Football
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-889, in the name of Kenny MacAskill, on the future of Scottish football, and two amendments to the motion.
I thank the minister for discussing and agreeing the terms of the motion that we are debating today. It is appropriate that when the national game is being debated in the national Parliament we should try to achieve a national consensus.
Scottish football finds itself in troubled times. The list of clubs in financial trouble reads like an excerpt from a hall of fame. More may follow those that have already been engulfed. Others, professional or not, are in debt or at best cash strapped.
Let us be clear that football is important. It is about jobs and livelihoods at clubs. It is part of the fabric of the community in towns and cities. It is part of the lives of many fans and followers. Nationally, it is how many people not only derive pleasure, but partake of exercise. Our distinct identity as a football nation is a source of pride, if all too often a source of heartache. Football is part of modern Scotland, transcending class, bridging age and uniting regions.
Let us also be clear that the plight of many clubs is a tragedy. Through mismanagement or mere misjudgment, they are in a dreadful situation. However, it is not the responsibility of the taxpayer to bail them out. The game needs to address the situation that has allowed wage bills to exceed income and clubs to live beyond their means. Limited companies may die; hopefully, football clubs will not, and football certainly must not.
Public funding for the game is essential, but it must be channelled into promoting the game as a whole and not into subsidising the faults and errors of the few.
Scottish football needs to restructure. Over recent years we have seen the game move from being a participatory sport to being a spectator event. The emphasis has been on stadia and foreign stars at the expense of the support and enhancement of the grassroots game. Scotland has pursued the wealth of the English premiership, or Spain's la Liga, rather than copying the development of the game in Norway or Denmark. As a result, we have bankrupt clubs, fewer people participating in the sport and a less successful national team than in comparable small nations. According to the Scottish Football Association, the number of players in Scotland is 130,000. However, despite its smaller population, Ireland has 180,000 players. Norway, with a comparable population to Scotland, has 325,000 players. As a result, Norway has a fitter population and, more important, a bigger pool of players from which to select its national team.
Rather than build football from the big clubs down, we need to construct Scottish football from the grass roots up. That is not rocket science. We have had reviews before. The tragedy is that they have not been implemented. How many bodies do we need to regulate and run football in Scotland? We have the Scottish Football Association; it must be extended from 78 member clubs to represent the whole football family. It must change and evolve, but it is the body that is best suited to governing the game and we must build around it. We do not need a superfluity of organisations from the Scottish Junior Football Association and the Scottish Schools Football Association to the Scottish Premier League, the Scottish Football League and beyond. It is not players hanging up their boots that we need, but some buffers hanging up their blazers.
I agree with much of Kenny MacAskill's analysis so far, but it is important for the Parliament to understand that the SPL, the Scottish Schools Football Association and the Scottish Junior Football Association are not completely separate entities from the Scottish Football Association. They come under the umbrella of the Scottish Football Association, which is the sole governing body for the whole of Scottish football. It is important that everybody understand that.
I fully accept that. As Dennis Canavan might be aware, John Swinney and I met the SFA and it was made clear that those bodies are affiliated. They contribute immensely through the time and commitment that they give, but we also have to address the structures. In the 21st century, those structures are archaic and they need to be developed. I hope that they will be built on consensus. As I will go on to say, it might be that we need to offer some carrot as opposed to too much stick.
We need to get more people playing the game and fewer people administrating it. We cannot replace the blazers with bureaucrats or players with politicians. We know what needs to be done. The plans exist and have done so for years, ever since Ernie Walker's time. If any additional review is required, it should come from within the game and should be done by the Dalglishes and the Laws or some of the countless other sporting legends.
What is needed is the will. As Mr Canavan commented, the role of the Parliament should be to say that funding is contingent upon change—we must say, "We cannot make you, but if you are to receive public funds, then change you must." We are in a new millennium and the time has come to change to meet it.
Action must also follow on from structural streamlining. A reconstituted SFA must enforce licensing schemes to address financial mismanagement. Broader ownership of clubs must be sought. Clubs should be for the pleasure of the many, not the privilege of the few. Community involvement must grow. Football has as much to contribute to our future as it has to our past, but to do that it must adapt to changing times. Football is our most popular sport and it has a great deal to contribute to the health and welfare of not just our young, but of all generations. The streets are busy with traffic and football fields are being sold off to developers. It is our duty to make the game affordable and accessible to all. Public funds must fund and provide public facilities. The PlayStation generation must be afforded the chance to become a footballing generation.
I am not prepared to accept either of the amendments that have been lodged. As far as the Tory amendment is concerned, I think that the "home international championship" that it mentions belongs to the previous century. In any event, the fixture lists for the Scottish international team should be chosen by Berti Vogts, not pre-selected by any Tory amendment.
Moreover, the Tory party's proposals on drinking in stadiums are entirely counterproductive. The Nicholson committee's report is currently under review. I and other members have had private discussions with the minister and his colleague and it would be wrong to supersede them and pre-empt where they might take us. More important, one of the results of this debate should be that we encourage more people to participate in football instead of giving more people the opportunity simply to have a drink while they sit on their backside.
Will the member give way?
Not at the moment.
The Scottish Socialist Party's amendment deletes a great deal of the meat of the motion that has been discussed and agreed between the minister's parties and my own party. As such deletion would negate any recognition of the requirement for change and to invest at youth level, I am not prepared to accept the amendment.
Our approach should be "one nation—one association". We must restructure. Although we must do what we can for the clubs in trouble, they must find their own level. We must reclaim the people's game for the people and make it affordable and accessible to all. We must build from the communities up, not from the big clubs down. We must provide facilities for all, not a fabulous lifestyle for the few. Let us follow the Norwegian and Danish model, not the English or Spanish one. Let us create a healthier population, a viable professional league and a more successful international team.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the crisis faced by Scottish football; recognises football's significant contribution and potential impact in terms of its economic, social and health benefits and its role in our culture and identity; sympathises with the backroom and playing staff of those clubs worst affected; calls on professional football clubs to work with their supporters to harness the emotional and financial investment they make in their clubs; calls on the football authorities and clubs to ensure better business planning and financial management; believes that public funding for the game is essential but not the bail out of individual clubs; welcomes current and proposed financial support from the Scottish Executive but calls for such support to be matched by structural change; calls for the Scottish Football Association (SFA) to be a more integrated governing body for the game; calls for a review of the professional league structure in Scotland and the criteria for membership, and further calls for the SFA to regulate and develop participation by all ages and at all levels from grassroots in the community through to the national team.
I should point out to Mr MacAskill that my amendment
"invites the Scottish Football Association to consider reinstating the home international".
It does not tell anyone to do anything.
Unlike the SNP in its motion.
Yes.
Although there is certainly a crisis in football, which is a game that is so important to so many Scots, I am very confused by certain points in Mr MacAskill's motion. In a press release that was issued on the SNP website on 6 February, he stated:
"No one will thank politicians if we try to dictate to football how it should proceed".
If that is the case, why, while welcoming current and proposed financial support from the Scottish Executive, does he call
"for such support to be matched by structural change"?
Surely that would be a case of politicians interfering with the business and management of football clubs and associations, both of which should be outwith any political interference. It is up to clubs and associations to take sensible financial decisions to cope with the present crisis. I would agree with Mr MacAskill's statement that
"public funding for the game is essential"
only if such funding were used to promote the playing of football in schools and to build the infrastructure to encourage that instead of giving a handout to struggling clubs.
Will the member give way?
Not at the moment.
Sections of Scottish football must realise that they do not generate enough of a turnover to support current levels of spending. There is no reason why a well-run club cannot operate at a profit. Clubs must find a way of securing a sustainable future that is based on a core of good, young players in order to help to boost dwindling attendances. Above all, they must make sound financial decisions.
In 2003, PricewaterhouseCoopers produced a report that concluded that, for a club to stand a chance of producing a reasonable financial performance, wage costs should represent no more than 60 per cent of its turnover. However, in 2001-02, only Celtic Football Club achieved that. In the same year, Dundee, Dunfermline and St Johnstone actually spent more on wages than they earned in income. Such a policy is bound to end in tears. Unfortunately, those tears are shed mostly by the loyal fans who have supported their teams relentlessly, through triumph and disaster in all weathers, and who have been let down badly by management.
I accept Lex Gold's point that this year the Scottish Premier League's total revenue has dropped from £21 million to £14 million. I also accept that he is quite right to say:
"There will be a lot of people who'll say why should we help you folks who have made an absolute shambles of it."
I am sure that most Scottish fans would agree, especially when they realise that the exclusive £50 million Sky TV rights offer was rejected by the Premier League clubs on the recommendation of the SPL management, who preferred the SPL's own proposed TV channel, which—as we know—failed to materialise. It was therefore the SPL's advice that precipitated the dramatic fall in television revenues to the clubs and the "absolute shambles" to which Mr Gold refers.
Other foolhardy practices have come to light. Bill Aitken, our chief whip and arguably the finest left winger since Bobby Lennox, tells me that after Motherwell went into administration last year it poached players from Partick Thistle by offering them higher wages. Partick Thistle took the honourable decision of not going into administration: it paid off its debts. That is surely a commendable course of action and an example that other football clubs should follow.
I have written to the chairmen of all the United Kingdom football associations to ask them for a return of the UK home internationals. England, Wales and Northern Ireland are in the same qualifying group for the world cup, so they will play each other twice anyway. What better time would there be to rekindle fixtures that were always popular and would be good for sport and for the economies of all the cities throughout the UK that were chosen to host the games? Revenue raised through television coverage could be reinvested in the Scottish game.
We also believe that we should revoke the ban on the sale of alcohol at football grounds. Our leader, David McLetchie, will expound on that later.
I come from the generation who remember great Scottish teams with players such as Jim Baxter, Jimmy Johnstone, wee Willie Henderson and Archie Gemmill—to name but a few. Those men encouraged young Scottish footballers. Now we have more great players such as Barry Ferguson, James McFadden and Darren Fletcher; they set the standard to which budding youngsters can aspire. We need more good Scottish players. In football terms, we need a Scottish coaching state rather than a Scottish nanny state.
I urge members to support the amendment in my name.
I move amendment S2M-889.1, to leave out from "significant" to end and insert:
"importance in terms of its economic, social and health benefits and also its contribution to our culture and identity; believes, however, that football clubs must take responsibility for their own commercial decisions and that a well-run football club should be sustainable without the need for public funding; further believes that the Scottish Executive can help club finances by lifting the outdated alcohol ban in all-seater stadia, and invites the Scottish Football Association to consider reinstating the home international championship as a means of generating additional revenue for the development of the game."
I declare an interest—perhaps it is a confession, as I am a Lothians MSP—I am a lifelong Motherwell fan. That is where I was born and bred and the club has already been mentioned in the debate.
Kenny MacAskill's motion more than adequately highlights the crisis in Scottish football and there certainly is a crisis. Anyone looking at the way that Scottish football is currently run must be tempted to ask, as Friedrich Engels once asked of Karl Marx, "Why is there not always a crisis?"
When we look at the situation, logic always goes out of the window in the management of Scottish football. Perhaps nothing typifies the madness of how Scottish football and our clubs have been run more than the figures Dunfermline released this week; it was revealed that its wage bill was 136 per cent of its turnover. Clubs' indebtedness at such levels leaves them at the mercy of the banks at a time when attendances are falling.
I thank the member for giving way. I could not resist that temptation.
Declare an interest.
Unfortunately, I do not have a financial interest to declare.
Does the member agree that the state of clubs such as Dunfermline is symptomatic of a club that has ambition and wants to do well on the national and international stage? That is one of the difficulties that we have when Scottish football is, unfortunately, dominated by two clubs and the rest all have to compete with them. It is very difficult for clubs such as Dunfermline to compete in that arena.
I agree with the member on that point. That is the point that I would like to finish my remarks on in a couple of minutes' time.
There have been crises before in Scottish football. After the famous Hillsborough disaster, clubs were faced with converting sometimes antiquated grounds into all-seater stadia. There was the Bosman ruling and the effect of European Union competition law on transfers. However, it is fair to say that the current crisis is undoubtedly the most severe that the sport has faced.
It is fair to say, as Graham Spiers did in The Herald on Tuesday, that when we examine how the current crisis has developed, it is clear that some clubs
"showed a reckless disregard for their financial position"
and that the situation has been brought to a head by the failure of promised TV deals.
We have seen that phenomenon across Europe. In Italy, Fiorentina went bust because it banked its money on the promise of an Italian television deal. I am told that 74 clubs in the English league are seriously indebted. For example, Leeds United Football Club's crippling debts of £80 million are well chronicled. In Scotland, Motherwell, Dundee and Livingston football clubs are already in administration. Which club will be next? As a Lothians MSP, I take a close interest in events at Tynecastle and Easter Road.
Would not the Scottish Socialist Party's policy of banning alcohol advertising on strips worsen the situation for clubs? The Tennants Scottish Cup and the Bells Scottish Football League are all sponsored in that way.
With respect, if the member will allow me, I will tell him precisely what the Scottish Socialist Party's policy is.
I want to highlight one or two points, if I can, as my time is rapidly diminishing. What happens when a team collapses? Yesterday I spoke to Jackie McNamara of the Scottish Professional Footballers Association, which is attempting to salvage what is left of the careers and contracts of players throughout Scotland—such as the six Livingston players who were sacked yesterday and the six others whose wages were cut by half, or the 20 Motherwell players who were sacked on the spot a couple of years ago. Such players find themselves in a stark position. While we are examining restructuring for Scottish football, we must introduce modern industrial relations to replace the archaic situation that we have now. Not all footballers are on the £50,000 per week wages of Henrik Larsson or the de Boer brothers. Players' careers are shortened through injury and declining living standards.
Communities are also affected by the closure of football teams. I have an eye on the time, Presiding Officer, but I want to get to the central issue, which is mutualisation.
You have about 30 seconds left, I am afraid.
There is much to be learned from mutualisation, through which clubs are owned by a broad base of supporters. More than 100,000 fans own the football club at Barcelona. Professor Jonathan Michie, of the department of management at Birkbeck College at the University of London, produced a paper that led to Northampton Town and Bournemouth football clubs in England being owned by supporters trusts. That is the way forward and that example should be followed in Scotland. The example of the stadio communale in Italy, where stadiums are owned by local authorities, also offers a way forward that would ensure that facilities are widely available to the communities that put their support behind clubs.
I move amendment S2M-889.2, to leave out from "sympathises" to end and insert:
"notes the experience of successful club teams such as Barcelona that are mutually owned and elect their own board of directors to run the club; further notes that some clubs in the English Nationwide League have already chosen this path by setting up supporters' trusts, and believes that public funding should be made available to allow for wider community involvement in the clubs and to co-ordinate the game across Scotland."
I am probably up front on my own with Tommy Sheridan, which is a surreal experience.
Football is a passionate issue in Scotland and there is no doubt that many of the speeches this afternoon will be about how we address the immediate concerns and economic problems that some of our many clubs have faced during the past few months and which have resulted in the substantial difficulties that four clubs in the SPL are now in.
Minister, there are some urgent signs behind you. Your microphone is a bit low.
Behind the play as usual, Frank.
I am reminded of when Engels said to Karl Marx, "We are getting beaten 5-0; we probably need a revolution pretty soon."
Those who are involved in the debate come to it with a passion and a commitment to addressing the concerns that face clubs. We need to recognise that clubs have responsibility for putting their own financial affairs in order, so that they do not face the meltdown that too many clubs have faced during the past few months. Some of the rigour with which costs—including wage costs and some of the over-commitments that clubs have made—are now being addressed, might concentrate minds.
Our agenda in Scotland should not be about dealing with the immediate issues that face clubs, but about how we grow the game and encourage participation at youth level and across different age ranges. The reality is that in comparison with our European neighbours, including those in Scandinavia, we are very good at encouraging participation up to the age of 18. However, we have not been so good at developing the very best of those young players, to ensure that they can come through the ranks to perform for clubs and—we hope—our national team in years to come. We need to address the dramatic drop-off in adult participation in football.
I welcome the developments of the past few weeks at the SFA on the licensing scheme and I welcome the role that the SPL has played recently—although perhaps belatedly—in addressing the financial situations that have forced clubs to face the consequences of not having followed things through.
The Parliament and the Executive should be asking how they can provide support at grass-roots level to enable a transformation so that the game can be sustainable in the long term and can allow many of our youngsters to perform at the top level.
Nobody has mentioned women's or girls' football. Does the minister recognise the importance of women's and girls' football? Girls' football is currently the fastest growing sport in Scotland. Will the minister ensure that girls and women get the opportunity both to play football and to spectate at women's games?
That point is well made. There is potential for growth and the increase in young girls' interest in football has been dramatic. We need to support and develop that—acknowledging that we are starting from a low base.
We must ensure that people have access to high-quality football and leisure facilities, to ensure that they can participate beyond school age and on into adulthood. That is why we are committed to ensuring that the active schools programme contains a variety of activities to ensure that young people are active while at school and can keep that going into adulthood, linking into the community clubs agenda.
We are investing in reform. There have been calls today for mutualisation, to which I am not unattracted. However, the fundamental issue is to support the work that Supporters Direct has undertaken in the past couple of years during the crises that many fans have seen their clubs going through. The work of Supporters Direct to encourage many of those fans is genuinely making a difference. I look forward to the annual general meeting in a few weeks' time.
Through our commitment to the football academy in recent years and, more important, through our commitment to the development of national and regional facilities, I am convinced that we have an opportunity to find ways of helping football.
Will the minister take an intervention?
I am conscious that I have only about a minute left. I hope that I can deal with issues when I sum up.
We have to ask what we will do about the development of youth football. Over the past few months, since becoming the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport, I have been engaged with the SFA in addressing the review that has been undertaken and in considering the recommendations that we want to make progress on. I categorically assure the Parliament and the wider public in Scotland that we are committed to ensuring that we invest in youth football in Scotland. We believe that we can grow from there.
Part of the investment will require reform in the governing body and its component parts—including the important elements that Dennis Canavan talked about earlier. That will be a major challenge. Some people will have to face up to that challenge and their responsibilities much more than they have in the past. However, I am determined that our investment in youth football will lead to a radical change in the way that football is run. Individual football clubs and the authorities must be up to the challenge. If we can be more effective in the coming period, I am convinced that the improvements that we already see—in our under-21 football side and in the emerging talent that will come through to the full national side—can be developed much more.
Over the next few years, Scots players—born and bred here—will find themselves much more involved in the clubs—including the old firm. That will help to address many of the concerns that members have expressed over the past few weeks.
I welcome the debate and especially the sensible tone of the motion and the speeches so far. It has been a good example. Members may have different emphases, but on issues such as this we can unite around the main point rather than merely abuse one another.
I was very impressed by the minister's speech. He said all—or rather, a lot of—the right things. Unlike those who are not ministers, he has a problem: he not only has to say the right thing, he has to do the right thing. We will judge him on that.
The two amendments raise some interesting points. This may be a relatively minor point, but it would be worth while having some sort of trial for the licensing of alcohol at sports grounds. That might actually reduce drunkenness as well as help the clubs financially.
As the minister said and as the SSP's amendment suggests, Supporters Direct, mutualisation and co-operatives represent an important way ahead.
There seem to be two main problems. First, when intelligent and careful businessmen get involved in a football club, they lose it and we are now picking up the pieces. We must try to encourage the tycoons who get involved in football to apply their intelligence to the issue rather than to let their hearts rule their heads. Secondly, the fact that sports organisations must be seen to be independent, because of international agreements, means that there is a limit to what we can do to encourage the SFA to act more intelligently than it does at the moment.
We could legitimately use the approach of "no reform, no money", because the whole byzantine apparatus that mismanages Scottish football needs to be sorted out. As the minister said, it is particularly important to act on the review of youth football, because that is where the future lies. At the moment, school sports co-ordinators provide liaison between primary and secondary schools, but we need to have the same—or even better—liaison between the secondary schools and the clubs, because the many young people who take part in sport in schools are not flowing through to local clubs. The minister could address that.
We need to emphasise the importance of attracting good people into football and other sports. We want to make it easier and more attractive to become a coach or a club official, as there are many obstacles that prevent people from doing that. As well as providing facilities, which are very important, we must supply the people who will enthuse young people and encourage them to use the facilities.
If we can invest more in facilities and in the people to manage them and attract young people into them, we will greatly reduce antisocial behaviour. I think that it is legitimate to use some of the budgets that are dedicated to sorting out young people to encourage community activity such as sport and culture. Many good things can be done and, as the minister is saying the right things, let us get on and do them.
I was going to start by saying that I am by no means an expert on football, but hearing Donald Gorrie has made me feel quite knowledgeable about the subject.
I am pleased to be taking part in the debate both as a member with a constituency interest in football, given the plight of Dundee Football Club, and as a health spokesperson. I can see the huge potential of football to improve our nation's health, particularly among young people of both sexes. I will say more about that later.
The situation at Dundee means that all concerned are experiencing a difficult time. I pay tribute to Dundee supporters who have rallied round and raised considerable amounts of money for the club. The Dee 4 Life campaign is hoping to raise enough money to secure the cost of Dundee's youth programme and the wages of the ground staff for the rest of the season and I am sure that we wish it the best of luck in achieving that.
Every encouragement should be given to Dundee and to all the other clubs that are facing difficulties at the moment. However, I see the present crisis as being short term, although I do not think that we should underestimate the scale of the problem, given that the figures involved are significant. Today we should be focusing on the long term. I do not believe that the public in Dundee or anywhere else would support the use of public money to bail out clubs—to be fair, the clubs have not been demanding that. We need to set Scottish football on the right course for the longer term so that the clubs do not find themselves in a similar crisis in the future.
Part of the debate about the future of Scottish football must be to consider the role of supporters clubs and trusts. We must consider ways of ensuring that supporters have more influence over the game by broadening ownership of clubs. As recommended by Dr Stephen Morrow of the University of Stirling, more emphasis should be put on community ownership, which would help to concentrate efforts on developing grass-roots football.
As has been said, Scottish football must find its appropriate financial level. We need a bottom-up approach, not a top-down one. We need to harness home talent rather than spend huge amounts of money on international players we cannot afford. Scottish clubs cannot compete in the inflated-wages war to attract international players, which is why focusing on home-grown talent makes far more sense. However, to do that, we must invest in grass-roots football, which means not selling off playing fields but keeping them for kids to kick a ball about in. We must develop facilities in communities to encourage young players, which should be linked to, and supported by, Scottish clubs.
Kenny MacAskill talked about the need for restructuring. I countenance that, given that when I looked at the internet last night, it took nine pages to print off the structure of Scottish football. That structure must be honed down because if change is to happen it will require a clear focus. It would be better to have only one body.
There is huge potential for creating health benefits by encouraging more people to play football. Obesity levels among young people have been highlighted yet again today. We must do more to get young people active. Football is an accessible game; it does not require a huge outlay. If we stop selling off playing fields, open spaces will still exist on which people can play football.
Nearly three times as many people play football in Norway as do in Scotland—320,000 people play the game in Norway. Norway achieved that through investment in grass-roots football and getting more people to participate. Yet again, lessons can be learned from our Scandinavian neighbours.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, thanks. I am going to finish soon.
Politicians cannot dictate what changes should happen in Scottish football, but we can kick-start a national debate and send a clear message to the football community that change is necessary for the long-term good of the game. If we are to avoid future crises at clubs throughout Scotland, we must hope that the national debate will lead to a consensus on the changes that are required to give Scottish football a new lease of life.
Nearly every speaker has referred to the crisis that is facing Scottish football: virtually every club in the SPL is heavily in debt; three are already in administration; and a fourth has asked its players to take a wage cut. The financial affairs of some clubs are like something straight out of "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"—the normal rules of business are ignored. It is about time that directors got a reality check. Some have tried to buy a short cut to success by lashing out millions of pounds to import foreign players, some of whom are overpaid mediocre performers who are not delivering. Scottish football, and football in general, is a multinational sport, but the influx of so many foreign players prevents Scottish players from getting a game.
Some clubs do not seem to have anything that resembles a genuine youth development policy. If the Scottish Executive is to put any more public money into football, it must be tied to the provision of community facilities and projects such as football academies that aim to nurture young talent. It is not the Scottish Executive's job to bail out football clubs that have got themselves into a mess through financial mismanagement.
It is rather ironic that all three of the SPL clubs that are in administration voted against Falkirk's promotion to the SPL last year, despite the fact that Falkirk should have been promoted on merit as champions of the first division and despite the fact that Falkirk's finances are much healthier than those of the clubs that vetoed Falkirk's promotion. That decision was based on self-interest rather than on fair play. I take no pleasure in the misfortunes of any football club, but the SFA and the SPL should ensure that all their members are on a sound financial footing and that promotion is based on merit rather than on spurious criteria that allow the SPL to behave like a closed cartel.
There should also be more opportunity for football fans to have a stake in their club through supporters trusts. Football clubs should not simply be the playthings of rich businessmen, some of whom have brought once great clubs to the verge of extinction. Football clubs are part of the community and there must therefore be at least an element of community ownership.
I finish on a positive note. On Sunday, I watched my old club, Spartans, playing in the fourth round of the Scottish cup. When I played for the club, way back in the swinging 60s, we had to pay to play, instead of being paid to play. Sometimes we were struggling to get 11 men on the field, and even when we managed that we sometimes struggled to get jerseys and shorts to match. This season, the club, which now runs three senior teams and a youth team, reached the last 16 of the Scottish cup—not exactly a rags-to-riches story, but an example of a wee club aiming high and achieving success on merit. If there were more of the Spartan spirit throughout the game, the future of Scottish football would be much brighter.
It makes a refreshing change to be able to welcome a motion lodged by the Scottish National Party. I welcome the debate principally for two reasons. First, it identifies areas on which the Executive is making progress and, secondly, it addresses concerns that I highlighted in November in a motion on the crisis in Scottish football. That was in the wake of Dundee's going into administration and, although I knew that the situation was serious, I had not imagined that, only a couple of months later, another SPL club would go into administration, with yet another seemingly on the verge.
What makes those experiences particularly painful for fans is that they have few options but to look on while the clubs they love face financial ruin. As someone who was, until this season, a season-ticket holder at Tynecastle, with a long family tradition of supporting Hearts, that has come home to me cruelly. Whatever the financial arguments over the future of Hearts are, the owners of the club are persevering with their plan to sell Tynecastle despite overwhelming opposition from Hearts supporters.
I am pleased, therefore, that the Executive is backing supporters trusts, with a view to getting fans' representatives on boards. I know that colleagues—including Scott Barrie at Dunfermline and Lewis Macdonald at Aberdeen—are involved in individual trusts, and I hope that the future of Scottish football is not one where owners have all the say and fans have no say.
The other area that the Executive has prioritised is the grass-roots development of the game. The Executive has invested in youth academies, and the Scottish Football Partnership is overseeing £7 million of investment in developing young footballing talent and finding the players of the future who will be vital to our success at international level.
I have been surprised to hear some senior people in the game suggesting that the Executive should intervene directly to help some clubs, when the SFA has made it clear that it does not envisage such a role for itself. That is not to say that we can afford to take a laissez-faire approach. The SPL has announced that clubs in administration will be docked points, but there has to be constructive support too. The Executive has a role to play in reviewing how the governance of the game can better support clubs and the development of the sport more widely, and I look forward to the publication of the SFA review on that issue.
There could be a role for Parliament to contribute ideas for the future and I hope that, in the midst of its busy schedule, the Enterprise and Culture Committee could find time to investigate how all the stakeholders in senior football could work together to help clubs to tackle their financial problems. That includes the communities around clubs and sponsoring organisations such as the Bank of Scotland. I have had a useful meeting with the bank on its involvement in supporting football. The investment that it puts into clubs and communities is hugely welcome. It has insisted in the past that it will not pull the plug on the many clubs that owe it huge debts. I hope that that policy will continue despite the recent events at Livingston, and the apparent pressure that it is putting on the Hearts board to sell Tynecastle. I also hope that it will provide financial advice and guidelines for clubs and help the SFA to engage in more regular financial scrutiny of clubs.
Another proposal to help clubs out of their financial plight is ground sharing, where that is desirable. A number of interesting ideas have emerged in the review published today by the all-party group on football at Westminster.
In short, a team effort is needed to address the problem. What irks most about the crisis is that many fans have been saying for years that it was coming. I hope that, in future, fans will have a say in ensuring that our football clubs do not reach such a crisis again because, although football is a game, it contributes a vital economic and cultural boost to communities throughout Scotland. It is not just the clubs that cannot afford to take no action to ensure a better, more prosperous future for Scottish football.
This is a day for nailing colours to masts, or perhaps, in my case, wearing hearts on sleeves, so I begin by declaring an interest as a small shareholder in Heart of Midlothian plc and, like Richard Baker, a devoted fan of the club for many years.
Although our professional football clubs have received public funding in the past for the development of all-seater stadia and other safety measures, as well as for community and youth development activities, that is a different proposition from a taxpayer-financed bail-out to eradicate the £190 million-worth of debt that our Premier League clubs have accumulated to date. Such a bail-out would be quite unacceptable to the body of taxpayers in Scotland, and I am pleased that there has been a broad consensus on that point in the speeches that have been made today.
In the debate, many suggestions have been made as to how we improve and develop the game as well as deal with the present financial crisis. For our part, the Conservatives have suggested one modest step that the Scottish Executive could take by lifting the ban on the sale of alcohol at football grounds, which would enable clubs to increase their revenues on match days. No convincing case has been made for the retention of the ban, which predates all-seater stadia and the greatly improved security arrangements that are now in place, and I welcome Donald Gorrie's expression of support for at least a trial lifting of the ban in a number of stadia. It is incomprehensible to me that police in Northumbria should welcome the fact that refreshment areas in St James' Park in Newcastle sell beer before games as a means of encouraging spectators to come to the ground early and discouraging binge drinking right up to the last minute outside the ground, but our senior police officers throw up their hands in horror at the prospect. Why is it that English football fans are treated like responsible adults in their football grounds whereas we treat our fans like feckless children in ours? There is no sense at all in that.
However, I would be the first to acknowledge that such a measure in itself will not transform the present situation. Each club has to seek its own financial salvation and resolve its problems by working together with its shareholders, supporters and creditors. In that context, we should give fair credit to the Bank of Scotland, which not only sponsors the Scottish Premier League, but has sustained the majority of our professional clubs by allowing generous lines of credit that, I suspect, would not be extended to any other businesses that performed so dismally.
The fact of the matter is that most of our clubs are seriously undercapitalised. Their principal shareholders are invariably successful businessmen in their own right, with a love of the game and a passion for their team. They are wealthy enough to buy their way into clubs but rarely wealthy enough to pump in the additional equity that is required to stabilise finances. It also seems that, as several members have already said, in their new roles, those shareholders leave behind the business skills that made their fortunes in the first place and rely unduly on tolerant banks approving absurdly optimistic business plans that invariably proceed on the assumption that the sun will always shine and that sources of revenue such as television rights can be relied on to grow exponentially.
I am reminded of the words of Macbeth when he spoke of
"Vaulting ambition, which o'er leaps itself
And falls on the other."
He could have been speaking about Scottish football today. In truth, our fans have to be prepared to capitalise their clubs by putting their money where their mouths are and subscribing for new shares, and the present owners have to be big enough to surrender control so as to open up the equity base. The survival of many clubs and the overall health of our game will depend on their willingness to do so.
I am pleased to support the amendment in the name of my colleague Jamie McGrigor.
I declare an interest as a director of the finest exponents of Scottish football, Motherwell FC.
I am not in favour of the Parliament bailing out Scottish football. It must stand on its own feet, and I am pleased to say that my club will be moving out of administration in the next eight weeks or so. It has been a hard lesson to learn, but we have learned it, and our overall wage bill is well within the recommended norm that is applied across all other industries.
Karl Marx was mentioned earlier. He stated that religion was the opiate of the masses. Nowadays—possibly sadly—football is the opiate of the masses. It is a tremendous mass attraction, which generates a great deal of passion. Every community is entitled to its own little bit of passion. Football fans do not like the idea of clubs amalgamating. We like to go to Airdrie or wherever and experience a little bit of local rivalry.
I can tell Dennis Canavan that I would have voted for Motherwell to be relegated at the end of last season and for Falkirk to be promoted, because fair play and competition are what football should be all about. Sadly, that did not come to pass—but, fortunately for us, we were able to take advantage of what happened. We have a youth policy, and we have a supporters trust, which has a representative on the board of directors. That is the way ahead for every club in the country. Clubs will benefit by involving the fans at grass-roots level.
The Conservatives talked about alcohol and football. Yes—why not bring it back in? Well, I doubt whether any of the Conservative members have ever seen the side of a little girl's face ripped off because of some thug in a drunken condition at a football match throwing a half-brick. I witnessed that—Rangers were playing Motherwell at Fir park on that occasion. The poor kid will be scarred for life. Incidents such as the 1980 riots—when mounted police were needed to quell the old firm crowds who were fighting a religious battle that had taken place about 300 years before—have no place in football.
I am quite surprised at the Conservatives wishing to go down that road. For every club from which they might get support, there would be the owners of all the surrounding pubs and hostelries who would no longer vote for the Tories, because their policy would take their profits away. The police have the right to stop any drunk getting into a football game. If someone is inebriated, they are not allowed access to the game. That is the correct approach.
The state of schools football is at the root of the whole situation. I ask Frank McAveety to encourage the Minister for Education and Young People to encourage schools football to be resurrected. Since the demise of schools football, Scottish football has basically gone down the tubes. We must get back to a good competitive level in schools and bring the kids through. More money must be pumped into communities so that they have facilities for kids to play the game.
Football is a great game because of the great uncertainty. Take Manchester City: the other day, they were 3-0 down to Tottenham Hotspur at half time, and were down to 10 men, but came back to win 4-3. It is a tremendous spectator sport, and I recommend to anyone who has not yet done so to enjoy the benefits of watching football. I have worked in the game for 25 years, and I hear a lot of stories about this, that and the other. I can assure members that it is the greatest game in the world—I will leave it at that.
I am afraid that we are behind the clock and must now move to closing speeches. My apologies to those members who have not been called.
It is always a joy to hear Karl Marx mentioned in the chamber. Whereas my colleague Mr Swinburne got it right, the minister—typically—got his quote wrong, so it is back to the drawing board for him.
I am encouraged by the fact that several members, including Donald Gorrie and Dennis Canavan, touched on the benefits of mutualisation, an approach involving a broad base of support for football clubs in our communities. In response to Mr McLetchie's remarks, I could not help but recall the words of Lenin—no less—who advised the likes of Mr McLetchie, "You're better getting a kopeck from 1,000 workers than having the backing of one multimillionaire." So have many football clubs found out. That is an illustration that a broad base of support will bring greater dividends in the long run—although "dividends" was probably a word that Lenin was not prone to use very much.
It is perhaps ironic that one of the best illustrations of the success of mutualisation comes from America, which is the land of unrestricted free enterprise. The National Football League contains 28 teams, one of which is the Green Bay Packers, which is mutually owned by 4,624 of its fans. It has proved to be one of the most successful clubs in the league, which shows that there are advantages in having a broad ownership base. Perhaps that answers the question that Scott Barrie asked me about the duopoly that runs the Scottish football scene at the moment
Will the member take an intervention?
Sorry, I do not have enough time.
Something else that is of value in the American football league is its draft pick scheme, under which the best up-and-coming young players are allocated each year to the team that had the poorest record in the previous season. The second-best player goes to the second-poorest team, and so on. There is an equalisation of the process. I hope that the minister will consider that scheme.
Will the member take an intervention?
Just this once.
The member eulogises about the American set-up, but will he condemn the practice whereby clubs move around the United States willy-nilly at the behest of their owners? Within a season, clubs move from New York to Los Angeles or from Houston to Tennessee, so the set-up is not all good.
I share that point of view, but the problem is not confined to America, as Scott Barrie knows—Wimbledon Football Club moved to Milton Keynes. Fans rightly take a dim view of the movement of traditions and history to other parts of the world. In all fairness, and as a Motherwell supporter, I would like there to be a system whereby the wealth that the sport creates is spread across football as a whole.
As many members have said, the future of Scottish football rests with our young men and women. If public money is to be invested, it is right for it to be invested in community development of football and in youth and women's football in particular. That is where the future players for the Scotland team and other clubs will come from. I mentioned mutualisation, and I hope that the minister will consider the Green Bay Packers, Barcelona, Northampton Town and Bournemouth. It might not work for every club, but there are lessons for Scottish football to learn from those examples of mutualisation and from football supporters trusts.
I agree that this has been a good debate. Like David McLetchie and Colin Fox, I will make a confession today: I have been supporting Heart of Midlothian since I was 13 years old. By the way, I moved to Edinburgh when I was 13, so that was my first opportunity to support the club.
I agree with Kenny MacAskill that football is part of the fabric of our communities and I agree with his motion. Much has been said about business involvement in football. I agree with Dennis Canavan, who said that many businessmen are like characters in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland". I ran my own business for a while and I would never have conducted it in the way that business people run football clubs. I made sure of my circumstances before I spent money. Lex Gold has complained that Scotitish football has been hit by the loss of television revenues and of revenue from transfers. Surely it would have been prudent for those businessmen to wait and see whether they would get those revenues before they spent them. Many members referred to business people owning and running football clubs; such people must be more responsible.
Does the member share my view that it is ironic that Sky TV has today announced its first dividend in five years while the football clubs in Scotland and England that it used to support are either in administration or close to it? Its revenues have been built up on the back of the football industry.
I do not disagree with the member. Television companies, along with businessmen, have a responsibility to help not only football but all sports.
I agree with David McLetchie that the sale of alcohol in clubs could have an impact, but that is not the answer and it is not where we will get the tens of millions of pounds to solve the problem.
The structures are old. Shona Robison referred to the pages that she dug out from a website to obtain some idea of the structure of the SFA, which needs to modernise. She also referred to the destruction of football fields throughout Scotland. As a councillor, I was a member of a planning committee for many years, during which I tried hard, but with little success, to prevent building on playing fields. The Scottish Parliament could seriously examine that. The Executive proposes to review planning law shortly. Perhaps the minister responsible could take on board what members have said about planning today.
Will the member give way?
I am sorry; I have only four minutes for my speech.
Colin Fox did not have much time to speak and neither do I, but he talked about supporters taking some control of football clubs. The Scotsman today contains an article that suggests that SMG is about to sell Heart of Midlothian's debt of £5.5 million for £2 million to an undisclosed group of businessmen. Perhaps SMG could reflect on what has been said today and sell that debt to the Heart of Midlothian supporters trust, so that the supporters can have a direct influence. As a Hearts supporter, I would welcome such a sale, because it would mean that the chief executive and the present board members, who are incompetent, would not have a majority of the shares and that Hearts might be able to stay in the community. The debate is about communities.
I agree with Dennis Canavan's comments about investment in young footballers. We should not bring football players from abroad with vast wages. We need to cultivate our own young players. Colin Fox's idea of a draft pick such as that in American football was good.
I support the motion.
I declare an interest, as my two sons are registered players with Livingston Football Club and I am a minority shareholder in Hibernian Football Club.
There is no doubt that football faces a crisis. The problem is not just that teams such as Motherwell, Dundee and Livingston have gone into administration, as many clubs face that spectre. As Dennis Canavan said, another issue is the plight of Falkirk and, possibly, other teams that might be made subject to what I see as a restriction of trade that prevents their promotion although they have won promotion on merit. That creates a local crisis for clubs.
Problems are also being experienced in recruiting referees at youth and junior levels. Without referees to manage games on the park, football is difficult to realise and make beautiful.
A crisis is also being experienced in schools. Many schools struggle to put together a team, whether that is because few kids come forward or because of a lack of teachers who are willing to run a team. However, evidence exists that schools turn down the help that parents offer, even when those parents have SFA coaching qualifications. I hope to debate with the minister in this parliamentary session the report about youth football, because there is no doubt that if we are to get football right, youth football will be key to change.
I was surprised by the tenor of Kenny MacAskill's speech, much as I welcome his initiating the debate, because the debate's pre-publicity led me to believe that he did not think that politicians should intervene. I picked up from the tone of his speech the idea that although we should not bail clubs out or intervene directly in football, we should use public funds for football as a lever to extract change in football's structure. That is still intervention in my book.
Will the member take an intervention?
I am sorry, Duncan—I have no time for an intervention.
Money for youth structures in particular should have no such preconditions.
Dennis Canavan's speech was objective and realistic. The speech was one of the best, if not the best, so far. He examined realistic aspects of what clubs face. David McLetchie brought into the debate the reality of the argument about licensing and the reality of the financial situation.
There are two key issues for football clubs. First, they do not have enough turnover. The turnover of Scottish clubs compared with that of football teams such as even Hull City—which can have gates of more than 20,000—is far too small.
Secondly, teams need more equity. There is no panacea—certainly, municipalisation is no panacea. The idea that supporters can simply buy shares in clubs without having the equity to invest will not change anything. Supporters trusts are good at giving supporters a voice, but they cannot resolve the problems of lack of turnover and lack of funding for investment.
With the SFA, the Executive can certainly help to provide more all-weather, field-grass pitches, which are crucial for the youth of today. More regional academies are needed—I know that the Executive is doing work in that area. Crucially, however, an indoor, full-size pitch—and perhaps more than one—is needed. Such things have been provided in Norway. We cannot just say about the Norwegians, "They're Scandinavian and so have a good team." We must recognise that people in Norway do not play rugby, cricket and other sports to the same level as people in Scotland do, but Norway has invested in indoor full-size pitches.
There is no problem that politicians cannot make worse. Therefore, we should be careful before we meddle with Scottish football.
We are being asked to consider ways in which the Executive and the Parliament can raise the importance of our national game; to address many of the critical factors that are involved; and to identify ways in which clubs themselves can remedy their immediate concerns. More important, we should consider how to develop an infrastructure so that clubs can effectively develop players. We are also being asked to consider how we can address the issue of male and female participation in sport—both in schools and when people leave schools and enter adulthood—to ensure that there is a participatory sports culture that includes football and is more equivalent to the culture in other parts of Europe. That is the real challenge that we face.
I noted with interest that David McLetchie quoted from "Macbeth", which refers to
"a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing."
I will leave members to judge David McLetchie's contribution. I say to him that I am sorry for lacking grace.
The fundamental problem is how we should address the big issues. We must consider and address the issue of alcohol in the light of the Nicholson report, but alcohol is not the fundamental reason why many large and small clubs are in the position that they are in. It is important this afternoon to signal the real issues that can be addressed. Members of all parties have suggested thoughtful ways in which to address concerns that have been raised recently.
We must link up active schools co-ordinators and community clubs more effectively. That is one of the key strategies that sport 21 and sportscotland have been asked to develop over the next few years.
I had hoped to make a number of points, but I thank the minister for giving me the opportunity to intervene.
The minister is aware that, prior to its recent difficulties, Livingston FC had engaged quite effectively with the community and community clubs in West Lothian and had presented plans to develop a football academy, which were knocked back by sportscotland. What does the minister intend to do to make it easier for clubs to take advantage of opportunities that exist to develop youth football?
We are considering the location of sports and football academies. The development that Heart of Midlothian has proposed in west Edinburgh has been seen as one way in which to address needs in that area. Given that much of the contribution to academies needs to come from partnership moneys, perhaps in retrospect and given recent developments, sportscotland took a wise decision on the long-term sustainability of the idea in question.
We need to address the principle that Bristow Muldoon has rightly raised in our development of national and regional sports facilities and to ensure that football clubs see a role in that alongside other sports. Brian Monteith is right to say that Norway has ensured that there are full-size indoor facilities so that its climate does not impact on development.
There is a more important element to our role, which I mentioned earlier. Incredible numbers of young people still participate in football in Scotland, but we do not have ways in which to maximise the best of that talent and to make enough of it come through. Perhaps too many of our clubs exclude opportunities. Norwegian and Brazilian players have been invoked as exemplars of football players, but I am sure that the respective supporters of Rangers and Celtic have identified Flo and Rafael as rather dodgy acquisitions. The total cost of those players was nearly £20 million, which could have been used more effectively for young people.
I will end with three important points. We need to develop the school-adult link much more effectively. We also need to ensure that the loss of any playing fields is looked at by sportscotland and the planning authorities to ensure that an improvement comes from that. I do not have any nostalgia for red blaes or black ash, and anyone who has played on those surfaces will testify to that terrifying experience. They do not engender a capacity for skill; playing on them is about saving energy and injuring your opponent before they injure you. We must improve the range and quality of facilities. I hope that the partnership bids that are coming forward will deal with that over the next few months.
Equally important is the role of leadership, both at club level and at organisational level. The SFA, as the governing body in Scotland, has a signal responsibility to work effectively with clubs and their affiliates to ensure that Scottish football has a prosperous future and a better structure. The current structure is based on a 20th century model of football development, and if there is a request for support from the public purse, it needs to reflect the fact that we are looking to the future and a 21st century model of football development. There must be flatter management structures and much more rigour in how clubs conduct their business. Most important, how do we assist clubs in developing young talent and how do we grow the skills that are there, not just in football for young men but, as Rhona Brankin said, in football for young girls? Football at that level has been improving dramatically in recent years and we have a real challenge in continuing that.
With consideration and support, we can genuinely make a difference. The Executive will make its contribution, where appropriate, but football itself has to raise its game.
I declare an interest as a season-ticket holder and a lifelong supporter of Dunfermline Athletic. I wish them well this evening—sorry to all the Celtic fans here. Supporters of clubs that are in the situation in which Dunfermline Athletic finds itself do not feel very good, and there are many fans who feel like that in this country today.
I thank everyone who has taken part in today's debate on Scottish football. We may have our individual views on how the current crisis in the professional game has been arrived at—that is as inevitable as it is predictable—but I hoped that today's debate would allow us to achieve some sort of common understanding of the scale of the challenge that is faced and a shared view of some of the strategies and solutions that will need to be developed for Scottish football to survive in the short term and prosper and bloom in the longer term. From that perspective, the debate has been successful. We have recognised the importance of the economic, social and health impacts of football in Scotland, right through from the grass roots to the national team. We have also recognised that a soft landing for troubled clubs through public funding is not a realistic prospect; that structural change is an absolute essential to allow a much more integrated approach to be taken in the governing of the game in Scotland; and that football clubs and their supporters must work together to harness investment in the clubs at both an emotional level and a financial level.
I hope that we have sent a message to lovers of football, and to those who are employed or involved in the game at whatever level, that we in the Scottish Parliament care about the future of the people's game. The phrase "the people's game" is a powerful and well-used description of the game. Certainly, at youth football level—not just in the schools—and for all the individuals throughout the country who are involved in the game, that description still rings true. Up and down the country, there is a band of dedicated volunteers who organise youth football, whose contribution to the sporting and social life of Scotland is not recognised often enough. We should pay tribute to them, as they are keeping alive the tradition and image of the people's game. In their hands lies the success or otherwise of the game of football in Scotland. They are the ones who require to be supported and nurtured if we are to breathe new life into the professional game and bring greater success to our national teams. That will not happen overnight and, as Kenny MacAskill said, it has got to start from the bottom and work up. In short, we have got to get the basics right and the fundamentals sorted.
Can we still call the game at the top level—the professional level—the people's game? At the very top, some players are paid more in a day than some people earn in a year. Dennis Canavan and Colin Fox alluded to that. Even in provincial clubs in Scotland, top players earn more in a month than the average person earns in a year. Many clubs have moved away from being clubs in the traditional sense. More and more, they are structured as companies that come under various forms of ownership. The professional game has moved a long way from being the people's game.
However, a consistent factor in football is the way in which the fans continue to show a long-term commitment to the clubs that they support—although perhaps not in the same numbers as in the past. That shows that, although the way in which the professional game is run may change, the game means so much to the fans that they will put up with an awful lot. I just hope that the current crisis does not weaken the connection between the clubs and their communities to such an extent that more famous names will be lost to the Scottish professional scene.
It is true that the economic base of Scottish football has changed and that running a football club is complex, but that cannot excuse clubs for consistently spending more than they earn and running up a combined debt of £144 million, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers. In its report, "The PricewaterhouseCoopers Financial Review of Scottish Football – Season 2001/02", PricewaterhouseCoopers stated that five clubs—not including Motherwell, as John Swinburne will know—were technically insolvent. Those were Dundee, Dunfermline, Hearts, Hibs and Livingston. The clubs in a net asset position all saw their positions worsen due to poor results. As members have said, that has resulted in Motherwell, Dundee and Livingston going into administration because they have not been able to service their debts. How many more will follow?
The choice for some clubs is either to go into administration or to take drastic but inevitable action to force down costs. That has an impact on everyone who is employed by the clubs. That is why our motion states that the Parliament
"sympathises with the backroom and playing staff of those clubs worst affected".
I am surprised that the SSP in particular wanted those words to be removed.
Why has it taken so long for experienced businessmen to act and for the banks to intervene? That question puzzles me. As others have said, perhaps the reason is simply that football is still the people's game and the businessmen and banks are as wrapped up in its emotion and tradition as the ordinary fans are. If that has been the case, I hope that that heady cocktail does not prove too potent for the game to absorb.
I am sure that many club chairmen would cite a variety of reasons—some of which we have heard today—for the perilous state of the game. One reason is the costs associated with the Taylor report. As an individual, I still think that all-seater stadiums were not entirely necessary. Some room should have been made for terracing to allow mass spectator sport at a cheaper level for the fans. Other reasons include the Bosman ruling, the failure of the TV deals and the dash to keep ahead by buying success through inflated wages. There have also been falling attendances, which were in part caused by the product being overpriced for fans. Another reason is the clubs' overexposure to borrowing.
Whatever the reason, the professional game must change drastically if it is to survive. Some traditions may have to be left behind. I finish by quoting a recent article by the University of Stirling's Steven Morrow, who was mentioned earlier. I think that he said it all when he wrote:
"In the current situation there is little merit in blind defence of history or tradition if the consequence is the disappearance of the very thing you are trying to save."
I encourage all members to support the motion at decision time.