Loading summary

Transcript99 lines

[00:00]
Jeremy Bowen
This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.
[00:04]
Adam Fleming
Hello. We are recording this episode of Newscast on Friday afternoon. And normally at this point we'd be looking back at the big events in British politics. This week, a bit of a retrospective, but there's so many huge news stories happening elsewhere, we've decided to do some of them instead. So in the second half you will hear about a huge development in Gaza, and in the first half you'll hear about an absolutely enormous visible from space bus stop, the world of international football that will have ramifications even if you're not even remotely interested in football. So that is what's coming up in
[00:36]
Laura McAllister
this episode of Newscast, Newscast, Newscast from the BBC.
[00:40]
Simon Jack
Humanity's next great voyage begins.
[00:42]
Adam Fleming
You know, I like my buses, I'll
[00:44]
Jeremy Bowen
come on to them. I see that he was, I guess, the mayor of a town.
[00:47]
Adam Fleming
O la la.
[00:47]
Simon Jack
Thinking about it like a panto helped.
[00:50]
Jane Dougal
Do we play music now or what do we do?
[00:51]
Adam Fleming
And what will you do?
[00:53]
Jane Dougal
Stare at a wall?
[00:56]
Adam Fleming
Hello, it's Adam in the newscast studio. And first of all, we're going to talk about this huge bust up around international football. And it goes like this. A few days ago, Gianni Infantino, who's the boss of FIFA, football's world governing body, unveiled this hitherto secret plan to create a new subsidiary company which would oversee FIFA's international events like World Cups, men's and women's and others, and allow private investors to buy a stake in that, which means they could make money out of it. Now, this plan would have to be approved by a majority of the national federations who comprise the FIFA membership. And this has caused uproar amongst lots of the federations. So, for example, On Thursday night, UEFA, which represents the 55 European federations, said, no way are we going along with this. And if it happens, we will boycott any future FIFA events like the World Cup. And throughout Friday, we've seen more and more federations doing the same things, which means that the future of Gianni Infantino, a quite controversial person in world football anyway, is starting to look a little bit hazy. So it is an interesting story where there is a complete collision between football, money, power, politics, America, the rest of the world, and also just these huge spectacles that you can buy into whether you like football or not, or in this case, actually buy into if you're a rich investor. So to help us understand what's going on, we're joined in the Newscast studio by BBC business editor, Simon Jack. Hi, Simon.
[02:33]
Simon Jack
Hello, Adam.
[02:33]
Adam Fleming
And you come bearing a PowerPoint presentation.
[02:36]
Simon Jack
I have got hold of the PowerPoint presentation that was sent by FIFA to the 211 member organizations, mapping out why they're trying to do this plan and what they'll get out of it and why it's a good idea.
[02:51]
Adam Fleming
And we will dig into those numbers in that presentation in a second. But we're also joined by BBC Sports News presenter Jane Dougal, who's on the line. Hello, Jane.
[02:58]
Jane Dougal
Hello, Adam. Hello, Simon.
[03:00]
Jeremy Bowen
Hello.
[03:00]
Adam Fleming
So, before Simon does the numbers and gives us a little PowerPoint presentation with no clicker, Jane, can you just give us the big picture about what the FIFA boss, Gianni Infantino is actually trying to achieve here and then we can do the numbers and the politics.
[03:13]
Jane Dougal
Yeah. So this has been a seismic moment in football. We knew that UEFA, the European branch, as it were, of world football, had been critical of FIFA's handling of this proposal that they have to sell off stakes in FIFA's major events to private investors. They had said that FIFA was using the sport to enrich themselves and their friends. So UEFA called an emergency meeting of all 55 of its members. We knew that they were going to be discussing the possibility of boycotting future World Cups and future FIFA tournaments in protest of these proposals. But we did not imagine that they would all vote unanimously in favour of that and that the statement that they would issue would be so strong. They said, the World Cup's not for sale. They called FIFA irresponsible and said it was indefensible that a proposal of such significance for football was conceived in secret. This is not merely a profound failure of leadership, but an abdication of FIFA's duty as the custodian of world football. Really, really strong sentiments. And then following that, other organizations, other confederations, have joined forces with UEFA. It's quite strange because we're not used to this sort of unity in football in their distaste of what FIFA president Gianni Infantino is proposing.
[04:37]
Adam Fleming
And as chance would have it, I was presenting Newsnight on Thursday night. So I spoke to Laura McAllister, who's a UEFA vice president. She'd been at this emergency meeting and she was very vocal on Newsnight about how they all fel. So here's a little sample of our conversation.
[04:52]
Laura McAllister
Lots of people felt that for some of the smaller federations, the carrot of a big cash injection would be significant. But I'm pleased to say that every federation, small, medium and large, backed the position that UEFA's leadership has taken this week. And therefore, it was very, very easy to reach consensus. It was you know, it was emotional, but I think there was a real sense of purpose. There was. And I felt that this was a very clear line in the sand in terms of the politics and the organization of football. And it was incumbent on us, as probably the most powerful confederation in Europe, to stand up and be counted and come up with a threat, the boycott threat, that is commensurate with the damage that such a proposal would do to our game.
[05:41]
Adam Fleming
And so, Jane, just to be clear, in a future universe where these plans went through, which is actually looking quite unlikely now, that would mean that you could have a World cup with no European countries in it because UEFA was boycotting it because they didn't like this. This plan. Yes, yeah.
[05:58]
Jane Dougal
That was what they were threatening to do. That's what they are threatening to do if these proposals go through. And the reason why they're threatening to do it is because they feel that the soul of football has been sucked out of it, out of this whole competition. These controversial plans, if I just sort of talk you through them as well, they would include the sale of FIFA's commercial rights to external investors, which would include broadcasting, sponsorship, ticketing and licensing, and possibly the delivery of its tournaments. But not only did FIFA come up with this plan without consulting any of the confederations, they also sent a letter to all 211 members saying to them that if they were to agree to the plan, then they would each receive 30 million pounds, which for some smaller nations would be a huge amount, which could be game changing, really. So some people are describing it as something of a bribe.
[06:55]
Adam Fleming
So, Simon, let's dive into the presentation. You've got there so many interesting aspects to how FIFA wants this to work and why they might be doing it.
[07:02]
Simon Jack
So, bottom line, it is about money. And FIFA feels that they are not making enough out of their valuable events, which include not only just the World cup, which is every four years, but also the World Club Championship, where basically the winners of the Champions League play the Copa America and South America to crown the best club in the world. And they've got this very interesting stat here. They're saying that the amount that FIFA makes per year per fan on average is $1. And they compare that to the Premier League, for example, which is 2.6 dollars per fan per year, and to the NFL, American Football, which gets nearly 53 dollars per fan per year. So they're saying the NFL is making 50 times per fan per year what we're making. We want a bit of that. We want to be a bit more like that. Now, I would say that that's a bit of a false comparison because you've got an event which doesn't happen very often and you're talking about something which happens every week in the US and every week in the Premier League, but nevertheless, that they're trying to say, and as Jane rightly says, they're trying to dangle, you know, it's both a carrot and a stick and a lot of people call it a bribe. Sign up to this will give you 15 million quid immediately or by the end of the year, and another 15 million when and if this deal goes through. And, you know, that's peanuts to, you know, UEFA and at the FA and what have you.
[08:22]
Adam Fleming
Because they're wealthy.
[08:23]
Simon Jack
Because they're wealthy. But if you are Montserrat or you're Andorra, you know, Cap Verd, the unlikely heroes of the World cup recently, then something like Montserrat, this is about 40% of their entire GDP. And so I think that what they thought is that although the other umbrella organizations might get a bit uppity about this, and boy, did they, that they could do almost like a hostile takeover, take it directly to the shareholders, if you like, and say, well, you know, do you want it or not?
[08:52]
Adam Fleming
And leverage the smaller countries against the richer ones.
[08:55]
Simon Jack
Correct. Which is a little bit like the International Olympic Committee used to work in the sense that they would. They would try and, you know, dangle something in front of the smaller countries because the sheer number of them would win the day.
[09:06]
Adam Fleming
And, Simon, in that presentation, do the consultants and the people involved in doing this deal and making this presentation, do they explain how the World cup and the FIFA events would change to make it go from $1 per fan to something more like $50 per fan?
[09:20]
Simon Jack
Well, they say they would different. They would look at increasing the number of teams in the World Cup. We already had a big increase, so they might take it up to 64 and they might make some changes. So you had phases of the World Club Championship, so there'd be more stuff going on. But there was a feeling that they, you know, you remember the hull about ticket prices and all that kind of stuff that went on. Hospitality and there's. There's all sorts of licensing partners and you've got your credit card partner and all this kind of stuff all adds up. They think they can squeeze a bit more. But what they're looking for, the reason they wanted to bring private investors, is they think we need some people who've got the commercial now to try and maximize value, who know this stuff better than we do. Now, in their defense, what they say is that we're not the only sport who does this. PGA Golf does this very good example is Formula One. And there's a fear, I think a lot of people thought that Gianni Infantino would become like the Bernie Eccleston of football with almost total control over the commercial rights. And I have to say that Infantino could not have possibly prepared the pitch worse for this idea. First of all, there was the peace prize to Donald Trump. Then there was the overturning of the red card at Donald Trump's bequest for the American striker. For the American striker. And then the lead partner or the lead private investor, the cornerstone investor in this is a company run by Donald Trump's son in law's brother. So you put all that together and Infantino's widespread unpopularity. And I think that they basically could not have sold this idea worse if they tried.
[10:50]
Adam Fleming
And Jane, just as we were getting ready to record this episode of newscast, we checked to see if there's a name for your son in law's brother in kind of genealogy. And it's like your co. Son in law. Who knew?
[11:02]
Simon Jack
There we go.
[11:03]
Adam Fleming
Yes. Anyway, so, Jane, so that's the numbers and that's the business plan. Where have we got to with the politics then? So when I was doing Newsnight last night, UEFA had said, no way we're doing this. We will boycott future events if it goes ahead. UEFA is 55 members of FIFA and there's 211.
[11:21]
Simon Jack
Yeah.
[11:22]
Adam Fleming
And you would need half of the 211 for this to go ahead. What's, what's the tally now?
[11:27]
Jane Dougal
So Infantino needs a majority of 106 to get his proposal through the Asian Football Confederation, who earlier today said that they would join the other two confederations. They've got 47 members, but 46 of them are FIFA members. And then CONCACAF, which is central America, North America and the Caribbean, they have 41 members, but 35 of them have a vote. They're FIFA members. So that adds up to 136 associations of three confederations. Now, this is just guesswork at the moment because you have to assume that they will all toe the line and vote the way that their confederation tells them to. So three confederations, UEFA, CONCACAF and the Asian Federation, they have all said, we don't want these proposals. But then there's each individual country within it that you would hope would toe the line and go along with what their confederation is asking. And if that does happen, then there will be 136 associations that could potentially vote against these plans, in which case they wouldn't happen. Now, if that's the case and the proposal is dead in the water, the question then remains, what is the future for Gianni Infantino? Can he continue?
[12:46]
Adam Fleming
I also was just going to ask, will there be a vote or will this be like Keir Starmer's welfare reforms and they pool them to avoid the embarrassment of losing?
[12:53]
Jane Dougal
No, there is actually a deadline. So Infantino sent a letter to all 211 member associations telling them that they had until the 19th of September to agree to this deal or not. And it's a straight majority, as we mentioned, whether it goes through or not. So they can vote to say yes or no. So we will know by the 19th of September whether it's going to happen or not.
[13:15]
Simon Jack
And also we just had the Prime Minister this afternoon weighed in saying Gianni Infantino is not the right person to lead FIFA. So it's becoming, you know, it's getting to the highest echelons of or whatever because, you know, football is the most popular game in the world, FIFA. Just saying we could be making more money out of it. UEFA and others, you know, it's not like FIFA's short of money. They made about 12, probably have made $12 billion. So 10 billion pounds, 9 billion in the last four years, which is double the previous four year cycle.
[13:44]
Jane Dougal
It was $15 billion they made from the World cup this summer.
[13:47]
Simon Jack
That's an up to date number. Thank you.
[13:49]
Adam Fleming
Although I would just say thinking about Andy Brown, easier for him to complain about Gianni Infantino and basically insinuate he should be replaced than to say, I don't know, complain about Donald Trump and call for him to be replaced. Because the stakes are very different there. So, Simon, where do you think this is going then? So listening to what Jane was saying.
[14:07]
Simon Jack
Yeah. My instinct is, I think that FIFA made a miscalculation here. They actually thought that they could reach beyond the umbrella organizations, the UEFA and concacafs, and appeal directly to the smaller nations. And it does look at the moment like those smaller nations are falling into line behind their umbrella organizations. This smacks to me very much of. You may remember a ago, there was an attempt to create a European Super League and funnily enough, the bankers who were involved in that, JP Morgan are also involved in this project. They've got a big sports business, which
[14:38]
Adam Fleming
I can take you back to that because that was when I was the chief political correspondent doing Henry's job, doing the news in the morning. And normally most mornings I would have to call Downing street at about quarter past six to get the latest lines from them about what the government thought about issue X or issue Y or issue Z. That morning, the second I woke up, I think Downing street called me to tell me how vehemently they were opposing the Super League plan. Hands, which tells you about the political salience of messing with football.
[15:03]
Simon Jack
There's also this kind of, you know, competitive stuff here. You know, UEFA, they're saying they're selling football. Now FIFA would say we were only going to sell a minority state. We're just going to bring in clever money people, try and extract a bit more money, which we would put in, by the way, into more resources, more money for local federations, more coaches, all this kind of good stuff. But, you know, I, I can imagine the UEFA sort of saying, listen, if anyone's going to gouge more money out of football, it'll be us.
[15:29]
Adam Fleming
Thanks very much.
[15:30]
Simon Jack
Not you guys. So they don't like being sort usurped onto their territory.
[15:34]
Adam Fleming
Jane Simon knows I always like to end on a philosophical note just to set set our friends of the podcast, a big brain teaser before they go. Here's the one for you. Why is it okay for big private investors to own football clubs in the UK, but not for there to be some investment in, in events for FIFA like the World Cup?
[15:55]
Jane Dougal
Because a lot of fans would argue that football doesn't belong to anybody, that it belongs to everybody. And to sell it off in the manner that Gianni Infantino is proposing is to dismantle the very soul of something that people feel so passionately about, that it's not just a hobby, it's a way of life. And to tinker with that is very dangerous. As we saw, as you mentioned, with the proposal for the European Super League in 2021 that lasted for 48 hours before the outrage of the fans dismantled it very quickly. And actually it's very interesting that you brought that up because Gianni Infantino has to restand for his position next March. At the moment he's unopposed. But the name that is coming up again and again is a man called Nasser Al Khelaifi. He is president of Paris Saint Germain. But at the time of the Super League collapsing, the European Super League collapsing, he took over as chairman of the European Clubs association and basically smoothed everything over. He's very well respected, he's a Qatari and he's a very powerful man in football. So he is one of the logical supposed successors to Gianni Infantino. So watch this space.
[17:16]
Adam Fleming
So interesting.
[17:16]
Simon Jack
Just one observation I'd make about this. It's reinforced to me, this may be obvious to others, but reinforced to me the fact that US appetite for our national game, you know, they want in, all in. In fact, I think something like 13 of the 20 Premier League clubs are majority owned by Americans. So, you know, I blame Ted Lasso for this
[17:43]
Adam Fleming
Apple TV show about.
[17:44]
Simon Jack
And welcome to Wrexham, where of course Ryan Reynolds.
[17:48]
Adam Fleming
Basically two TV shows that gave Americans a greater appetite for football.
[17:51]
Simon Jack
Greater appetite. They, they saw it as a really, you know, whether a quaint or an attractive or financially attractive property and they want it in. And so the American ownership of, you know, of, of UK football and football generally has never been higher.
[18:05]
Adam Fleming
Isn't it interesting? And this is my last philosophical point, let's see where this goes. That often we're told, oh, Europeans look at the UK and say, oh, you've got such an Anglo Saxon model of capitalism where everything's up for sale. And then us Brits go, no, no, we're a mixture of European and American. We're just got our own British kind of recipe of the different elements. And then you look at what happens when Americans get involved in something like football as they soccer and you realize actually American capitalism is different from British capitalism, which may indeed be different from what they have on the continent.
[18:35]
Simon Jack
Yeah, maybe. Yeah, maybe.
[18:37]
Adam Fleming
There we go. Ringing endorsement. My theory. Simon, thank you very much.
[18:41]
Simon Jack
Thank you, Adam and Jane, good to
[18:43]
Adam Fleming
catch up with you too.
[18:44]
Jane Dougal
And you, Adam.
[18:45]
Simon Jack
See you, Jane.
[18:46]
Jane Dougal
Bye.
[18:55]
Adam Fleming
Now, as promised, there have been big developments in Gaza, namely that Hamas appear to have signed up to a deal that involves them handing over their weapons, which would be effectively the end of their armed struggle against Israel. And it also sounds like Israel might potentially have agreed to withdraw from Gaza as well. So if all that happens, that would be a huge moment for the Middle East. And the person who's been monitoring these developments for a long time, and especially Today, is the BBC's international editor, Jeremy Bowen, who's on the line. Hi, Jeremy.
[19:29]
Jeremy Bowen
Hey, how are you, Adam?
[19:30]
Adam Fleming
Good, thank you. Good to catch up. So in terms of the timeline, the very long, slightly torturous timeline about Gaza, I mean, put these events today into context.
[19:43]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, this did not happen overnight. There has been a process building in terms of. Well, first of all, if you think back to October of last year, that's when they had the ceasefire, that's when there were a couple of different Donald Trump and his people driven agreements, one of which he hailed as the greatest thing to have happened in the Middle east in 3,000 years. And essentially there were various points about the way that Gaza would be dealt with in the future in those deals and over a protracted period of negotiations which involved. There's a UN envoy as well as that. The Turks have been very active, the Egyptians have been particularly active because the talk's been held in Cairo, not least a lot of them. And so Hamas have also, our information, have moved towards being more open to accept things. And that is because there's been precious little or no reconstruction. People are in a terrible state there. They're also have somewhat lost control I think, such as they had, of law and order because there are these Israeli sponsored militias who roam around at times. So essentially they didn't have that many choices and they decided in the end to sign up to this deal which actually for them it has a number of positives. First of all, it might allow some reconstruction to happen. Second of all, this is assuming it goes ahead, of course, and that is a massive if which we'll talk about. Obviously there's also the fact that. What is the other.
[21:35]
Adam Fleming
Well, what is it that we think Hamas have signed up to?
[21:41]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, there have been two contentious points that they'd signed up to. Everything else in terms of things like a new form of governance in the territory, a new kind of technocratic Palestinian administration, the idea that there would be some other measures taken which would enable, I mean, to be honest, none of it. If you go back through the original documents, there's no detail there. So there's a lot that needs to be, to be worked out. But there were two outstanding points, one of which was on disarmament. And that is the most important thing because that's what stopped any kind of diplomatic progress. And the other one was essentially about things to do with governance with the people who are in various roles that they employ at the moment. I'm talking about civil servants as well, who keep ministries going, such as there are these days. The thing is that, that the 30% or so that they control is, is barely governed in the way that, you know, you can no longer say that this is a mini state led as you might have been able to before. You certainly can't now. Most people are intense for goodness sake and dependent on aid. So those were the two outstanding points. And the most significant single point is that for the first time Hamas has agreed to disarm. And that is new.
[23:06]
Adam Fleming
And Jeremy, I'm sure you've seen lots of examples around the world of groups saying they will hand over their weapons. How do we think this might work in this case?
[23:14]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, of course, these things are all different. And in some cases, groups get absorbed into the armed forces of a state. Well, there is no functioning Palestinian state. Many countries recognize the existence of one, but there's no functioning state. So it's not that. One very good example was in Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement, when there were protracted negotiations to, and I think the phrase was to put the IRA weapons beyond use. And that required a huge amount of very, very detailed stuff. And the thing about the agreement that Donald Trump, surprise, surprise, has announced is there's, there's very little detail about how it's actually going to work, because it's not just about weapons, it's about their tunnel network, revealing where the tunnels are, where the entrances are, making it all public, all that sort of thing. But in Northern Ireland, it was crucial to the completion of that whole peace process. It was a vital stage in it. And equally, this is a vital stage. It's, it's invidious to compare the two. I'm always very reluctant to compare the situation and the troubles in Northern Ireland with the Israeli Palestinian conflict. There are so many things that are different, but on this, I mean, what we can learn from it is these processes require detailed diplomacy and staff work, because let's assume there's no trust between parties who've been trying to kill each other. There also has to be. It has to be very verifiable. So we don't know that detail is yet.
[24:57]
Adam Fleming
And also it usually needs a trusted third party. And Israel tends to never trust any third parties.
[25:03]
Jeremy Bowen
No. And, and the, the third party the Israelis sometimes have trusted is the Americans. Apart from the fact they're having a rift with them at the moment, the, the Palestinians don't trust them. So other countries are going to be very much involved. Countries which have been really involved in this process from the very outset of these ceasefire talks have been, particularly Turkey, Egypt and Qatar. And they have, all three countries have pretty good relations with Donald Trump. They have been. Palestinians have been persuaded to trust them to a degree. The Israelis don't trust them. But the thing is, at the moment, Mr. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, is under double pressure. One set of pressures comes from the fact he faces an election in October, a general election. And in that election, if his opponents, who are all who the main ones, are pretty right wing, if they were to say, well, you just crumbled to Hamas, you've just given in to them, you've given them a sweetheart deal that's not going to win, and that's not going to win him votes. But equally, Donald Trump, at least his Republican Party, faces elections in November, the midterms in America, and he's at the moment engaged in this, well, the makings of a forever war that he swore he'd never get America involved in again with Iran. And he needs some wins. So he wants this thing to work. So he's putting pressure on Netanyahu. So he's on one side, he's got his base who'll be very unhappy about this, and his political opponents. On the other hand, there's Donald Trump saying, right, then, come on, do this. You have to do it. I have leverage over you. We keep you going. We are now your only friend left in the world. Not quite true, but that's what several American officials have been saying. And so, yeah, so I think that what Netanyahu will do is probably play for time, time between now and the election. He's pretty good at that.
[27:12]
Adam Fleming
And also, the Israelis, are they not obligated under this deal to withdraw entirely from Gaza or even withdraw partially?
[27:18]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, that is the central bargain in this. And if it was simply a deal to Hamas gives up their weapons, then Israelis would be very suspicious because they don't trust Hamas because of the killings on the 7th of October and other things. But they'd say, all right, let's see how it goes. But, but it's a quid pro quo, it's a tit for tat. So the deal, the bargain at the center of all of this is that Hamas gives up its weapons and Israel pulls out. And that was in the original deal as well, the Trump deal. The Israelis are saying, well, we might think about it if we are convinced you've given up all your weapons. And Hamas essentially at the moment saying, well, if you don't start withdrawing, we're not giving up any weapons.
[27:58]
Adam Fleming
And, Jeremy, we started this conversation by talking about kind of the torturous process that got us here and the two steps forward, one step back, sometimes three steps back, the lack of detail, but also still some progress at the same time. I mean, can we say that Donald Trump's quite strange idea or innovative idea or novel idea of the Board of Peace might have worked here?
[28:20]
Jeremy Bowen
I think it's a bit too early to say that the idea of a Board of Peace overseeing everything was roundly condemned as a neocolonialist idea. How come is it that a bunch of mostly white Americans and Europeans are going to tell these people how to live their lives. That was the central message that people were coming out with. I think this means, however, that the Americans do have leverage and when they get involved, things can happen. And that has always been the case because they're a very powerful and influential country, not least with the Israelis, if they care to use the leverage. So Donald Trump, I mean, he always claims credit for anything that works well and he tends to blame everybody else if it doesn't work out. But certainly on this occasion, if this goes through, and there are many reasons why I might not, if it goes through, then, yes, I think he'd be quite justified in patting himself on his back for his contribution.
[29:19]
Adam Fleming
Jeremy, thank you so much for bringing us up to date. I can now repay the favour with some news from Westminster that has broken in the last 30 seconds while we were talking. Do you want to hear it?
[29:27]
Jeremy Bowen
It go on.
[29:28]
Adam Fleming
We've not got much choice really, but thank you for playing along. John Healey, the Chancellor has confirmed his first budget will be on Wednesday 28th October. He's posted a video message on social media and he says this will be a budget that moves money and power out of Westminster and into every postcode around Britain. It will be built on fiscal discipline, it will meet our fiscal rules, it'll give businesses and families some of the stability they need to plan for the future. Now, let's get on with the job.
[29:54]
Jeremy Bowen
Week of the Israeli elections as well. So maybe Mr. Netanyahu won't be looking too closely at what Mr. Healey's saying.
[29:59]
Adam Fleming
Maybe not. We will do our best on newscast to look at both. But Jeremy, thank you very much.
[30:04]
Jeremy Bowen
Yes, thanks, Adam.
[30:05]
Adam Fleming
And according to my running spreadsheet, because I'm trying to run 500km in Andy Burnham's first 100 days, alongside all the challenges you're trying to achieve, shows that that will be Andy Burnham's 101st day. So John Healy's challenge in Andy Burnham's first hundred days is to come up with a budget that means they can meet the ambitions of the government while not breaking the Government's fiscal rules that they inherited. Interesting.
[30:40]
DQ Advertiser
Score big with the DQ$7 meal deal. Crispy chicken strips, hot fries, a refreshing drink and a tasty side, all for just seven bucks. It's so much delicious food, you'll bring home the win every time and keep on winning when you upgrade to a small Blizzard treat for just $2. More like the limited time Biscoff Cookie blizzard treat. The seven dollar meal deal with a $2 small Blizzard upgrade for the win. DQ Happy tastes good. Participation may vary.
[31:12]
Greg Jenner
Hello, Greg Jenner here. I'm the host of youf're Dead To Me, the BBC comedy show that takes history seriously. Every episode, I pair up a top historian with a fantastic comedian and we have a lovely, funny, fascinating chat about a different subject from world history. And in this new series, we're beginning with an epic voyage through the story of Homer, the Iliad and the Odyssey. And that's with Kael Smith Byno joining us. And then we'll be learning about Francis Galton and the racist, discredited pseudoscience of eugenics with Desiree Burch. We'll meet many medieval saints in their bone bones boxes with Rachel Parrott. So if that sounds like your sort of thing, listen to your dead to me wherever you get your podcast. Thank you.
[31:50]
Simon Jack
Bye.
[31:56]
Adam Fleming
Coming your way next is an old newscast about the 2005 Tory leadership contest that will be in your feeds this weekend. But before that, I promised you we were going to jump on the bandwagon of Moosecast, where our colleagues on local radio had a webcam on a herd of cows as they were going to be milked. And we've been creating a newsc rural soundscape with your sounds. We're going to do all in a oner. And so you're now going to hear Craig from Glossip and the brook next to his house, Dan, who is next to a lake, Harvey and Kieran who are on a farm that farms both pigs and asparagus, and Stephen, who sent us two. The first is a beach in the Falkland Islands and the second is some geese being disturbed as he walked past them in the dark. These are your newscast rural sounds to sound you into the weekend. Newscast.
[33:17]
Simon Jack
Newscast from the BBC.
[33:19]
Adam Fleming
You've come to the end of newscast.
[33:21]
Simon Jack
Some people, and you know who I
[33:22]
Adam Fleming
mean, might say you ooze stamina.
[33:24]
Simon Jack
Can I encourage you to subscribe on BBC Sounds?
[33:27]
Adam Fleming
And you can get in touch with us anytime.
[33:29]
Simon Jack
Email us@newscastbc.co.uk you you can WhatsApp us on 033-01-2390.
[33:46]
Greg Jenner
Hello, Greg Jenner here. I'm the host of youf're Dead To Me, the BBC comedy show that takes history seriously. Every episode I pair up a top historian with a fantastic comedian and we have a lovely, funny, fascinating chat about a different subject from world history. And in this new series, we're beginning with an epic voyage through the story of Homer, the Iliad and the Odyssey. And that's with Kyle Smith Byno joining us. And then we'll be learning about Francis Galton and the racist, discredited pseudoscience of eugenics with Desiree Birch. We'll meet many medieval saints in their bone boxes with Rachel Parrott. So if that sounds like your sort of thing, Listen to youo Dead to Me wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you.
[34:25]
Simon Jack
Bye.

Summary6 min read

Newscast (BBC News)

Episode: Is The World Cup For Sale?

Release Date: July 31, 2026
Host: Adam Fleming
Guests: Simon Jack (BBC Business Editor), Jane Dougal (BBC Sports News Presenter), Laura McAllister (UEFA Vice President), Jeremy Bowen (BBC International Editor)

Episode Overview

This Newscast episode focuses on explosive allegations and controversial proposals surrounding FIFA and the future of the World Cup. The episode dives into FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s plan to sell stakes in major international football events to private investors—a move that has provoked outrage from national football federations and could fundamentally reshape the nature of international football. The first half is a detailed breakdown of the FIFA vote saga, power politics, and potential impacts on the game, while the latter part explores seismic new developments regarding Gaza and Middle East peace efforts.

1. FIFA’s Controversial Power Play: Selling the World Cup? (00:56–18:45)

The Plan: Privatizing Football’s Crown Jewels

Adam Fleming introduces the story: FIFA president Gianni Infantino has proposed a secretly developed plan to create a new company to oversee international events (e.g., World Cups), then sell stakes to private investors.
Such privatization would require majority approval (106+ votes) from FIFA’s 211 national federations.
This triggered uproar, notably from UEFA, which threatened to boycott FIFA events, a rare display of unity in global football politics.

Context: Europe vs. FIFA (03:12–04:36)

Jane Dougal: UEFA called an emergency meeting. All 55 members voted unanimously to reject the plan, calling FIFA “irresponsible” and accusing them of an "abdication of duty as custodian of world football":

"They said, the World Cup’s not for sale. They called FIFA irresponsible and said it was indefensible that a proposal of such significance for football was conceived in secret." — Jane Dougal (03:23)
Laura McAllister (audio from Newsnight, 04:52):

“I'm pleased to say that every federation, small, medium and large, backed the position that UEFA's leadership has taken this week. It was emotional, but I think there was a real sense of purpose." (04:54)

The Mechanics: Money as Motivation (06:55–08:22)

Jane Dougal: FIFA proposed direct financial incentives—$30M per federation—if they back the proposal, leading some to call it “a bribe."
Smaller nations could be swayed, as the sum represents a significant proportion of their GDP (e.g., for Montserrat).
Simon Jack:

“They’re trying to dangle, you know, it's both a carrot and a stick and a lot of people call it a bribe... that's peanuts to UEFA and the FA, but if you are Montserrat... this is about 40% of their GDP." (07:49)

Why Is FIFA Doing This? (07:02–09:05)

FIFA argues it is under-monetizing fans compared to leagues like the Premier League or NFL (currently $1 per fan per year vs. NFL’s $53).
FIFA wants to emulate the commercial expertise of sports like Formula 1 and PGA Golf.
Infantino’s pitch is widely seen as mishandled, with added controversy due to the potential involvement of figures connected to Donald Trump.

The Political Numbers Game (11:02–12:45)

With UEFA, AFC, and CONCACAF all opposing, more than 136 federations could reject the plan, likely dooming it.
Jane Dougal:

“If that does happen, then there will be 136 associations that could potentially vote against these plans, in which case they wouldn't happen." (12:30)

Deadline and Infantino’s Future (12:52–13:48)

A vote is set for September 19. The UK Prime Minister publicly denounced Infantino, adding political pressure.
FIFA still made record profits in recent years ($15B from the latest World Cup alone).

History Repeats? (14:06–15:29)

The hosts compare this proposal to the failed European Super League.
Adam Fleming recalls:

"...that morning, the second I woke up, I think Downing street called me to tell me how vehemently they were opposing the Super League plan. Hand tells you about the political salience of messing with football." (14:42)

Philosophical Questions: Ownership and the Soul of Football (15:33–17:15)

Adam Fleming poses: Why is it okay for private investors to own clubs but not FIFA events?
Jane Dougal responds:

“Football doesn’t belong to anybody, it belongs to everybody. And to sell it off in the manner that Infantino is proposing is to dismantle the very soul of something that people feel so passionately about.” (15:54)
Possible successor to Infantino: Nasser Al Khelaifi (President of PSG, well-respected after stabilizing European football post-Super League).

US Appetite & Capitalism Culture (17:16–18:37)

Simon Jack:

“This may be obvious to others, but reinforced to me the fact that US appetite for our national game—they want in, all in... 13 of 20 Premier League clubs are majority owned by Americans.” (17:16)
The show closes the segment pondering the differences between American and British capitalism, especially regarding sports ownership models.

2. MEMORABLE QUOTES & MOMENTS (with Timestamps)

Jane Dougal on UEFA’s stance:

“The World Cup’s not for sale. They called FIFA irresponsible... not merely a profound failure of leadership, but an abdication of FIFA’s duty as the custodian of world football.” (03:23)
Laura McAllister on UEFA’s consensus:

“It was emotional, but I think there was a real sense of purpose... a clear line in the sand.” (04:54)
Simon Jack on FIFA’s ‘bribe’ tactic:

“If you are Montserrat... this is about 40% of their GDP.” (08:16)
Jane Dougal on football’s soul:

“Football doesn’t belong to anybody, it belongs to everybody. And to sell it off in the manner that Infantino is proposing is to dismantle the very soul of something that people feel so passionately about.” (15:54)
Simon Jack on American ownership:

“US appetite for our national game—they want in, all in.” (17:16)

3. Gaza: Possible End to Hamas’ Armed Struggle (18:55–30:03)

Summary of Developments

Adam Fleming reports Hamas appears to have agreed to hand over weapons, marking the potential end of their armed struggle in exchange for Israel’s potential withdrawal from Gaza.
Jeremy Bowen explains the protracted negotiation involving multiple international parties (Egypt, Turkey, Qatar).
The deal hinges on Hamas’ disarmament and a new administrative structure for Gaza—though specifics are vague.

Key Points

Suffering and collapse of civil order in Gaza among drivers for Hamas agreeing.
Disarmament’s precedent: comparisons with Northern Ireland’s peace process, emphasizing the need for verifiable, staged implementation.
Trusted third-party mediators are still contentious; Israel and Palestinians distrust the Americans, turning toward regional mediators.
Political pressure on Israeli PM Netanyahu and Donald Trump to resolve the conflict for electoral reasons.
The “Board of Peace” concept remains controversial for its perceived neocolonialism but would show US leverage if successful.

Notable Quotes

Jeremy Bowen:

“The most significant single point is that for the first time Hamas has agreed to disarm. And that is new.” (23:03) “[Disarmament] has to be very verifiable. So we don't know what that detail is yet.” (24:49) “The idea of a Board of Peace... was roundly condemned as a neocolonialist idea. But the Americans do have leverage.” (28:19)

4. Timestamps for Key Segments

00:56 – Introduction to FIFA controversy
03:12 – Jane Dougal’s overview of UEFA backlash
04:52 – Laura McAllister (UEFA VP) audio from Newsnight
06:55 – FIFA’s financial incentives explained
07:02–09:19 – Simon Jack breaks down FIFA’s comparisons and business plan
11:21 – Vote counting and political maneuvering
12:52 – Vote deadline (September 19) and UK PM intervention
14:06 – Super League lessons & political pressure
15:33 – Philosophical debate on ownership of football
17:16 – Growing US involvement in football
18:55 – Pivot to Gaza peace developments
23:03 – The significance of Hamas agreeing to disarm
24:49 – Challenge of “verifiable” disarmament
28:19 – Board of Peace idea and US leverage

5. Episode Takeaways

FIFA’s plan to sell World Cup stakes has provoked unprecedented unity among football federations, with strong resistance from UEFA, AFC, and CONCACAF.
The proposal offers large financial incentives, but is viewed by many as a threat to the “soul of football.”
Politics, power, and transatlantic attitudes toward sports ownership underpin the debate.
In global affairs, major new steps towards peace in Gaza raise hope—pending verification, implementation specifics, and critical elections in Israel and the US.

For deeper understanding of global football’s governance, geopolitics in sport, and the evolving legacy of FIFA, this episode is essential listening.

Loading summary

Transcript99 lines

[00:00]
Jeremy Bowen
This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.
[00:04]
Adam Fleming
Hello. We are recording this episode of Newscast on Friday afternoon. And normally at this point we'd be looking back at the big events in British politics. This week, a bit of a retrospective, but there's so many huge news stories happening elsewhere, we've decided to do some of them instead. So in the second half you will hear about a huge development in Gaza, and in the first half you'll hear about an absolutely enormous visible from space bus stop, the world of international football that will have ramifications even if you're not even remotely interested in football. So that is what's coming up in
[00:36]
Laura McAllister
this episode of Newscast, Newscast, Newscast from the BBC.
[00:40]
Simon Jack
Humanity's next great voyage begins.
[00:42]
Adam Fleming
You know, I like my buses, I'll
[00:44]
Jeremy Bowen
come on to them. I see that he was, I guess, the mayor of a town.
[00:47]
Adam Fleming
O la la.
[00:47]
Simon Jack
Thinking about it like a panto helped.
[00:50]
Jane Dougal
Do we play music now or what do we do?
[00:51]
Adam Fleming
And what will you do?
[00:53]
Jane Dougal
Stare at a wall?
[00:56]
Adam Fleming
Hello, it's Adam in the newscast studio. And first of all, we're going to talk about this huge bust up around international football. And it goes like this. A few days ago, Gianni Infantino, who's the boss of FIFA, football's world governing body, unveiled this hitherto secret plan to create a new subsidiary company which would oversee FIFA's international events like World Cups, men's and women's and others, and allow private investors to buy a stake in that, which means they could make money out of it. Now, this plan would have to be approved by a majority of the national federations who comprise the FIFA membership. And this has caused uproar amongst lots of the federations. So, for example, On Thursday night, UEFA, which represents the 55 European federations, said, no way are we going along with this. And if it happens, we will boycott any future FIFA events like the World Cup. And throughout Friday, we've seen more and more federations doing the same things, which means that the future of Gianni Infantino, a quite controversial person in world football anyway, is starting to look a little bit hazy. So it is an interesting story where there is a complete collision between football, money, power, politics, America, the rest of the world, and also just these huge spectacles that you can buy into whether you like football or not, or in this case, actually buy into if you're a rich investor. So to help us understand what's going on, we're joined in the Newscast studio by BBC business editor, Simon Jack. Hi, Simon.
[02:33]
Simon Jack
Hello, Adam.
[02:33]
Adam Fleming
And you come bearing a PowerPoint presentation.
[02:36]
Simon Jack
I have got hold of the PowerPoint presentation that was sent by FIFA to the 211 member organizations, mapping out why they're trying to do this plan and what they'll get out of it and why it's a good idea.
[02:51]
Adam Fleming
And we will dig into those numbers in that presentation in a second. But we're also joined by BBC Sports News presenter Jane Dougal, who's on the line. Hello, Jane.
[02:58]
Jane Dougal
Hello, Adam. Hello, Simon.
[03:00]
Jeremy Bowen
Hello.
[03:00]
Adam Fleming
So, before Simon does the numbers and gives us a little PowerPoint presentation with no clicker, Jane, can you just give us the big picture about what the FIFA boss, Gianni Infantino is actually trying to achieve here and then we can do the numbers and the politics.
[03:13]
Jane Dougal
Yeah. So this has been a seismic moment in football. We knew that UEFA, the European branch, as it were, of world football, had been critical of FIFA's handling of this proposal that they have to sell off stakes in FIFA's major events to private investors. They had said that FIFA was using the sport to enrich themselves and their friends. So UEFA called an emergency meeting of all 55 of its members. We knew that they were going to be discussing the possibility of boycotting future World Cups and future FIFA tournaments in protest of these proposals. But we did not imagine that they would all vote unanimously in favour of that and that the statement that they would issue would be so strong. They said, the World Cup's not for sale. They called FIFA irresponsible and said it was indefensible that a proposal of such significance for football was conceived in secret. This is not merely a profound failure of leadership, but an abdication of FIFA's duty as the custodian of world football. Really, really strong sentiments. And then following that, other organizations, other confederations, have joined forces with UEFA. It's quite strange because we're not used to this sort of unity in football in their distaste of what FIFA president Gianni Infantino is proposing.
[04:37]
Adam Fleming
And as chance would have it, I was presenting Newsnight on Thursday night. So I spoke to Laura McAllister, who's a UEFA vice president. She'd been at this emergency meeting and she was very vocal on Newsnight about how they all fel. So here's a little sample of our conversation.
[04:52]
Laura McAllister
Lots of people felt that for some of the smaller federations, the carrot of a big cash injection would be significant. But I'm pleased to say that every federation, small, medium and large, backed the position that UEFA's leadership has taken this week. And therefore, it was very, very easy to reach consensus. It was you know, it was emotional, but I think there was a real sense of purpose. There was. And I felt that this was a very clear line in the sand in terms of the politics and the organization of football. And it was incumbent on us, as probably the most powerful confederation in Europe, to stand up and be counted and come up with a threat, the boycott threat, that is commensurate with the damage that such a proposal would do to our game.
[05:41]
Adam Fleming
And so, Jane, just to be clear, in a future universe where these plans went through, which is actually looking quite unlikely now, that would mean that you could have a World cup with no European countries in it because UEFA was boycotting it because they didn't like this. This plan. Yes, yeah.
[05:58]
Jane Dougal
That was what they were threatening to do. That's what they are threatening to do if these proposals go through. And the reason why they're threatening to do it is because they feel that the soul of football has been sucked out of it, out of this whole competition. These controversial plans, if I just sort of talk you through them as well, they would include the sale of FIFA's commercial rights to external investors, which would include broadcasting, sponsorship, ticketing and licensing, and possibly the delivery of its tournaments. But not only did FIFA come up with this plan without consulting any of the confederations, they also sent a letter to all 211 members saying to them that if they were to agree to the plan, then they would each receive 30 million pounds, which for some smaller nations would be a huge amount, which could be game changing, really. So some people are describing it as something of a bribe.
[06:55]
Adam Fleming
So, Simon, let's dive into the presentation. You've got there so many interesting aspects to how FIFA wants this to work and why they might be doing it.
[07:02]
Simon Jack
So, bottom line, it is about money. And FIFA feels that they are not making enough out of their valuable events, which include not only just the World cup, which is every four years, but also the World Club Championship, where basically the winners of the Champions League play the Copa America and South America to crown the best club in the world. And they've got this very interesting stat here. They're saying that the amount that FIFA makes per year per fan on average is $1. And they compare that to the Premier League, for example, which is 2.6 dollars per fan per year, and to the NFL, American Football, which gets nearly 53 dollars per fan per year. So they're saying the NFL is making 50 times per fan per year what we're making. We want a bit of that. We want to be a bit more like that. Now, I would say that that's a bit of a false comparison because you've got an event which doesn't happen very often and you're talking about something which happens every week in the US and every week in the Premier League, but nevertheless, that they're trying to say, and as Jane rightly says, they're trying to dangle, you know, it's both a carrot and a stick and a lot of people call it a bribe. Sign up to this will give you 15 million quid immediately or by the end of the year, and another 15 million when and if this deal goes through. And, you know, that's peanuts to, you know, UEFA and at the FA and what have you.
[08:22]
Adam Fleming
Because they're wealthy.
[08:23]
Simon Jack
Because they're wealthy. But if you are Montserrat or you're Andorra, you know, Cap Verd, the unlikely heroes of the World cup recently, then something like Montserrat, this is about 40% of their entire GDP. And so I think that what they thought is that although the other umbrella organizations might get a bit uppity about this, and boy, did they, that they could do almost like a hostile takeover, take it directly to the shareholders, if you like, and say, well, you know, do you want it or not?
[08:52]
Adam Fleming
And leverage the smaller countries against the richer ones.
[08:55]
Simon Jack
Correct. Which is a little bit like the International Olympic Committee used to work in the sense that they would. They would try and, you know, dangle something in front of the smaller countries because the sheer number of them would win the day.
[09:06]
Adam Fleming
And, Simon, in that presentation, do the consultants and the people involved in doing this deal and making this presentation, do they explain how the World cup and the FIFA events would change to make it go from $1 per fan to something more like $50 per fan?
[09:20]
Simon Jack
Well, they say they would different. They would look at increasing the number of teams in the World Cup. We already had a big increase, so they might take it up to 64 and they might make some changes. So you had phases of the World Club Championship, so there'd be more stuff going on. But there was a feeling that they, you know, you remember the hull about ticket prices and all that kind of stuff that went on. Hospitality and there's. There's all sorts of licensing partners and you've got your credit card partner and all this kind of stuff all adds up. They think they can squeeze a bit more. But what they're looking for, the reason they wanted to bring private investors, is they think we need some people who've got the commercial now to try and maximize value, who know this stuff better than we do. Now, in their defense, what they say is that we're not the only sport who does this. PGA Golf does this very good example is Formula One. And there's a fear, I think a lot of people thought that Gianni Infantino would become like the Bernie Eccleston of football with almost total control over the commercial rights. And I have to say that Infantino could not have possibly prepared the pitch worse for this idea. First of all, there was the peace prize to Donald Trump. Then there was the overturning of the red card at Donald Trump's bequest for the American striker. For the American striker. And then the lead partner or the lead private investor, the cornerstone investor in this is a company run by Donald Trump's son in law's brother. So you put all that together and Infantino's widespread unpopularity. And I think that they basically could not have sold this idea worse if they tried.
[10:50]
Adam Fleming
And Jane, just as we were getting ready to record this episode of newscast, we checked to see if there's a name for your son in law's brother in kind of genealogy. And it's like your co. Son in law. Who knew?
[11:02]
Simon Jack
There we go.
[11:03]
Adam Fleming
Yes. Anyway, so, Jane, so that's the numbers and that's the business plan. Where have we got to with the politics then? So when I was doing Newsnight last night, UEFA had said, no way we're doing this. We will boycott future events if it goes ahead. UEFA is 55 members of FIFA and there's 211.
[11:21]
Simon Jack
Yeah.
[11:22]
Adam Fleming
And you would need half of the 211 for this to go ahead. What's, what's the tally now?
[11:27]
Jane Dougal
So Infantino needs a majority of 106 to get his proposal through the Asian Football Confederation, who earlier today said that they would join the other two confederations. They've got 47 members, but 46 of them are FIFA members. And then CONCACAF, which is central America, North America and the Caribbean, they have 41 members, but 35 of them have a vote. They're FIFA members. So that adds up to 136 associations of three confederations. Now, this is just guesswork at the moment because you have to assume that they will all toe the line and vote the way that their confederation tells them to. So three confederations, UEFA, CONCACAF and the Asian Federation, they have all said, we don't want these proposals. But then there's each individual country within it that you would hope would toe the line and go along with what their confederation is asking. And if that does happen, then there will be 136 associations that could potentially vote against these plans, in which case they wouldn't happen. Now, if that's the case and the proposal is dead in the water, the question then remains, what is the future for Gianni Infantino? Can he continue?
[12:46]
Adam Fleming
I also was just going to ask, will there be a vote or will this be like Keir Starmer's welfare reforms and they pool them to avoid the embarrassment of losing?
[12:53]
Jane Dougal
No, there is actually a deadline. So Infantino sent a letter to all 211 member associations telling them that they had until the 19th of September to agree to this deal or not. And it's a straight majority, as we mentioned, whether it goes through or not. So they can vote to say yes or no. So we will know by the 19th of September whether it's going to happen or not.
[13:15]
Simon Jack
And also we just had the Prime Minister this afternoon weighed in saying Gianni Infantino is not the right person to lead FIFA. So it's becoming, you know, it's getting to the highest echelons of or whatever because, you know, football is the most popular game in the world, FIFA. Just saying we could be making more money out of it. UEFA and others, you know, it's not like FIFA's short of money. They made about 12, probably have made $12 billion. So 10 billion pounds, 9 billion in the last four years, which is double the previous four year cycle.
[13:44]
Jane Dougal
It was $15 billion they made from the World cup this summer.
[13:47]
Simon Jack
That's an up to date number. Thank you.
[13:49]
Adam Fleming
Although I would just say thinking about Andy Brown, easier for him to complain about Gianni Infantino and basically insinuate he should be replaced than to say, I don't know, complain about Donald Trump and call for him to be replaced. Because the stakes are very different there. So, Simon, where do you think this is going then? So listening to what Jane was saying.
[14:07]
Simon Jack
Yeah. My instinct is, I think that FIFA made a miscalculation here. They actually thought that they could reach beyond the umbrella organizations, the UEFA and concacafs, and appeal directly to the smaller nations. And it does look at the moment like those smaller nations are falling into line behind their umbrella organizations. This smacks to me very much of. You may remember a ago, there was an attempt to create a European Super League and funnily enough, the bankers who were involved in that, JP Morgan are also involved in this project. They've got a big sports business, which
[14:38]
Adam Fleming
I can take you back to that because that was when I was the chief political correspondent doing Henry's job, doing the news in the morning. And normally most mornings I would have to call Downing street at about quarter past six to get the latest lines from them about what the government thought about issue X or issue Y or issue Z. That morning, the second I woke up, I think Downing street called me to tell me how vehemently they were opposing the Super League plan. Hands, which tells you about the political salience of messing with football.
[15:03]
Simon Jack
There's also this kind of, you know, competitive stuff here. You know, UEFA, they're saying they're selling football. Now FIFA would say we were only going to sell a minority state. We're just going to bring in clever money people, try and extract a bit more money, which we would put in, by the way, into more resources, more money for local federations, more coaches, all this kind of good stuff. But, you know, I, I can imagine the UEFA sort of saying, listen, if anyone's going to gouge more money out of football, it'll be us.
[15:29]
Adam Fleming
Thanks very much.
[15:30]
Simon Jack
Not you guys. So they don't like being sort usurped onto their territory.
[15:34]
Adam Fleming
Jane Simon knows I always like to end on a philosophical note just to set set our friends of the podcast, a big brain teaser before they go. Here's the one for you. Why is it okay for big private investors to own football clubs in the UK, but not for there to be some investment in, in events for FIFA like the World Cup?
[15:55]
Jane Dougal
Because a lot of fans would argue that football doesn't belong to anybody, that it belongs to everybody. And to sell it off in the manner that Gianni Infantino is proposing is to dismantle the very soul of something that people feel so passionately about, that it's not just a hobby, it's a way of life. And to tinker with that is very dangerous. As we saw, as you mentioned, with the proposal for the European Super League in 2021 that lasted for 48 hours before the outrage of the fans dismantled it very quickly. And actually it's very interesting that you brought that up because Gianni Infantino has to restand for his position next March. At the moment he's unopposed. But the name that is coming up again and again is a man called Nasser Al Khelaifi. He is president of Paris Saint Germain. But at the time of the Super League collapsing, the European Super League collapsing, he took over as chairman of the European Clubs association and basically smoothed everything over. He's very well respected, he's a Qatari and he's a very powerful man in football. So he is one of the logical supposed successors to Gianni Infantino. So watch this space.
[17:16]
Adam Fleming
So interesting.
[17:16]
Simon Jack
Just one observation I'd make about this. It's reinforced to me, this may be obvious to others, but reinforced to me the fact that US appetite for our national game, you know, they want in, all in. In fact, I think something like 13 of the 20 Premier League clubs are majority owned by Americans. So, you know, I blame Ted Lasso for this
[17:43]
Adam Fleming
Apple TV show about.
[17:44]
Simon Jack
And welcome to Wrexham, where of course Ryan Reynolds.
[17:48]
Adam Fleming
Basically two TV shows that gave Americans a greater appetite for football.
[17:51]
Simon Jack
Greater appetite. They, they saw it as a really, you know, whether a quaint or an attractive or financially attractive property and they want it in. And so the American ownership of, you know, of, of UK football and football generally has never been higher.
[18:05]
Adam Fleming
Isn't it interesting? And this is my last philosophical point, let's see where this goes. That often we're told, oh, Europeans look at the UK and say, oh, you've got such an Anglo Saxon model of capitalism where everything's up for sale. And then us Brits go, no, no, we're a mixture of European and American. We're just got our own British kind of recipe of the different elements. And then you look at what happens when Americans get involved in something like football as they soccer and you realize actually American capitalism is different from British capitalism, which may indeed be different from what they have on the continent.
[18:35]
Simon Jack
Yeah, maybe. Yeah, maybe.
[18:37]
Adam Fleming
There we go. Ringing endorsement. My theory. Simon, thank you very much.
[18:41]
Simon Jack
Thank you, Adam and Jane, good to
[18:43]
Adam Fleming
catch up with you too.
[18:44]
Jane Dougal
And you, Adam.
[18:45]
Simon Jack
See you, Jane.
[18:46]
Jane Dougal
Bye.
[18:55]
Adam Fleming
Now, as promised, there have been big developments in Gaza, namely that Hamas appear to have signed up to a deal that involves them handing over their weapons, which would be effectively the end of their armed struggle against Israel. And it also sounds like Israel might potentially have agreed to withdraw from Gaza as well. So if all that happens, that would be a huge moment for the Middle East. And the person who's been monitoring these developments for a long time, and especially Today, is the BBC's international editor, Jeremy Bowen, who's on the line. Hi, Jeremy.
[19:29]
Jeremy Bowen
Hey, how are you, Adam?
[19:30]
Adam Fleming
Good, thank you. Good to catch up. So in terms of the timeline, the very long, slightly torturous timeline about Gaza, I mean, put these events today into context.
[19:43]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, this did not happen overnight. There has been a process building in terms of. Well, first of all, if you think back to October of last year, that's when they had the ceasefire, that's when there were a couple of different Donald Trump and his people driven agreements, one of which he hailed as the greatest thing to have happened in the Middle east in 3,000 years. And essentially there were various points about the way that Gaza would be dealt with in the future in those deals and over a protracted period of negotiations which involved. There's a UN envoy as well as that. The Turks have been very active, the Egyptians have been particularly active because the talk's been held in Cairo, not least a lot of them. And so Hamas have also, our information, have moved towards being more open to accept things. And that is because there's been precious little or no reconstruction. People are in a terrible state there. They're also have somewhat lost control I think, such as they had, of law and order because there are these Israeli sponsored militias who roam around at times. So essentially they didn't have that many choices and they decided in the end to sign up to this deal which actually for them it has a number of positives. First of all, it might allow some reconstruction to happen. Second of all, this is assuming it goes ahead, of course, and that is a massive if which we'll talk about. Obviously there's also the fact that. What is the other.
[21:35]
Adam Fleming
Well, what is it that we think Hamas have signed up to?
[21:41]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, there have been two contentious points that they'd signed up to. Everything else in terms of things like a new form of governance in the territory, a new kind of technocratic Palestinian administration, the idea that there would be some other measures taken which would enable, I mean, to be honest, none of it. If you go back through the original documents, there's no detail there. So there's a lot that needs to be, to be worked out. But there were two outstanding points, one of which was on disarmament. And that is the most important thing because that's what stopped any kind of diplomatic progress. And the other one was essentially about things to do with governance with the people who are in various roles that they employ at the moment. I'm talking about civil servants as well, who keep ministries going, such as there are these days. The thing is that, that the 30% or so that they control is, is barely governed in the way that, you know, you can no longer say that this is a mini state led as you might have been able to before. You certainly can't now. Most people are intense for goodness sake and dependent on aid. So those were the two outstanding points. And the most significant single point is that for the first time Hamas has agreed to disarm. And that is new.
[23:06]
Adam Fleming
And Jeremy, I'm sure you've seen lots of examples around the world of groups saying they will hand over their weapons. How do we think this might work in this case?
[23:14]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, of course, these things are all different. And in some cases, groups get absorbed into the armed forces of a state. Well, there is no functioning Palestinian state. Many countries recognize the existence of one, but there's no functioning state. So it's not that. One very good example was in Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement, when there were protracted negotiations to, and I think the phrase was to put the IRA weapons beyond use. And that required a huge amount of very, very detailed stuff. And the thing about the agreement that Donald Trump, surprise, surprise, has announced is there's, there's very little detail about how it's actually going to work, because it's not just about weapons, it's about their tunnel network, revealing where the tunnels are, where the entrances are, making it all public, all that sort of thing. But in Northern Ireland, it was crucial to the completion of that whole peace process. It was a vital stage in it. And equally, this is a vital stage. It's, it's invidious to compare the two. I'm always very reluctant to compare the situation and the troubles in Northern Ireland with the Israeli Palestinian conflict. There are so many things that are different, but on this, I mean, what we can learn from it is these processes require detailed diplomacy and staff work, because let's assume there's no trust between parties who've been trying to kill each other. There also has to be. It has to be very verifiable. So we don't know that detail is yet.
[24:57]
Adam Fleming
And also it usually needs a trusted third party. And Israel tends to never trust any third parties.
[25:03]
Jeremy Bowen
No. And, and the, the third party the Israelis sometimes have trusted is the Americans. Apart from the fact they're having a rift with them at the moment, the, the Palestinians don't trust them. So other countries are going to be very much involved. Countries which have been really involved in this process from the very outset of these ceasefire talks have been, particularly Turkey, Egypt and Qatar. And they have, all three countries have pretty good relations with Donald Trump. They have been. Palestinians have been persuaded to trust them to a degree. The Israelis don't trust them. But the thing is, at the moment, Mr. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, is under double pressure. One set of pressures comes from the fact he faces an election in October, a general election. And in that election, if his opponents, who are all who the main ones, are pretty right wing, if they were to say, well, you just crumbled to Hamas, you've just given in to them, you've given them a sweetheart deal that's not going to win, and that's not going to win him votes. But equally, Donald Trump, at least his Republican Party, faces elections in November, the midterms in America, and he's at the moment engaged in this, well, the makings of a forever war that he swore he'd never get America involved in again with Iran. And he needs some wins. So he wants this thing to work. So he's putting pressure on Netanyahu. So he's on one side, he's got his base who'll be very unhappy about this, and his political opponents. On the other hand, there's Donald Trump saying, right, then, come on, do this. You have to do it. I have leverage over you. We keep you going. We are now your only friend left in the world. Not quite true, but that's what several American officials have been saying. And so, yeah, so I think that what Netanyahu will do is probably play for time, time between now and the election. He's pretty good at that.
[27:12]
Adam Fleming
And also, the Israelis, are they not obligated under this deal to withdraw entirely from Gaza or even withdraw partially?
[27:18]
Jeremy Bowen
Well, that is the central bargain in this. And if it was simply a deal to Hamas gives up their weapons, then Israelis would be very suspicious because they don't trust Hamas because of the killings on the 7th of October and other things. But they'd say, all right, let's see how it goes. But, but it's a quid pro quo, it's a tit for tat. So the deal, the bargain at the center of all of this is that Hamas gives up its weapons and Israel pulls out. And that was in the original deal as well, the Trump deal. The Israelis are saying, well, we might think about it if we are convinced you've given up all your weapons. And Hamas essentially at the moment saying, well, if you don't start withdrawing, we're not giving up any weapons.
[27:58]
Adam Fleming
And, Jeremy, we started this conversation by talking about kind of the torturous process that got us here and the two steps forward, one step back, sometimes three steps back, the lack of detail, but also still some progress at the same time. I mean, can we say that Donald Trump's quite strange idea or innovative idea or novel idea of the Board of Peace might have worked here?
[28:20]
Jeremy Bowen
I think it's a bit too early to say that the idea of a Board of Peace overseeing everything was roundly condemned as a neocolonialist idea. How come is it that a bunch of mostly white Americans and Europeans are going to tell these people how to live their lives. That was the central message that people were coming out with. I think this means, however, that the Americans do have leverage and when they get involved, things can happen. And that has always been the case because they're a very powerful and influential country, not least with the Israelis, if they care to use the leverage. So Donald Trump, I mean, he always claims credit for anything that works well and he tends to blame everybody else if it doesn't work out. But certainly on this occasion, if this goes through, and there are many reasons why I might not, if it goes through, then, yes, I think he'd be quite justified in patting himself on his back for his contribution.
[29:19]
Adam Fleming
Jeremy, thank you so much for bringing us up to date. I can now repay the favour with some news from Westminster that has broken in the last 30 seconds while we were talking. Do you want to hear it?
[29:27]
Jeremy Bowen
It go on.
[29:28]
Adam Fleming
We've not got much choice really, but thank you for playing along. John Healey, the Chancellor has confirmed his first budget will be on Wednesday 28th October. He's posted a video message on social media and he says this will be a budget that moves money and power out of Westminster and into every postcode around Britain. It will be built on fiscal discipline, it will meet our fiscal rules, it'll give businesses and families some of the stability they need to plan for the future. Now, let's get on with the job.
[29:54]
Jeremy Bowen
Week of the Israeli elections as well. So maybe Mr. Netanyahu won't be looking too closely at what Mr. Healey's saying.
[29:59]
Adam Fleming
Maybe not. We will do our best on newscast to look at both. But Jeremy, thank you very much.
[30:04]
Jeremy Bowen
Yes, thanks, Adam.
[30:05]
Adam Fleming
And according to my running spreadsheet, because I'm trying to run 500km in Andy Burnham's first 100 days, alongside all the challenges you're trying to achieve, shows that that will be Andy Burnham's 101st day. So John Healy's challenge in Andy Burnham's first hundred days is to come up with a budget that means they can meet the ambitions of the government while not breaking the Government's fiscal rules that they inherited. Interesting.
[30:40]
DQ Advertiser
Score big with the DQ$7 meal deal. Crispy chicken strips, hot fries, a refreshing drink and a tasty side, all for just seven bucks. It's so much delicious food, you'll bring home the win every time and keep on winning when you upgrade to a small Blizzard treat for just $2. More like the limited time Biscoff Cookie blizzard treat. The seven dollar meal deal with a $2 small Blizzard upgrade for the win. DQ Happy tastes good. Participation may vary.
[31:12]
Greg Jenner
Hello, Greg Jenner here. I'm the host of youf're Dead To Me, the BBC comedy show that takes history seriously. Every episode, I pair up a top historian with a fantastic comedian and we have a lovely, funny, fascinating chat about a different subject from world history. And in this new series, we're beginning with an epic voyage through the story of Homer, the Iliad and the Odyssey. And that's with Kael Smith Byno joining us. And then we'll be learning about Francis Galton and the racist, discredited pseudoscience of eugenics with Desiree Burch. We'll meet many medieval saints in their bone bones boxes with Rachel Parrott. So if that sounds like your sort of thing, listen to your dead to me wherever you get your podcast. Thank you.
[31:50]
Simon Jack
Bye.
[31:56]
Adam Fleming
Coming your way next is an old newscast about the 2005 Tory leadership contest that will be in your feeds this weekend. But before that, I promised you we were going to jump on the bandwagon of Moosecast, where our colleagues on local radio had a webcam on a herd of cows as they were going to be milked. And we've been creating a newsc rural soundscape with your sounds. We're going to do all in a oner. And so you're now going to hear Craig from Glossip and the brook next to his house, Dan, who is next to a lake, Harvey and Kieran who are on a farm that farms both pigs and asparagus, and Stephen, who sent us two. The first is a beach in the Falkland Islands and the second is some geese being disturbed as he walked past them in the dark. These are your newscast rural sounds to sound you into the weekend. Newscast.
[33:17]
Simon Jack
Newscast from the BBC.
[33:19]
Adam Fleming
You've come to the end of newscast.
[33:21]
Simon Jack
Some people, and you know who I
[33:22]
Adam Fleming
mean, might say you ooze stamina.
[33:24]
Simon Jack
Can I encourage you to subscribe on BBC Sounds?
[33:27]
Adam Fleming
And you can get in touch with us anytime.
[33:29]
Simon Jack
Email us@newscastbc.co.uk you you can WhatsApp us on 033-01-2390.
[33:46]
Greg Jenner
Hello, Greg Jenner here. I'm the host of youf're Dead To Me, the BBC comedy show that takes history seriously. Every episode I pair up a top historian with a fantastic comedian and we have a lovely, funny, fascinating chat about a different subject from world history. And in this new series, we're beginning with an epic voyage through the story of Homer, the Iliad and the Odyssey. And that's with Kyle Smith Byno joining us. And then we'll be learning about Francis Galton and the racist, discredited pseudoscience of eugenics with Desiree Birch. We'll meet many medieval saints in their bone boxes with Rachel Parrott. So if that sounds like your sort of thing, Listen to youo Dead to Me wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you.
[34:25]
Simon Jack
Bye.