MP questions FCO’s role in takeover talks

A TYNESIDE MP has questioned why there was a need for two meetings between Government officials and the Premier League over the aborted takeover of Newcastle United last summer.

Fans, MPs and the media have repeatedly been told by several different government departments that officials were ‘clear’ the final outcome of the attempted takeover was not something the Downing Street would be involved in.

Despite this, the Foreign Office has confirmed it held two virtual meetings with the Premier League, at the request of league bosses, which saw officials from the Middle East and North Africa Directorate and the British Embassy in Riyadh involved.

Mr Mearns, Labour MP for Gateshead, questioned why a second meeting was needed between the Premier League and the Government.

He said: “On one hand, you have Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden saying the takeover is a matter for the Premier League and its Owners’ and Directors’ Test but on the other there is clearly another arm of the Government involved.

“It does not look like it was just a matter for the Premier League but one for the Foreign Commonwealth Office too.

“It does not stand up – if you have told them it is a matter for them then why have a meeting with the FCO and then have another meeting with the FCO?

“Surely at the first meeting, the FCO would have been telling the Premier League: ‘This is a matter for you.’ Why a second meeting?”

Mr Mearns yet again asked the FCO if they would release the correspondence from their meetings but was told doing so would ‘would contravene the General Data Protection Regulation relating to third-party data.’

The Chronicle was told by the FCO certain documents had been withheld due to the commercial sensitivity of the content.

Mr Means said he considers that a poor excuse.

He added: “What is within the FCO’s correspondence with the Premier League which means it is commercially in confidence?

“Surely all the FCO should be doing is advising them about the political situation. There should be nothing in the correspondence which is commercially sensitive, which is not their remit. Quite clearly there is a public interest issue here and the FCO should be open and publish their correspondence between themselves and the ... League.”