FA and Sport England called before parliament over potential sale of Wembley Stadium to Shahid Khan
Shahid Khan, the owner of Fulham and the Jacksonville Jaguars in the NFL, has made the FA an offer of £800m to purchase the 90,000-seater venue
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The future of Wembley will be discussed in parliament in the summer, after the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee called on representatives of the Football Association and Sport England to attend a one-off meeting on 18 July to talk about the national stadium. Sports minister Tracey Crouch will also attend.
Shahid Khan, the owner of Fulham and the Jacksonville Jaguars in the NFL, has made the FA an offer of £800m to purchase the 90,000-seater venue. The American billionaire had been hopeful of completing a deal by August but the proposed sale, and just how the FA would reinvest the windfall, has generated much debate.
A potential stumbling block surrounds measures which were implemented to guarantee the FA’s commitment to the stadium for 50 years following an injection of £161m from public bodies during the redevelopment project, which was completed in 2007.
Those stem from the National Audit Office’s report of June 2003 into the “English national stadium project at Wembley”, which goes on to explain how “the public sector funders have secured protections to safeguard the public interest in the project”.
The NAO report said there were concerns “to safeguard the public interest by preventing the Football Association from appearing to profiteer, or destabilising the project, by taking windfall gains, including after refinancing”.
As such, protections were put in place stating the FA has to “retain a controlling interest in Wembley National Stadium Limited for 50 years from completion of the stadium and its ability to sell a minority interest is limited”.
The report adds: “The sale of any minority interest earlier than 2018 requires approval from the Secretary of State and between 2018 and 2022 the Football Association can sell only up to 15 per cent without approval.”
Following the continuing debate, the DCMS committee said in a statement issued on Friday morning that the proposed sale of the “national asset” was a “move of considerable public importance”.
The chairman of the DCMS committee, Damian Collins, said: “Wembley is the home of English football, built in part using public money. There should be some public scrutiny of any decision to sell the stadium and how proceeds from this could be invested to benefit the long-term future of the game.
“The committee is interested in understanding the details of the FA’s proposals and receiving evidence from people who may hold alternative views.”
Written submissions from “interested parties” have also been welcomed by the DCMS committee, which can be contributed until 5pm on 28 June.
When contacted by Press Association Sport on Friday, Sport England referred to a previous statement, which read: “Sport England invested £120m of National Lottery money into the development of Wembley Stadium.
“We look forward to hearing more detail about how such a deal would work and whether it would benefit grassroots sport.”
The FA did not immediately respond when approached for additional comment on Friday morning.
PA
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments