the steps that the Conservatives have suggested; it is for the regulator to take a reasonable view on how it might support those clubs. New clause 6 may well not pass, but I hope that the Minister takes away the message to work with regulators, so that the regulator, when it is set up, is in a position to support the smaller clubs that have maybe only a few full-time members of staff, or even fewer than that. We back the expansion of the regulator to the sixth tier as well; in those circumstances, it would be particularly important that such support was available.