Written Evidence Submitted by the Rugby Football League

Written evidence submitted by the Rugby Football League DCMS Select Committee call for evidence: ‘Sport in our Communities’ Response from the Rugby Football League, 12 November 2020 The Committee Inquiry asks: Are current sports governance models fit for purpose? At what level of sport should the government consider spending public money? National Governing Bodies of sport fulfil important roles in the sector which are unique to them and not fulfilled by other bodies. It is important to distinguish between an NGB and an organisation like the Premier League in Football or Super League Europe in Rugby League which are not NGBs but primarily exist to promote and market their competitions and develop broadcast and commercial value from them. The governance models of these organisations differ from those of an NGB. There are challenges where clubs make decisions about other clubs. Aside from overseeing rules, clubs, officiating, coaching and competitions, as an NGB the RFL distributes income generated by commercial and broadcast rights, and investment from Sport England and Government. NGBs of each sport are important social institutions – they combine being the custodians of tradition with ensuring the future of the whole sport they serve. The RFL implements a governance framework for the sport and administers Rugby League on a national basis; and delivers the England teams which represent the nation and generate national pride. The RFL exists to protect and help grow the sport – from the under 6s to the England teams. That purpose extends to being a vocal champion and a campaigner for the sport, demonstrating to Government and other policy makers how Rugby League is more than a sport and delivers meaningful and measurable social impacts in key communities for which it should be supported by Government. Whether the leadership of NGBs is as diverse and inclusive as it might be is a live and public discussion. NGBs are not perfect, but they are more socially progressive than some public institutions. For example – being subject to the Sport Governance Code and various other requirements by funding awarding bodies. NGBs are also held to high standards in areas including but not limited to anti-doping, player welfare, coach education, and safeguarding. In these respects, statutory and non- statutory funders can have a high degree of confidence in the management and delivery of projects by NGBs. NGBs fulfil an important ‘amplifying role’ for their sports. For example, developing programmes which are rolled out across their sport and applying for/generating the additional funding for clubs and Foundations to deliver those programmes. This strengthens the economy and ecosystem of their sport. In Rugby League, the RFL brings in £hundreds of thousands per year which go straight to the sport’s Foundations for project delivery in disadvantaged communities. Public funding for sport at any level should be subject to appropriate governance, inclusion and diversity requirements. Indeed, this can help drive further change at all levels of sports. There is a risk that looking at sport through the lens of professional football distorts the wider picture. The notion that elite football would receive public money is not sensible. There are other sports where the player/athlete salaries etc are also very high indeed. o However, this is not the case in many other sports – including for players/athletes at the highest level. For example, in Rugby League the average Super League salary is £61k; clubs do not make large profits, they reinvest everything into their club – both on-field and to support the wider work of the club in its community. Whilst clubs have accessed Government mitigations as other businesses (furlough etc) they have lost millions in non- recoverable revenues and are prevented from generating matchday income. Broadcast monies in many cases – including in Rugby League – have been partially clawed back due to a wholly disrupted season. o For these reasons, the means of alleviating the impact of the pandemic on ‘professional’ as well as ‘grassroots’ sport should include public money in the form of loans (as per the £16m loan provided to the RFL for Rugby League with a further request due to the extended absence of spectators); and some grant funding as it has in the Arts and Culture sectors. What are the biggest risks to the long-term viability of grassroots sport? What key measures could the Government introduce to increase the resilience of sports clubs and venues? There are now significant risks to participation patterns and longer-term behaviour change in many sports. Team sports especially contact sports like Rugby League were the last to return to play. The seasonality of some sports, including ours, means players have missed an entire season. As well as participation the issue is the financial sustainability of grassroots clubs. Clubs have been denied x3key revenue streams for most of this year: match day income (bar, food etc); non-match day income (events at the sports club) and membership fees from participants. Even when, before lockdown 2, some play was temporarily resumed in Rugby League, the ‘turn up and play and then go home’ guidance means that income is foregone by the club which is effectively treated as ‘closed’. It has been extremely complicated to return to play in many sports. When lockdown 2 eases and presumably the nation returns to the system of tiers, there should be a presumption in favour of sport wherever possible. It is important that guidance must apply nationally and be adhered to consistently by regional and local authorities. This will avoid issues where regional/local health bodies have tried to make arbitrary decisions about sports guidance which has been signed off at a national level, creating confusion for sports clubs and volunteers and considerable work for NGBs. Business rate relief for grassroots sports clubs needs to continue. It is important to note that – in the main - utilities etc are not covered by grant funding support. Local authorities are themselves under huge pressure so are not able to reduce pitch hire costs, or in some cases even able to maintain pitches properly. These issues are most acute in economically disadvantaged communities where there are multiple indices of deprivation. 50% of all Rugby League in played in the most deprived areas in England. Sport England have worked quickly and effectively to support the sector and their help has been appreciated. One suggestion is that some grant funding from Sport England needs to be ring-fenced for the sports clubs that need it most due to the socio-economic reality of their community – not those clubs that can act and react most quickly and who often have volunteers with professional backgrounds. An additional suggestion is that DBS checks for sports volunteers should be met by central Government. To what extent should elite professional sports support the lower leagues and grassroots? How should the Government make this happen? To differing extents this happens across sport – directly and indirectly, though it differs considerably in sports. Many sports with broadcast contracts voluntarily agree to commit an annual percentage of broadcast revenues to the development of grassroots sport. Elite clubs in Rugby League support their own charitable Foundations which deliver valuable community and social impact projects; this includes supporting the development of the grassroots game in clubs and schools. The profile of elite sport, national teams and major events like the Rugby League World Cup in 2021 generates interest which in turn benefits grassroots sport. The principle of solidarity between the top-flight and the tiers beneath is an important one in sport and reflects the symbiotic relationship between professional and semi- professional and amateur sport. Some sports are less commercial than others – including at the top end. And the commercial climate in sports sponsorship is hard hit by the current situation. o As above, it is important that all elite sport is not judged by the finances of elite football or elite rugby union. What key measures could the Government introduce to increase the resilience of sports clubs and venues? The sector needs a ‘Sports Recovery Fund’ similar to the Culture Recovery Fund, with targeted investment – which includes grant funding - to assist: Community sport to build back better from Covid-19; further allocation of funds for Return to Play including harder to reach audiences. Support for professional clubs where those clubs are providing measurable community impacts; and are reinvesting in the club and community and not excessive player salaries. Capital investment into facilities. NGBs and Sports event organisers who have lost income which is now irreplaceable due to spectators not being able to attend since March 2020. The sector needs regulatory and policy change: VAT reduction to 5% for sports and leisure activities to match that given to culture and hospitality. This would assist with current sales including competition entry fees, sporting merchandise, memberships and tickets. There has been no explanation from Government as to why sport has been excluded from the VAT reduction applied to other event tickets; it means customers can[t benefit from ‘buying forward’ and clubs can’t benefit from the confidence and cash flow this would bring. Further exemption of business rates for community clubs. A Sports Betting Right – considered as part of the Gambling Review - could be part of how a new income stream to invest into community sports clubs and other areas supported by NGBs. Government can seize the opportunity to make sport and physical activity central to the national recovery strategy: Government to continue to ensure that Sport England is appropriately funded and consider an increase in the settlement as vital funding flows through Sport England to NGBs and other partners who are at the forefront of delivering sport and physical activity, and increasingly opportunities which deliver combined physical and mental wellbeing outcomes.

Load more