| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Ashton: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I am old enough to remember the 1966 World cup, when I was serving on Sheffield city council and many things took us by surprise. Supporters adopt a pub, so one will be known as the German pub and another as the Danish pub--and
one cannot stop them going to those pubs with their mates. When it comes to closing time, two or three hooligans say, "Let's go and sort out the German pub." We hope that that will not happen, but it can.
Another problem acknowledged by the police is tented cities. In 1966, Sheffield was caught unawares when armies of youngsters arrived--some of them on push bikes--with tents. They did not have tickets for the game or money to buy them, but they could watch the game in a pub. We let those youngsters pitch their tents in the park. Six hundred people allowed tents in their back gardens. Sheffield and other cities even asked householders to offer supporters bed and breakfast for £12 a night. It is difficult to guard tented cities from hooligans who go looking for a bit of fun, to steal and to cause vandalism. The police are already stretched, and football gets the blame.
Last night, I went to the new football embassy near Piccadilly. Fans get a lot of stick but only a tiny minority cause trouble. The Football Supporters Association received a grant of £50,000 from the Football Trust to establish a football embassy in every town. The embassy at 17 Shaftesbury avenue occupies two floors and is manned by student football supporters who can speak different languages. They can give help with accommodation, and can give advice if one has lost one's money or ticket. The embassy is even publishing handbooks identifying safe pubs and good places to eat.
That scheme will work marvellously well, but it will not grab the headlines. There were hardly any members of the media present last night. If there had been a punch-up, there would have been. Next week, our committee will be meeting the Football Supporters Association to learn more about its plans. The Government should have done something, but they have not. They opted out. One expects the Minister responsible for sport and the Department to take the initiative in welcoming visitors to our country.
The press in this country have their problems. Thousands of people who trained as journalists cannot get a job, or perhaps they had a job and were made redundant. Technology has put them on to the streets. An army of freelance journalists, photographers and cameramen are out of work and get paid only if they can sell a story. That is how they scratch a living. That is why 500 journalists and photographers will turn up to watch the England squad training--hoping that a player will spit or swear.
My fear is that Euro 96 will go wrong because freelance journalists are desperately trying to earn a living in any way they can. Younger freelancers tack on to a bunch of fans and look for a fight--they may even incite a fight. They have a camera handy in their back pockets, to get an exclusive photograph of a window being smashed or a car being turned over which will make the front page--especially if the match is boring. Plain clothes police officers in discos, nightclubs and pubs at the lower end of the scale will be looking for agents provocateur.
The House must remind the newspaper industry that it has a responsibility to project that which is good about Britain, not that which is bad. The media constantly place emphasis on what is bad about politics, football or anything else. If one talks to people in the business about
the incident on the flight back from Hong Kong which was said to involve England players, they say that the damage was negligible.
Lady Olga Maitland:
Is £5,000 of damage negligible?
Mr. Ashton:
It was not £5,000 of damage. I am sure that the hon. Lady has flown club class on long-haul flights, so she will be familiar with the small video televisions that are fitted into the back of the seat. I doubt that they cost 200 quid each. I even doubt that two televisions suffered severe damage.
Lady Olga Maitland:
I am astonished. Is the hon. Gentleman suggesting that appalling behaviour is totally excusable? Is he suggesting that £200 of damage is more acceptable than £5,000 of damage? The fact remains that the men in question behaved appallingly. They were a disgrace to Britain and should have been disciplined. It is outrageous that the hon. Gentleman should try to defend them.
Mr. Ashton:
The hon. Lady knows only what she has read in the newspapers, but she condemns and convicts everybody on that basis. Neither the stewards nor stewardesses reported anything to the pilot during the flight in question, and nothing was said for nine hours after the aircraft landed. Then, two cleaners who had entered the aircraft ran to the press to say that there had been some damage. I will not give too many details because libel actions are pending. Some players intend to sue some newspapers for libel, which is whyMr. Venables could not offer a proper explanation. The hon. Lady read the newspaper stories and, like many other people, has jumped on the bandwagon. I hope that there will be an inquiry and libel actions.
Lady Olga Maitland:
They did not even apologise.
Madam Deputy Speaker:
Order. The hon. Lady knows my views about sedentary interventions.
Mr. Ashton:
The hon. Lady asks the players to apologise when they may not have even--
Lady Olga Maitland:
They should have made one.
Madam Deputy Speaker:
Order. We will start with discipline here, in the House.
Mr. Ashton:
The hon. Lady is more gullible than I would expect from a Member of Parliament, and she does not know a lot about football and reporters. Media hype will destroy the games. If that happens, the newspapers will be destroying this country. If the press persist in publishing front-page stories about two idiots having a punch-up or breaking a window, that image will go around the world. Football is not to blame but the people who publicise such incidents out of all proportion.
Mr. Pendry:
I have just returned from Hong Kong, where I met the chief of Cathay Pacific. He confirms my hon. Friend's comment that the damage was highly
Mr. Ashton:
We must not forget the amount of money that has been invested, the organisation, or the wonderful feeling of having the biggest street party in Europe where everybody can have a marvellous time. Young people coming to this country should have that as their first impression of Britain. I remember 1966--it was marvellous, even though it rained for three weeks. It was not just a matter of England winning the cup; it was the marvellous party atmosphere, just like there was at the coronation and on VE day. It could be like that again.
Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale):
I could not agree more with the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Ashton). Like him, I am a vice-chairman of the all-party football committee, which is in no doubt that the police have done sterling work and I pay tribute to them for their efforts.
I begin my speech in my capacity as chairman of the all-party racing committee. When my hon. Friend the Minister opened the debate, he listed the great sporting events that we are going to enjoy in the weeks and months ahead--but I was disappointed to note that he did not mention that it is the Derby tomorrow. There will be a great deal of interest in what is happening at both Wembley and Epsom. We have brought forward the time of the race to 2.25 pm so that people can watch the Derby on television, having, we hope, placed their bets in the betting shops in the morning, and then watch the football afterwards. Large screens at Epsom will show the opening game at Wembley.
Despite the number of welcome initiatives in racing, many of them due to Government help, there is continuing cause for concern about the long-term health of the sport. Racing is both a sport and an industry and the Government have a clear interest in it. For example, they take £350 million a year in general betting duty and there are at least 100,000 jobs in the racing industry, which is inextricably linked with the betting industry. At the other extreme, the breeding and training of horses is a vital part of the rural economy, as those of us with a constituency interest know. In my constituency, the first recorded race was in 1692, when a plate race was run on the wolds just outside Norton. Racing is an important industry that embraces both sport and the economy. The breeding of horses is a £100 million a year industry. Owners pay some £200 million a year in training and veterinary fees and other costs.
The House should be alerted to the fact that racing finances remain in a parlous state. That is despite the help given by the Government with VAT on the cost of bloodstock, the two cuts in general betting duty and the
deregulation of some of the betting legislation so that there can be Sunday racing and evening opening of betting shops. In addition, following the recommendation of the Home Affairs Select Committee, the British Horseracing Board was created. It has done everything possible to improve racing's commercial interests.
You, Madam Deputy Speaker--as a member of the committee--will no doubt remember the work that we did for racing. I pay tribute to the Marquess of Hartington--Stoker, as he is affectionately known in the industry--for the work that he has done with the board. He will retire shortly and will be replaced by my noble Friend Lord Wakeham. The Tote and the Levy Board has been as generous to racing as it can, but betting turnover remains weak. We had looked forward to an increase in the levy, but that has not materialised in the way we envisaged.
I mentioned earlier that training costs amount to some £200 million a year, yet net prize money to owners totals only £38.25 million--barely 20 per cent. of the training costs are recovered in prize money. I am the first to say--as would be many of the owners--that owners are in the business for fun and for sport. In the same way as someone who owns a yacht, they expect to pay for things out of their pockets. However, compared with the prize money in other countries, including just across the channel in France, prize money in Britain is very low and needs to be increased. The Government have recognised that on many occasions.
The Racehorse Owners Association gave a presentation to our committee on Tuesday. It calculates that the deficit between prize money and training costs means that every time an owner has a horse in a race, it costs him £3,000--net of any prize money he may win. That puts the matter into perspective.
In the Budget last year--now enacted in the Finance Act--the Government agreed to make a 1 per cent. reduction in general betting duty. However, that must be seen as a very welcome first step; we need further substantial reductions in this year's Budget. Those in the House who follow the interests of racing will recognise how important that is.
One issue of particular concern is that many small betting shops are closing, often because they are bankrupt. If we allow such shops to close in small market towns there may be a resurgence of illegal betting, which would not be in anyone's interest, especially the Government's. There will be arguments about how any future reduction should be split, but that is a matter for another day.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |