§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for the Department of Education and Science (Mr. Denis Howell)With permission, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a statement arising from the withdrawal of 206 the Sports Facilities Bill by the hon. Member in charge of the Bill, who has given such notice at the Table, duly minuted.
The Government appreciate the position in which the Football Associations and the Football Leagues find themselves financially and understand why such bodies desire to secure adequate payments from those who use football matches for betting purposes.
I have to inform the House, however, that the Government, with much regret, could not have accepted the principle of the Sports Facilities Bill. There were basic objections to the Bill in that it conferred upon a largely independent body an uncontrolled right to regulate betting and raise revenue from it which would then be applied without the need for Government approval. This would have amounted, virtually, to an invasion of the province of the Government.
Moreover, football betting—unlike horserace betting—is a field where the Exchequer already levies a substantial duty—25 per cent. of the turnover. It has been represented from time to time that this is the most that can be levied on this industry. The House will recall that the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer decided in his last Budget to reduce the level of the duty on pool betting from 33 to 25 per cent.
The extension, at that time, of this duty to fixed-odds betting has come in for criticism as being too heavy a burden for the industry. The Government could not look with favour on a proposal to give a new body monopoly powers to impose what would have amounted to a compulsory levy in a field in which the Exchequer itself already looks for a substantial amount of revenue.
Moreover, the Bill would have given wider powers to the proposed Sports Facilities Board than those given to the Horserace Totalisator Board or the Horserace Betting Levy Board.
The Government recognise, however, that the matter cannot be left there. The principal object of the Bill was to remedy the deteriorating financial position of football. The Government are of the opinion that this merits a comprehensive inquiry into the future of football and the problems which beset it. They have not yet decided what form this inquiry 207 should take, but I shall be discussing the problem shortly with the several football authorities.
One of the objects—
§ Mr. Neil Marten (Banbury)On a point of order. Is not the inordinate length of this statement an abuse of the proceedings of the House, particularly when an important debate is to follow?
§ Mr. SpeakerIt is not one of my responsibilities to control the length of statements. What the hon. Gentleman said is not a point of order.
§ Mr. HowellWith respect, Mr. Speaker, it was vitally important that a statement should be made about this Bill, which had all-party support and which was lost because the House could not sit due to the death of Sir Winston Churchill, and particularly about the World Cup, with which I am now dealing.
One of the objects underlying the introduction of the Bill was to enable the very important World Cup games of 1966 to be staged in a suitable manner. Undoubtedly, this will involve heavy expenditure on improvement of existing facilities for accommodation of spectators and the proper reception of overseas visitors at some grounds and also on providing adequate facilities for television, radio and the Press. The Government are prepared to provide some financial help towards essential preparations for having the 1966 World Cup games in this country if detailed examination shows that an acceptable case can be made out for a contribution from public funds. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]
§ Mr. Philip Noel-BakerOn a point of order. Is not this a matter of great public interest, and is it not fortunate that we have a Government who are prepared to treat it as such?
§ Mr. SpeakerI quite understand the observations of the right hon. Gentleman. I do not understand why they raise a point of order.
§ Mr. HowellAs I was about to say, I shall be consulting the football authorities at once on the steps to be taken to establish what measure of Government help would be appropriate. I intend to visit all the grounds concerned to secure 208 first-hand knowledge of the problems to be dealt with.
§ Mr. HoggWhile I understand that there were perfectly acceptable reasons why we could not have had this very long statement more than about 10 minutes ago, may I ask whether it is really necessary for the Minister to make a statement of such inordinate length to explain that the Government have made up their mind about only one thing, which is to turn down the all-party Bill? How many more comprehensive reviews and inquiries are we to have from the hon. Gentleman's Department? Last week he set up an advisory Sports Council. Would not this matter have been within the terms of reference of that body? Can we understand anything about this statement except that no decision has been arrived at about anything?
§ Mr. HowellI am grateful that the right hon. and learned Gentleman is in the House today and was in the House last week, but it is not clear to me that he understands a word said either today or last week. Had he done so, he would have known that the Sports Council which I set up last week is concerned specifically with amateur sport and has nothing to do with the World Cup. Further, he would have acknowledged that in my statement I specifically said that the Government intended to do two things: first, to offer an inquiry into football; and, secondly, as I have just announced, to give aid to the World Cup.
§ Mr. Harry HowarthAs the Member responsible for the promotion of the Sports Facilities Bill, and therefore, presumably, for some of the din this afternoon, may I thank my hon. Friend for the second part of his statement, which will be welcomed by the sponsors of the Bill on both sides of the House? May I also say that the statement meets the objectives which it was sought to meet by the introduction of the Bill?
Would my hon. Friend agree that since the Bill was published an agreement has been signed by the Pools Promoters Association and the Football Association for a payment of £75,000 a year to assist football?
Finally, may I ask my hon. Friend, who I know recognises the urgency of setting up approved facilities in connection with 209 the World Cup series, whether he will say how urgent he considers this matter to be and what he proposes to do about it?
§ Mr. HowellIt is clearly a very urgent matter, because if works of a capital nature are to be ready for hundreds of thousands of overseas visitors next year they must be started immediately. Therefore, my tours of these grounds will begin this weekend.