Independent Football Regulator

Baroness Twycross Excerpts

Tuesday 18th November 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)]

My Lords, these three breaches of the appointments code are not just about trust in government. UEFA and others have made it clear that English teams’ participation in foreign competitions depends on the new regulator’s independence.

Mr Kogan certainly appears to be very lucky. He did not originally apply to be chairman and was allowed to apply after the deadline had passed. He withdrew from the process last November, so was not one of the 10 people interviewed or three found appointable. He was reinserted in March by the Secretary of State, having previously made two donations to her Labour leadership campaign—something she says she did not know about. He was given his own interview. Within six hours, he was her preferred candidate,

“subject to No. 10 giving the green light”.

A note was sent to the Prime Minister, whose leadership and general election campaigns Mr Kogan had also donated to, and the Prime Minister gave his approval. He now says he should not have done that.

When this Urgent Question was taken in another place last week, the Secretary of State said this was not a prime ministerial appointment. If that is the case, why did she send the Prime Minister a note asking for the green light? If the Prime Minister had agreed with Sir Laurie Magnus that he would play no part in the appointment of the regulator, how can he play a part in exonerating the Secretary of State for these multiple breaches of the code?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)]

That was quite a lot of questions in one question. I will do my best to answer the noble Lord, but on his points about UEFA and the success of the Independent Football Regulator, I want to make it very clear that the report does not question the suitability of Mr Kogan as chair of the IFR. The plight of clubs, including Sheffield Wednesday, shows why the Government were right to establish the IFR, which is to put fans back at the heart of the game, where they belong.

The noble Lord asked about the Prime Minister’s reply to a note. The Prime Minister’s letter to Sir Laurie Magnus on this point shows that he knew that the decision was for the Secretary of State. He replied on the basis that the decision had been taken. He made it clear that it would have been preferable for him not to have been given the note or confirmed that he was content, and he sincerely regrets this. The Football Governance Act is clear that DCMS Ministers alone make appointments to the board of the IFR. In practice, in the end, David Kogan was appointed as chair of the IFR not by the Secretary of State nor by the Prime Minister but by the Minister for Sport.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, if we are to assume that this is cock-up and not conspiracy, can the Minister assure us of the process that will happen next time to make sure that this does not happen again? Also, it might be helpful for this ongoing situation if we could get some definition of what we are looking for as regards the success of the Independent Football Regulator.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The department has reviewed all appointments processes to ensure that this issue does not arise again. We will work with the Cabinet Office and the commissioner, as per the recommendation in the report. On what success looks like for the Independent Football Regulator, I know that the IFR under David Kogan will protect clubs, empower fans and keep clubs at the heart of their communities, which is exactly where they belong.

[Lord Birt (CB)]

My Lords, whatever the imperfections —and there manifestly were some—identified by the commission in the selection process, Mr Kogan did not apply but was invited to apply for the regulator post when it was first advertised, as the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson, just reminded us, under the previous Conservative Government. Does the Minister agree that whether Mr Kogan had been appointed under a Conservative or a Labour Government, it would have been solely because of his unique ability and expertise, which are widely admired right across football?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

There is no doubt in my mind, and I know in the minds of noble Lords from across your Lordships’ House, that David Kogan is supremely qualified for the role to which he has now been appointed. As the noble Lord highlights, he was approached under the previous Government for this role and is eminently qualified for the job.

[Lord Young of Acton (Con)]

My Lords, the Hillsborough law that this Government are introducing will make it a criminal offence for an elected official to mislead the public even if he or she did not intend to do so. Does the Minister agree that, had the Public Office (Accountability) Bill been on the statute books, the Prime Minister would now be liable for prosecution for telling his independent ethics adviser that he had recused himself from the appointment of David Kogan, only to then sign off on David Kogan’s appointment?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

Absolutely not. The Prime Minister replied, as I have said previously, on the basis that this decision had been made, and he made it clear that it would have been preferable for him not to have been given a note or confirmed that he was content. He sincerely regrets this. As I have previously stated, the Football Governance Act is clear that this is a matter for DCMS Ministers alone.

[Lord Bassam of Brighton (Lab)]

My Lords, it is a shame that the Opposition are sniping away at something that they first supported when they were in government. They proposed a regulator to ensure that the game became more sustainable, that owners were genuinely fit for purpose and that clubs thrived at the centre of their communities. Does my noble friend the Minister agree that, had it not been for the Opposition’s delaying tactics, we could have had the Bill on the statute book earlier, sending a signal to owners and fans that the state of the game must be improved? Does she further agree that the only thing that supporters of clubs such as Sheffield Wednesday and Morecambe want to see is the regulator up and running, effective, and protecting the interests of fans, footballers and supporters at large?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I could not agree more with my noble friend. He highlights a number of clubs that have gone through an incredibly difficult time. We are pleased that we have now made it through all the parliamentary hurdles. At one point, it felt like we were never going to get there. For players, fans and clubs across the country, I am absolutely delighted that the regulator is going to bring rigour and new financial regulation, which should improve the financial resilience of clubs across the football pyramid so that no owner can jeopardise clubs’ futures. We can all be pleased that we have finally got there. It is regrettable that it took so long.

[Lord Pannick (CB)]

Does the Minister agree that, in the light of the manifest suitability of Mr Kogan to perform this important job—given, as the noble Lord, Lord Birt, said, his unique expertise and experience—it is unfortunate that this synthetic dispute should seek to undermine the important responsibilities he is performing?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I am pleased that, despite the potential distractions around the process, there is pretty much universal support for David Kogan and the incredible range of skills and experience he brings to this role. The Secretary of State was clear that she will own up when she gets things wrong, as will this Government. As she said, when we make mistakes—and we will make mistakes; we are human beings—we will put ourselves through those independent processes, which are there for a reason, and take the consequences.

[Lord Mohammed of Tinsley (LD)]

My Lords, I declare an interest as a long-suffering Sheffield Wednesday supporter. Now that the regulator is in post, is the Minister assuring us that there will never be another debacle like the one we have seen at Sheffield Wednesday?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I would love to say that there will never be another debacle like the one we have seen at Sheffield Wednesday. It has clearly been a very difficult time for the club, its players and fans, and, no doubt, the noble Lord. We have established the Independent Football Regulator, following the incredible work by the former Sports Minister, Tracey Crouch, on her fan-led review, to make sure that we introduce much stronger financial regulation, which will improve the financial resilience of clubs across the country and across the football pyramid. We are really keen that fans will be at the heart of football, where they rightly belong.

[Lord Polak (Con)]

My Lords, I take issue with the noble Lord, Lord Pannick. There is nothing synthetic about the fact that the Prime Minister has had to apologise for something he said he did not do. That is the issue. The least that should happen is that “independent” should be taken away from the name of the Independent Football Regulator, because there is nothing independent about it.

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I have huge respect for the noble Lord and quite regularly agree with points that he makes in this House; I simply cannot agree with this point.