Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Local Government and Regeneration Committee 18 March 2015

18 Mar 2015 · S4 · Local Government and Regeneration Committee

Item of business

Community Empowerment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Stevenson, Stewart SNP Banffshire and Buchan Coast Watch on SPTV

I do not seek to pick at the underlying principle of this group of amendments, but I seek information about the implementation of that principle. I will start with something that central belt members might have overlooked: the status and issues relating to the clubs in the Scottish Highland Football League, of which I have three in my parliamentary constituency—in Buckie, Banff and Fraserburgh. As we know, Highland league clubs have successfully been a feeder for more senior leagues. Examples of that are Ross County, which was my father’s club, and of course Caley Jags, which interestingly was formed from the merger of two of the three clubs in Inverness—Clachnacuddin refused to play. That immediately opens up one of the issues, which is that a purchase might relate not to a single club but to the circumstances in which clubs are merging. The construction of the amendments that are before us would probably exclude action by supporters in those circumstances. The mover and supporter of the amendments might care to think about that, because I suspect that that is not their intention. I will by no means cover all the detail, which is substantial, but I will perhaps cover just enough to show that further thinking is needed. There is perhaps a little misunderstanding of how share ownership and voting works—the two might not be as easily connected as is thought. The amendments talk about a majority of the voting shares, which is fine, but there may be circumstances in which previous owners retain a single share that does not have the characteristics of a vote that may cause something to happen, but which carries with it the right to veto a proposed action. When Governments have sold off companies, they have exercised that right, and it also happens in commercial environments. The construction of the amendments perhaps does not fully address that way in which things may happen. The amendments talk about the purchase of the majority of a club. I understand what is intended, but the difficulty is that an individual purchase could well not be about buying a majority of a club, as it might be about adding to a significant shareholding to create a majority. I suspect that the mover and supporter of the amendments do not seek to exclude that, so they might need to look at the construction of the amendments in that regard. Another issue is that there may be circumstances in which the transfer of ownership or part of the ownership of a club takes place without any value exchange. Again, the mover and supporter are unlikely to seek to exclude that. However, that is very tricky territory, so a wee bit more thinking requires to be done. I have a more general question to which I genuinely do not know the answer. It is simply whether, in operating with the provisions of the Companies Act 2006, which is clearly a reserved matter, we are crossing the line into ultra vires issues. I am sure that advice will have been taken on that, but it would be helpful if the mover of the amendments could give us comfort that that issue has been considered. I would hate to see the initiative fall for that particular reason, above all. Finally, I sound a note of caution about the use of the word “fans”. Fans come in all shapes and forms. We should not discount the idea that David Murray was a fan of Rangers—a fan with sufficient money that he could act alone in what he thought was the club’s interest. We need to be careful about how we talk about and define fans. In principle, the amendments are a very good and eminently supportable effort, but further work is required on some of the detail. I do not pretend that I have exhausted all the issues that I might have found if I was a regular member of the committee—rather than someone who was parachuted in at comparatively late notice—and had spent a wee bit more time on the matter.

Search Hansard contributions

Local Government and Regeneration Committee 18 March 2015

In the same item of business