English Football Governance: The New Regulatory Framework

In this episode, we uncover the details of the Football Governance Bill [HL], a significant piece of legislation introduced in the House of Lords on 24 October 2024 and progressing through Parliament. This bill aims "to protect and promote the sustainability of English football". We'll explore the policy background that led to its creation, the key aspects of the bill itself, and what it means for the future of the English game.

The bill is a response to long-standing worries about the financial stability of English football clubs, their ownership, and the need for greater fan involvement. Concerns were amplified by events like the expulsion of Bury FC, the financial impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the abandoned plans for a European Super League. 

These issues prompted a Fan-led Review of football governance in 2021, which recommended the establishment of an independent regulator. The government accepted this recommendation, and a subsequent white paper in February 2023 outlined plans for this regulator. The current Football Governance Bill is very similar to a previous version that didn't complete its parliamentary journey.

Key Takeaways:

• The Football Governance Bill [HL] aims to ensure the financial sustainability of English football and enhance fan involvement.
• A key component is the creation of an Independent Football Regulator (IFR) with powers to license clubs and oversee their financial health.
• The bill introduces a stricter regime for determining the suitability of club owners and officers.
• Clubs will have greater duties to protect their heritage and engage with supporters on important matters.
• The IFR will have backstop powers to intervene in revenue distribution if football authorities fail to agree.

Source: Football Governance Bill [HL] 2024-25
Research Briefing
Published Wednesday, 23 April, 2025

Chapters

• 0:08 Introduction
• 1:41 Three main aims of the bill
• 2:12 Independent Football Regulator (IFR)
• 3:45 Provisional and Full licences
• 5:17 Preventing breakaway clubs
• 5:34 Suitable owners and officers
• 7:37 Protecting club heritage
• 9:11 Distribution of revenue
• 10:13 Parachute payments
• 10:36 IFR powers
• 11:59 Conclusions

Transcript

Hello, benchwarmers, and welcome again to the bench report. You're listening to Amy and Ivan. Today, we're looking at the football governance bill. It's, already been through the House of Lords. Now it's landed in the House of Commons.

That's right. And this new law, well, it wants to tackle some pretty long standing issues in English football. Things like clubs running out of money. Right. And who owns them.

Exactly. Financial stability, ownership questions, and also making sure fans actually have a bigger voice in how their clubs are run. And this all stems from that fan led review back in 2021. It does. Yeah.

That review really brought these issues into sharp focus. I mean, these problems aren't exactly new, are they? People have worried about club finances for years. Definitely. And ownership has often been controversial.

And fans often feel, you know, left out of the loop, ignored even. So what pushed it forward now? Well, a few things really converged. The, the pandemic hit clubs hard financially Mhmm. Exposing vulnerabilities.

Then you have the whole European Super League debacle. Oh, yes. That caused quite the uproar. It really did. It galvanized fan opinion and highlighted the need for, well, better oversight.

So the fan review recommended an independent body, an independent regulator. And the government actually listened. They did. Back in 2023, they published a white paper confirming plans for one. An earlier attempt at a bill didn't quite make it before the last election, mind you.

But the commitment remained. Yes. The Labour Party also had it in their manifesto, something similar anyway. And then the King's speech last year specifically mentioned introducing this bill. So there's been a fair bit of cross party, well, momentum.

So let's get into the bill itself. What are its main aims? Broadly, it's aiming for three things. Better financial sustainability for clubs, protecting their cultural heritage, and ensuring genuine fan engagement. Sounds sensible.

And is it very different from the last government's version? Not drastically. No. It's, very similar in its main components. The absolute key part is creating this independent football regulator, the IFR.

The IFR. Sort of a watchdog for the game. Pretty much. Yeah. It's the central pillar.

This idea gained a lot of traction after those events we just talked about. Okay. So this independent football regulator or IFR, what powers will it actually have? What's its job description? Its main function will be operating a licensing system For all clubs.

For clubs in the top five tiers of English men's football. So Premier League down to the National League. And if you want to play in those leagues, you need a license from the IFR. Correct. And the IFR's objectives in granting these licenses are, first, promoting the financial soundness of individual clubs.

Second, ensuring the overall financial resilience of the leagues, systemic resilience, they call it. And third, safeguarding the heritage of clubs, things like badges, colors, stadiums. And how does it have to operate? Are there guiding principles? Yes.

It has general duties. It has to act compatibly with the bill's purposes, obviously. It must advance its own objectives, those financial and heritage goals. It also needs to consider things like sporting competitiveness and encouraging investment in the game. It shouldn't stifle that.

So it's a balancing act. It is. And there are regulatory principles too. Using its resources efficiently, cooperating with everyone involved, clubs, owners, fans, the leagues, the FA. Crucially, any regulations it imposes must be necessary and proportionate, you know, not using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Makes sense. And it needs to recognize football specific context. Yes. That football isn't just any other business. It has cultural significance.

Go. Oh, and it also has to publish a regular state of the game report looking at the health of English football. Right. Let's dig into these licenses. You said top five tiers need one.

What kind of licenses are there? There are two types, provisional and full. Provisional first, I assume. Usually, yes. All licensed clubs, whether provisional or full, must meet certain mandatory conditions.

Like what? Things like having appropriate financial planning in place, consulting properly with their fans on key issues, and reporting on their corporate governance how the club is actually run internally. And the full license. Well, beyond the mandatory stuff, there are threshold requirements. Financial resources, nonfinancial resources like staffing and facilities and fan engagement levels.

If a club meets the mandatory conditions, but maybe needs a bit more work on those thresholds, the IFR can add discretionary conditions to their license to help them get there. I see. So clubs need to provide quite a bit of information. They do. Things like personnel statements, who the key people are, and strategic business plans outlining their future direction.

How long does a provisional license last? The initial grant could be for a maximum of three years. And getting the full license? What's the hurdle? It's called the full license test.

A club needs to demonstrate it's operating a team, obviously, meeting all those threshold requirements we mentioned, complying with the mandatory conditions, and very importantly, that its owners and officers, the directors and senior managers, are deemed suitable people. And the IFR can say no or take a license away? Absolutely. It can refuse or revoke licenses if clubs don't meet the conditions or if other serious issues arise. You mentioned stopping breakaway leagues earlier.

Yes. The bill ties the license to participation in specified competitions, essentially the established pyramid. The idea is you can't operate a licensed club in a prohibited breakaway league. Now this suitable owners and officers point, how does that compare to the current system? Well, currently, the leagues, the Premier League, EFL, and the FA administer their own owners and directors tests.

They mainly focus on disqualifying conditions, criminal convictions related to dishonesty, previous involvement in insolvent clubs, that sort of thing. But there have been criticisms? Yes. Concerns about how robust they are, whether they dig deep enough, and whether the league's policing themselves is truly independent. So the bill creates a new system under the IFR?

Correct. Prospective owners and officers will need what's called an affirmative determination of suitability from the IFR before they can take up their roles. So they apply to the IFR? Yes. Applicants provide information, and the IFR assesses them based on, honesty, integrity for officers, also competence for the role, and financial soundness.

Financial soundness of the individual. Or the entity seeking to own the club. Yes. Ensure they have the means and a sound financial background. The IFR can make detailed rules about this process.

Can clubs notify the IFR about potential new owners? Yes. There's a notification process for prospective owners and officers, and the bill distinguishes slightly between tests for individuals and for, say, registered societies like fan owned clubs. What about existing owners and officers? Can the IFR look at them?

It can. Yes. If concerns arise about incumbent owners or officers, the IFR can make determinations about their ongoing suitability. And if the IFR thinks someone isn't suitable? There's a process.

The individual gets a chance to make representations to argue their case before a final negative determination. But if found unsuitable, the IFR has strong powers. It can disqualify them and issue removal directions. Basically, kick them out. What happens to the club then?

The bill allows the IFR to appoint interim officers or even trustees to ensure the club can continue operating while new suitable people are found. And everyone has to cooperate with these interim managers? Yes. There's a duty to cooperate fully. Okay.

Moving on to protecting heritage. What specific duties do clubs have here? Well, first, the duty not to operate a team in a prohibited competition that reinforces the anti breakaway league measure. And the IFR has a process for deciding if a competition should be prohibited involving consultation with fans and the FA. What about the physical home of the club?

Big one. Clubs have a duty not to change their home ground without getting IFR approval first. No moving the club miles away without oversight. And financial distress. Clubs, even formally regulated ones, can't appoint an administrator, which is a formal insolvency process without prior IFR approval.

The regulator wants to be involved before that stage if possible. And the really core identity stuff, badges, colors. Yes. Clubs will have a duty to consult their fans meaningfully on any proposed changes to significant heritage matters. Such as?

The club emblem or crest, the colors of the home shirt, the club's name itself. And after consulting fans, they still need IFR approval for the change. So fans get a say, and the regulator gets a final check. That's the idea. Clubs also have a duty to keep fans informed if they are facing insolvency proceedings.

Plus, licensed clubs must publish that personnel statement we mentioned earlier for IFR approval. Do the leagues, the competition organizers, have duties too? They do. They have to notify the IFR about significant risks they identify, about clubs breaching rules, and about any proposed changes to their own rules, and consult the IFR on those changes. Okay.

Let's talk money. The distribution of Premier League revenue is always a hot topic. Does the bill force a deal? Not directly force one, but it creates a backstop. This was a key recommendation for the fan led review.

Basically, if football can't agree on a financial distribution deal between the Premier League and the EFL, the regulator might get involved. The bill gives the secretary of state the power, not duty initially to make regulations about revenue distribution, but only if the IFR advises that there isn't a sufficient agreement in place between the relevant parties, like the PL and EFL. So the IFR triggers it. Either the IFR believes there's no agreement after a certain period or a competition organizer, say the EFL, could apply to the IFR asking it to consider stepping in. If the IFR agrees the conditions are met, it advises the secretary of state.

Who then consults before making regulations? Yes. Consults the IFR, the FA, and the competition organizers. And any regulations would need parliamentary approval, The affirmative procedure usually. What about parachute payments?

The money relegated clubs get. Are they part of this? That's been debated a lot. The bill doesn't explicitly exclude parachute payments from being considered within the overall distribution picture. So, potentially, yes.

The IFR would have a process to assess any distribution proposals put forward by the leagues and could potentially impose a solution through a distribution order if triggered via the secretary of state. Right. So if clubs or individuals break these new rules, what teeth does the IFR have? Investigations, enforcement. Yes.

It has significant powers. It can gather information demanding documents and answers through information notices. It can formally open investigations into what the bill calls relevant infringements, basically Yeah. Breaches of the act or the IFR's rules. Is it always a full investigation?

Not necessarily. The IFR can also accept commitments from a club or individual to put things right instead of pursuing or completing an investigation. But if they do find a breach then there's a range of enforcement actions, warning notices, formal decision notices setting out the breach, and any penalty. Penalties can include substantial financial fines. And for very serious breaches, the bill even creates some criminal offenses.

Wow. Criminal offenses. In specific serious circumstances, yes. The IFR can also issue urgent directions if needed to prevent immediate harm. Will these decisions be public?

Yes. There's provision for publishing warning notices, decision notices, and urgent directions. Transparency is intended. And appeals. Can clubs challenge the IFR?

Yes. There's an appeals process. Certain decisions are classed as reviewable decisions. First step is usually an internal review by the IFR itself. If the club is still unhappy, they can appeal to the competition appeal tribunal, which is an existing specialist body.

Okay. Nearly there. Yeah. Any other general points in the bill worth noting? Just a couple.

The secretary of state is required to review the effectiveness of the act within five years of it coming into force. Standard practice for major legislation. Mhmm. And as you often find, there's detail on the parliamentary process itself, how bills pass through the commons and lords, dealing with amendments, royal assent, and so on. So quite a comprehensive attempt to reshape football governance.

It certainly is. It touches on finance, ownership, heritage, fan engagement. It's potentially transformative if it passes in this form. Its goal seems to be bringing more stability and accountability, addressing those long running worries. That's the ambition.

Balancing financial health with the cultural importance of clubs and giving fans a proper stake. And the next step is the second reading in the commons. It'll be fascinating to see the debate there. Absolutely. There will likely be arguments about the detail, the scope of the regulator's powers, the impact on investment.

It's far from over. As always, check out the episode notes for more details on today's topic. Find us on social media at bench report UK. Take care.