1. We have always held concerns about the way in which the Supporter Engagement Panel was established by the club in early 2021. These concerns relate to the lack of a written constitution, no written rules, a lack of transparency and accountability and the club controlling Panel membership – in effect a club led and controlled process. We know that the Football Supporters Association (FSA) provided the club with a ready-made model and memorandum of understanding (MOU) for how a Supporters Advisory Board could operate, but sadly the club declined to utilise that and instead went their own way.
  2. There was a mediation process to resolve differences over the establishment of the Supporter Engagement Panel and all concerned (club, Trust and Panel) agreed to draw a line under those events and move on.  We agreed to play our part in trying to make the process work.
  3. We attended the 2 meetings of the Panel that have taken place since then, we contributed to a letter to the club from Panel members, suggested agenda items and made comments on the draft terms of reference for the Panel. The last meeting of the EP that we attended was on 27 May 2021 to discuss a draft club statement on 19/20 season ticket refunds and to discuss possible season ticket prices for 21/22. After that meeting, we wrote to the club to express how useful that meeting had been. These were not the actions of people trying to disrupt the EP process.
  4. On 16 August 2021 - totally out of the blue – we received a communication from the club which asked us (under threat of expulsion) to step down from the Engagement Panel. The reasoning for this was:
    • We had continued to raise issues directly with the club rather than solely through Panel meetings. We did not apologise for this as Panel meetings take place infrequently and some issues cannot wait to be raised.
    • We have leaked information from Panel meetings. No evidence was provided for this allegation, but reference was made to a Trust statement of 17th June on the lack of season ticket refunds for 20/21, that was announced by the club on 15 June. We provided evidence to show that we had not leaked information, that the club’s own public statements were published before the minutes of the May EP were published (breaking their own rule), and that our statement of 17th June was in response to that of the club on 15th June.
    • That we had commented publicly on a matter that we had not raised at a Panel meeting on 27 May. We were not offered evidence on what this comment was, but we believe this refers to our 17th June statement on 20/21 refunds. We had previously written to the club requesting 20/21 refunds be available and we raised this at the EP meeting on 27 March. The Panel meeting on 27 May was called by the club for the club to consult on a statement on 19/20 refunds and on draft season ticket prices for 21/22. On 17th June we were responding to the club’s confirmation on 15th June that no 20/21 refunds would be available. In any case we reject a ‘rule’ that limits us to only raising issues via the Panel only.
    • That we had commented publicly on a matter without consulting other Panel members first. Again, we believe this refers to our 17th June statement on season ticket refunds for 20/21. We reject a position that the Trust would have to consult non-Trust members on what the Trust can communicate to Trust members.
  5. We made it clear to the club on 27th August that we had no mandate from our members to withdraw from the Panel, and that we believed there was no justification for our removal as it was based on no evidence and no transparency as to how this decision had been made or by whom. 
  6. In response the club did not address the factual evidence we had presented but instead made it clear that our removal from the Panel was still the intention. 
  7. We wrote to the club on 7th September seeking clarification on the ‘rules’ that now appear to apply to EP membership and to seek the club view on which course of action will now be followed. We emphasised that we didn’t want a “war of words” with the club and instead wish to resolve this issue in a calm manner. Our message to the club is attached for information. As you can see, we offered the club 4 different options for a way forward.
  8. On 14 September we were informed by the club that the fourth of those options was preferred which removes us from the EP. We are disappointed with this decision when we had offered the club other options of establishing a Supporters Advisory Board that we could be part of, or to agree an MOU with the Trust so that we could leave the EP by agreement, or for us to consult you the Trust members on whether we remain part of the EP, with the club’s ‘rules’ in-force.
  9. The club did not respond on the question we asked regarding the four ‘rules’ so we do not know if three of these ‘rules’ exist at all or were simply manufactured to try engineer the removal of the Trust from the EP. It feels to us like it was the latter.
  10. The Trust has been a source of constructive challenge to the club – 6000 fans signed our open letter in December 2020 asking for change in the way the club is run. We have produced blogs and research reports on key issues such as ticket prices, and we have shaped the agenda regarding how the club is run. We believe the club want to side-line the influence of an independent, transparent and democratic supporters’ organisation. This, we believe, is a significant reason why the Trust has been removed from the Engagement Panel.
  11. We took a principled position regarding season ticket refunds for the 20/21 season believing that those fans who had been impacted by changed circumstances, ill-health, financial challenge, bereavement etc had a right to a refund if they wanted one, and it was legally and morally wrong, and counter-productive, for the club to refuse them. We assume that the club did not like our position and were also unhappy that we shared information with Trust members (on a confidential basis) on their legal rights regarding refunds. We believe this has also inspired the club’s decision to remove the Trust from the EP.
  12. We have to say that it would have been difficult for the Trust Board to remain a member of the EP under the ‘rules’ that appear apply to EP members, and certainly appear to apply to the Trust. We could only have remained under those terms on the basis of an explicit decision to do so from Trust members – we did not have the opportunity to consult you on that as we were simply removed from the EP by the club.
  13. Despite the club’s actions we will continue to do the job we have been doing - we will raise issues directly with the club, you will know about that and know the response we receive. We will continue to use media and social media to make our case when it is justified. We will continue to seek the views of our members and to represent them. We are not going away. We will continue to be a key voice for fans.
  14. We are more than happy to return to a direct relationship with the club either via a Supporters Advisory Board, or via an explicit MOU between the Trust and the club and we have made this clear to the club. We hope that the club will respond positively to that offer.

Copy of email sent to Trevor Braithwait on 7th September 2021

Hi Trevor,

We write in response to you note of 27th August.

We want to clearly understand the club’s position regarding future relationships with the Trust so that we can calmly work out a way forward – we wish to avoid a “war of words” between the club and Trust at a time when there is much positivity around the club. We therefore have some genuine questions of clarification that are set out below.

The conclusion we have drawn from your communication of 16th August is that the following ‘rules’ apply to being a member of the Supporters Engagement Panel:

1.   A member of the Panel cannot comment on any matters discussed at a Supporters Engagement Panel meeting unless and until the agreed minutes have been published.

2.   A member of the Panel can only communicate with the club via the Supporters Engagement Panel and should not communicate with the club outside the Panel process, eg by writing to the club.

3.   If a member of the Panel wishes to comment (outside of the Panel) on anything that has been discussed at a Supporters Engagement Panel meeting, the Panel member must consult other members of the Panel before making any comment.

4.   A member of the Panel cannot comment (outside of the Panel) on matters that have not been raised at a Supporters Engagement Panel meeting.

Can you please confirm if we have accurately understood the club’s position on these ‘rules’, if not please do correct our understanding of the position as it is important to inform the next step forward.

We were aware of rule (1) above and we genuinely believe (as we have explained) that we have not breached that rule. The other three ‘rules’ were ones that we were not aware of, but it seems that they are now being used to justify us being asked to step down from the Panel for allegedly breaching them when we did not know those ‘rules’ existed.

If the ‘rules’ are in-force we do believe that the club and other Supporters Engagement Panel members are in breach of ‘rule’ (2) as they have been discussing the Trust’s position outside of the EP process and without our knowledge or involvement. We also believe that the club is in breach of ‘rule’ (1) by publishing statements flowing from the 27 May Panel meeting before the agreed minutes of that meeting had been published. Despite these alleged breaches we are content to “draw a line” under these issues in the interests of moving on and establishing meaningful engagement processes between the club and the Trust.


We now see the following options as outlining possible ways forward:

1.   If you can confirm that the four ‘rules’ are not in-force we can confirm that we would wish to remain a member of the Supporters Engagement Panel but on the basis that there is a clear and acceptable Memorandum of Understanding on how the Panel will operate for the future. The MOU would be very much along the lines of the MOU for a Supporters Advisory Board, as previously suggested to the club by the FSA, see attached.

2.   If you confirm that the four ‘rules’ are in force then we will consult Trust members on whether they agree to the Trust remaining a member of the Panel with the four ‘rules’ in place, if our members do not agree then we will withdraw from the EP.

3.   If the club does not wish to pursue options 1 or 2 and instead simply wants us to withdraw from the Panel, we will agree to withdraw, but only on the basis that the club and the Trust agree an MOU very similar the one agreed by Swindon Town FC and STST, see attached. This will enable the club and Trust to establish a structured engagement process and leave the EP to continue to operate without the Trust being a member.

4.  If the club simply wants to remove us from the Engagement Panel without establishing any formal arrangements between us and the club you will have to make this clear. In those circumstances the club will remove us from the Panel and there would be no obligations to each other.

We await your urgent confirmation of the position regarding the four ‘rules’ and regarding the option that the club prefers to pursue.

Regards

Steve Walmsley

Trust Board Chair

Join The Trust