ANNEX
RESPONSE FROM THE DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION
AND EMPLOYMENT
A quota covering both EEA and non-EEA players
1 We hope that the present negotiations between
the EU institutions, the Member States and football's governing
bodies lead to measures which will limit the negative consequences
of the Bosman ruling. We urge the Government to support
proposals which will allow limits to be placed on the number of
players a club can have on its books who are not eligible for
selection for the national side of the country in which they are
playing. If the present negotiations are not successful to this
end, we recommend that the Government support any future proposals
of the same kind.
The Government, via the Department for Culture, Media
and Sport, is playing an active role in the discussions with other
Member States, European Football governing bodies and the Commission,
concerning a proposal to limit the impact which the Bosman
ruling has had on professional sport in Europe.
The Government understands that the issue is likely
to be taken forward by the French Presidency. The Committee may
wish to note that it is the Minister of Sport who will negotiate
on behalf of the Government at any subsequent meetings. Should
the French presidency table a paper on steps to reverse the Bosman
ruling on quotas, then the Department will, of course, liaise
with the Minister of Sport and ensure that the Committee's recommendations
are reflected upon. Given that free movement of labour throughout
the EEA is viewed as one of the cardinal principles of the Treaty
of Rome, we think it unlikely, however, that sport would be given
an exemption.
2 We recommend that, if the governing bodies are
once again allowed to place restrictions on the number of foreign
players—both EEA and non-EEA—which a club may have
on its books, a single limit on the number of overseas players
should be applied and that no distinction should be made between
EEA nationals and work permit players. The limit should apply
to those players who are not available to be selected to play
for England, Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales, whatever their
nationality, although a player from one part of the UK playing
in another part of the UK should not be counted as a foreign player.
This recommendation is hypothetical and clearly dependent
on the outcome of the current negotiations covered in the previous
recommendation.
It would be for the World, European and British football
governing bodies, not the Government, to consider introducing
rules which would ensure limits on overseas players on the books
of individual clubs.
The Government's policy of considering work permit
applications against the relevant criteria would continue. If
the criteria were met, a permit would be issued to the club. It
would be the responsibility of that club to comply with all appropriate
Football governing bodies' regulations regarding limitations on
the numbers of overseas players they are permitted to have on
their books.
A quota of non-EEA players only
3 If a quota governing EEA as well as non-EEA
players proves impossible, we recommend that the governing bodies
introduce a quota for work permit players. The quota would have
to be set so that it did not permit a substantial increase in
the number of work permit players. We recommend a quota of two
work permit players per club in the Premiership and one in the
First Division. We do not believe that a quota system would need
to be accompanied by any further restrictions, although the Minister
indicated that even with such a system, she would not accept the
complete removal of all quality controls.
Whilst not averse to the principle of quotas, in
order to afford home-grown youngsters the opportunity to develop,
the Government's policy is clear: any quota system must be underpinned
by a measure of quality. This, the Government is convinced,
is how we can ensure that only top international footballers,
who contribute significantly and add value to the game, are granted
permission to play in the UK.
The Government would support and help to facilitate
the introduction by the governing bodies of a voluntary
quota system for non-EEA players, as long as the quality threshold
remained a key criterion. Ultimately it would be the governing
bodies, not the Government, who would be responsible for inaugurating
and monitoring such arrangements.
The Department would not be able to support a quota
system which did not contain a quality component as it would run
totally counter to the aim of granting work permits only to players
of the highest calibre who can make a significant contribution
to the game. Without a quality threshold, clubs would be able
to bring over young and non-established players, a move which
the Government believes would have a severe and detrimental effect
on the opportunities available to home-grown talent.
There is also the distinct possibility that if the
bodies introduced the quota system proposed by the Committee then
clubs in the lower football divisions will argue that they were
being discriminated against. Also, such a policy could exacerbate
the widely-acknowledged gap between themselves, the Premier League
and First Division, potentially prejudicing the development of
home grown talent.
4 We recommend that if the governing bodies introduce
a quota system that would not permit the number of work permit
players to be increased substantially above its present level,
and the Government still feels that some form of quality control
is necessary, the issue of a work permit should be based on a
single criterion: that the salary which the club is offering would
place the player in the upper quartile of the salary range for
that club's players.
Should a quota system be implemented, the Government
would not be prepared to accept the Committee's recommendation
that a player's salary be used as the sole quality criterion.
It is not Government policy to intervene, nor set arbitrary terms
and conditions in the negotiations between an employee and an
employer; this applies to any industry and profession, not just
football.
Salaries in football can vary widely, including those
offered by clubs to players of similar quality. It is paramount
that the work permit arrangements should not been seen as a contributory
factor to fuel wage inflation in the game. Previously, as the
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State stated in her oral evidence,
there were certain cases where clubs hiked up a player's salary
just to secure the work permit; the rational argument had moved
from the player's international experience, ability and skill
level to one where as long he was paid more money the club received
a work permit.
If such a criterion were introduced it is possible
that clubs would recoup the additional costs by passing it on
to the fans. That is why the salary criterion was removed from
the 1999/2000 work permit criteria. Furthermore, such a measure
could be viewed as favouring the richer clubs and discriminating
against the less wealthy ones.
Transition to a quota system
5 We recommend that, if a quota system is introduced,
clubs which already have more players than the quota permits should
be allowed to retain their existing overseas players until their
contracts expire. We recommend that the same principle should
apply to clubs which become subject to a smaller quota requirement
by virtue of relegation, but only in respect of those players
signed before the club had played half its league matches in the
season at the end of which it was relegated
There are a number of important factors to be considered
as part of the transitional arrangements for any quota system
and such discussions would form a major part of the discussions
with the football bodies. The Government would be keen to ensure
that clubs who had existing work permit holders were not penalised
in any way.
New criteria
6 We recommend that, if a quota system is not
to be introduced, a work permit should only be issued if:
(a) the player
concerned has played for his present club's first team in at least
75 per cent of its matches;
(b) he has played
for his country in at least 75 per cent of its competitive 'A'
team matches for which he was available for selection; and
(c) the salary
which the club is offering would place him in the upper quartile
of the salary range for that club's players.
Should discussions between the Government and football
governing bodies prove inconclusive on the matter of introducing
a quota system, the Government, as always, will review the existing
criteria in consultation with the bodies for the 2001/2002 season.
The Government is pleased that the Committee has recommended that
a player's international record should form an integral part of
any new criteria. However, the Government is unable to accept
the Committee's two other suggested criteria for the following
reasons.
The Committee's recommendation relating to checking
appearances at club level would, in most cases, be an additional
and lower quality assessment than the current international appearances
check which the Committee recommend be retained. This criterion
would not add any significant value. Difficulties would also exist
in assessing the quality of the national league in which the individual's
club compete. No world league ranking list exists. Verifying the
number of club matches a player has played could prove to be a
difficult and onerous task as many national football associations
do not have the administrative infrastructure of the domestic
football associations.
The Government's response to the inclusion of a salary
threshold has been covered earlier.
In summary, the Government believes that the current
criteria for applying for permits are objective, straightforward
and transparent.
7 We do not believe that a player who habitually
displays poor sportsmanship or who regularly misses matches through
suspension can be said to be contributing to the development of
the game at its highest level. We recommend that, for the purposes
of determining the proportion of matches in which a player has
participated, matches missed through suspension should be treated
as matches for which he was not selected to play, rather than
as matches missed through injury.
Clearly, no Government would wish to encourage or
condone bad sportsmanship. However it is the Government's belief
that such matters are the responsibility of a sport's governing
body.
The Government's two benchmarks for the work permit
arrangements for non-EEA footballers have been, and will remain,
quality and the contribution a player can make to the British
game. If a player has been suspended by an overseas football association
then it could be argued that, if this period was taken into account,
the Government would be, in essence, punishing the person twice
for the same offence. This could lay the Government open to accusations
of double jeopardy.
There might also be problems with devising objective
criteria for measuring the severity of the offence for which the
person was suspended. Sportspeople around the world are suspended
from their sport for a host of reasons. Often, suspensions are
not alike and it would be an extremely difficult task to draw
up criteria which were fair, consistent and transparent.
Work permit renewals
8 We recommend that work permits should be subject
to renewal every two years. Permits should be renewed automatically
if a player has played in at least 75 per cent of his club's first
team games for which he was fit to play.
The Government does not accept this recommendation
and does not think it would help to ensure the objectives agreed.
The criteria for the coming 2000/2001 season state that a permit
will be issued for the length of a person's contract; the Government
is convinced that this is the most appropriate way forward as
it enables a club to take responsibility for the players they
recruit, plan for the future and invest appropriately in quality
players.
The Review Panel
9 We do not believe that, under a quota system
or under the salary criterion we have proposed, there would be
any need for applications to be re-considered if they clearly
did not meet the criterion. We recommend that the Review Panel
should be retained but its terms of reference should extend only
to determining disputes between the club and OLS over matters
of fact relating to work permit applications.
The Government does not accept that this recommendation
would improve the current arrangements. The Government believes
that the current structure and purpose of the panels, as set out
in their existing terms of reference, have been a success. As
an appeal mechanism they have also proved to be competent, efficient
and popular with the clubs. Regardless of whatever work permit
arrangements are in place some sort of appeal mechanism must always
be afforded employers. The current Review system is transparent,
efficient and easy to administer.
The Government is keen for the Review panels to continue
in their present format as they provide clubs with the opportunity
to present arguments to a panel of independent football
experts, should their application not meet the published criteria.
Panel members are well-respected figures in the game and they
discharge their duties in a professional, objective and qualified
manner.
The Government has decided that the panels will remain
in place for the coming season and has tightened up the procedures
so that clubs will be entitled to only one review per application
submitted for a particular player during the season for the same
club. This strengthening of the Review process has been welcomed
by all of the football bodies.
| 
