Scotland
in the
heat
Quintin Jardine
I am a man of few real gripes, I believe, but I have a real aversion to the ‘Quickquid’ type ads that are becoming more and more prevalent on our commercial telly.
I accept that a short-term loan facility that is easier to arrange than a conventional bank overdraft can be attractive to folk who are cash-strapped, or whose employers are casual about wage deadlines. (Hearts footballers come to mind.) However my dislike of the burgeoning consumer finance industry comes from my perverse insistence on reading the small print in the ads, easy to do if you know how to freeze frame. When I do that, I discover that these payday loans carry interest that can run up to an APR of 4,000%. On top of that most of them seem to involve an arrangement fee.
In other words if you borrow, say, £500 to tide you over till payday, you don’t actually get £500, but that amount less the company’s charge…and that, you can bet, will be also subject to the accruing interest. There are dozens of these operators around, throwing very expensive money at people who are either under too much pressure to consider the implications, or who are simply soft touches for the brash TV commercials, populated by flash Wonga geezers and smiling women with dead eyes.
I am advised that the Citizens’ Advice Bureau has its eye on the situation, and that it has asked the government to tighten regulation of a business that is now turning over £2bn annually, according to estimates.
To date the consumer minister’s response has been that such a step could push people towards illegal moneylenders. This is the same minister whose government is presiding over a situation that has allowed the Santander bank, and no doubt others, to impose daily overdraft charges that can run, according to a report I read recently, to the equivalent of an APR of 800,000%.
I suggest to Dave and Nick that rather than continuing to tolerate such Shylockian usury, they take a serious look at raising the tax threshold by 50%, so that lower earners can hang on to enough of their wages to see them through the month, in the face of uncontrolled or weakly regulated rip-offs like escalating energy bills and transport costs.
The higher earners, who will also benefit, will spend the extra few quid in their pockets on items that are VAT-able at 20%, the same level as the basic rate of tax, or even better spend it on bigger revenue earners, such as petrol, alcohol and tobacco, thereby providing a useful stimulus to the economy.
Until it begins to think slightly out of the political box, the ruling Westminster junta will continue to be seen as the friend of rapacious pseudo-banks, utility and petrol companies, etc, and by association as the enemy of the people it exists to serve.
In my eyes, the booming and inherently evil consumer finance industry which the coalition chooses to defend is yet another symptom of a diseased society, alongside inner city riots, irresponsible strikes, and rampant political correctness that all too often overrides common sense.
It might be possible
for the fans to take
over Rangers
Alasdair McKillop and Graham Walker
The developments that have placed Rangers Football Club in its current perilous situation have been excruciatingly detailed across the media in recent days and it would be somewhat redundant to do so again here. However, some of the major developments of the past couple of days should be outlined in order to provide context.
On Monday, the club filed papers at the Court of Session in Edinburgh announcing its intention to enter administration. Craig Whyte, the Rangers chairman, stated that the club had 10 days to try and negotiate a settlement with creditors and HM Revenue and Customs, and that administration was not yet inevitable. Reading a statement outside Ibrox stadium, he was heckled by supporters.
Yesterday, HMRC petitioned the Court of Session to have its own administrators appointed and this forced Whyte to appoint the firm of Duff and Phelps. The club entered administration shortly before 3pm. Administration appears, to the average fan, to be a process fraught with uncertainty and marked by distinctly alien terms like Company Voluntary Agreement (CVA). This is to say nothing of the damage done to Rangers as a football institution now suffering the iniquity of a 10-point deduction from the Scottish Premier League. Liquidation, however unpalatable, is now a tangible possibility.
There might be more bad news to come. The club awaits the outcome of a tax tribunal that could see it liable to HMRC for up to £75 million after penalties and interest are added to the original sum. It was also revealed that Rangers owe HMRC £9 million in unpaid taxes that have accumulated since Whyte took over the club in May of last year. The tax tribunal clouds the situation.
HMRC, as indicated yesterday, seem disinclined to cut deals with Rangers or, perhaps more accurately, Craig Whyte. On the other hand, Rangers being liquidated would see them walking away with nothing so it might be in HMRC’s interest to come to some sort of arrangement that would see it recoup a sizeable chuck of the money owed it.
Whyte, should the club go into liquidation, would stand as secured creditor and thus in possession of the primary assets including Ibrox and the Murray Park training complex. He could then re-float the club as a new entity but severed from its history and traditions. It is not fanciful to speculate that this might have been his plan all along. It is difficult to believe that a man who spent months doing due diligence before purchasing the club for £1 from its previous owner Sir David Murray would not have been prepared for the eventuality we have seen being played out over the past two days.
Many would not lament the demise of Rangers. One Irish-based journalist and blogger, writing in a popular online Scottish football magazine, declared that Scottish society would benefit from the ‘extinction’ of Rangers, labelling them as a ‘grand central stain on Scottish football and Scottish society’. Tom Gallagher, in an article that appeared yesterday on the same forum, demonstrated a more thoughtful understanding of the dynamics surrounding the demise of Rangers and explored the possibilities the situation offered to the SNP. Gallagher suggested that ‘the SNP could be the force that eases Rangers’ pain’ by facilitating action among business leaders that would see the club remain a viable entity and, in doing so, demonstrate that the party’s commitment to the ‘social union’ is more than just beguiling rhetoric.
It might seem like an unlikely scenario but Gallagher argued that such a move could have benefits for the SNP in terms of winning converts from a supporter base that might be considered among the most hostile of constituencies. It might also prove to be shrewd with reference to recent developments in Glasgow City Council and could be the final move that places the City Chambers in the hands of the SNP at the expense of a shambolic and faction-ridden Labour Party.
Deputy first minister Nicola Sturgeon, who just happens to be the MSP for the area where Rangers are based, talked yesterday of the potentially detrimental impact on jobs and her hope that Rangers might emerge from administration without totally reneging on its liabilities to its various creditors. It was a statement characteristic of the consummate career politician, in that it revealed little, but it would be unrealistic to expect her to divulge any SNP thinking on the matter in the immediate aftermath of the announcement that Rangers had indeed entered administration.
On the back of recent developments, fan ownership has become an ever
more desirable business model although there remain doubts about the viability of such a model for delivering sustainable investment but this
need not be the immediate priority.
At the moment this is all hypothetical. For all the Rangers fans who would welcome intervention from any source if it meant safeguarding the integrity of the club’s history, there are probably just as many who would baulk at the possibility that the club might be beholden, for its very existence, to a political party that many regard as a threat to the sense of Britishness that they see Rangers as representing.
Failing some kind of external salvation, the question to be asked is what kind of assistance can the Rangers supporters render their beloved club in its hour of utmost need? In recent weeks the popular message-board FollowFollow has been alive with talk of the fans contributing financially, although it should be acknowledged that many would be reluctant to contribute to what they view as rectifying the mess created by Murray and exacerbated by Whyte.
Such a scheme would also be vulnerable to timing – many Rangers fans would simply not be able to contribute given the current economic climate. And there are other obstacles that might stand in the way of the kind of collective action envisioned. The size of the Rangers support, while being potentially the club’s greatest asset, poses substantial organisational problems and also comes with a history of organisational factionalism, division and suspicion of those perceived to be operating for their own ends.
It might be suggested that they put Presbyterians and Ulster unionists to shame in this regard. The fans have a number of prominent organisations including the Rangers Supporters Association (founded in 1946), the Rangers Supporters Trust and the Rangers Supporters Assembly. These groups also send a representative to the Rangers Fans’ Working Group.
It seems clear that Rangers fans need an outlet for their pent-up frustration. Properly organised, they have the potential to have a say in the future of their club. Trying to overcome the difficulties outlined above presents a daunting challenge but there is a feeling that something needs to be done. I propose the following. A meeting of the Rangers Fans’ Working Group should be arranged as a matter of utmost urgency. Those with responsibility for organising the meeting should contract an advisor with specialist knowledge in navigating such insolvency events in a sporting context (there have been plenty of these individuals on our television screens over the past few days).
As its first order of business, the meeting should consider how the fans might contribute financially to some sort of fighting fund that would remain independent of the club, Craig Whyte and the administrators. As a practical measure, the money so far saved in the Rangers Supporters Trust’s Gersave scheme might be pledged as an initial contribution pending the acquiescence of its members. It would be desirable if contributors could see some kind of dividend or return so ways this might achieved should also be discussed.
A committee should be appointed to monitor the fund and explore ways that it might be used for the benefit of the club and the fans. On the back of recent developments, fan ownership has become an ever more desirable business model although there remain doubts about the viability of such a model for delivering sustainable investment but this need not be the immediate priority. As a final act, a shortlist should be drawn up of distinguished ex-players to approach for endorsement. A figurehead like former captain Richard Gough would add prestige and credibility to the endeavour.
In the face of developments that seem overwhelming and potentially terminal, it is imperative that Rangers fans liberate their anger in a constructive manner and regain some sense of empowerment. Someone needs to book a venue, invite the relevant people, have a discussion and come up with a plan of action. Tackling the most Olympian of challenges is going to begin with the simplest of actions.
Alasdair McKillop is a member of the Rangers Supporters Trust writing in an independent capacity
Graham Walker is co-author of the recent ‘Rangers: The Official Biography‘
