Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)

My Lords, Amendment 7 begins this group of amendments on this important Bill. It would expand the definition of, “the sustainability of English football”. On day one, we had a useful debate—although it was longer than the Committee Whip might have wished—about the purpose of the Bill and the limits of sustainability. As the Bill is drafted, the only definition of “the sustainability of English football” is, as the Minister pointed out to us in our debates on the previous groups, Clause 1(3)(a) and (b). Paragraph (a) states that English football is sustainable if it, “continues to serve the interests of fans of regulated clubs”, and paragraph (b) specifies that it must continue, “to contribute to the economic or social well-being of the local communities with which regulated clubs are associated”. That is all we have to go on in the Bill. The criteria for the success of this important and novel Bill therefore rest upon these two simple lines. Our contention is that these brief and rather vague statements of intent are not sufficient to act as the foundations on which the success, or otherwise, of this Bill and this new regulator are to be judged. The actions of this regulator will have significant consequences for the whole football pyramid. It is vital, therefore, that we ensure that it has the necessary legislative tools and the clarity of message from Parliament to set it up for success. To do that, it must have in statute a strong set of conditions against which its actions and its regulatory work can be assessed. This echoes the fruitful discussion we had on our first day in Committee about the underlying purpose of the Bill. However, my Amendment 7 is about much more than this. It is about setting a precedent. If we do not establish from the outset the frames of reference and the standards to which the regulator will have to be held, that does not set it up for a successful future. It is surely the duty of this Committee and of Parliament more broadly to hold public bodies to higher standards than these two rather short and insubstantial lines we have in the Bill at the moment. That is why I look forward to my noble friends Lord Maude of Horsham and Lord Markham setting out the case for their Amendments 12 and 13, and I will say a bit more once they have done so.