Agenda item

When the new stadium was built, one of the conditions placed upon the owners of the stadium - the Football Association (FA)  - was that they needed to analyse the impact of their activities on the local area.  The FA commissioned the respected accountancy firm Deloitte to produce this report.  The most recent iteration was published earlier this year and is attached for members’ consideration. Representatives from the FA and Deloitte will be in attendance at the meeting to discuss the report.

The Chair welcomed Chris Bryant (Head of Operations, FA), Jake Wilson (Senior Manager, Deloitte) and Tom Hammond (Assistant Manager, Deloitte) to the meeting, noting that the committee had before them the report prepared by Deloitte Sport Business Group on behalf of the Football Association on the Economic Impact of Wembley Stadium for 2017/18 event season. The committee subsequently received a short presentation highlighting the key findings of the report for the Brent area.

During the presentation, Members were advised that there had been a record 58 events held at Wembley Stadium during 2017/18. The usual number of events was around 32. These events had attracted 3.8 million spectators, including 350k from overseas and high numbers of first-time visitors.  The report stated that the Wembley Stadium events had delivered a major economic boost to Brent and that Tottenham Hotspur’s residency had further increased the local economic impact, accounting for over one third of the total economic impact from events in 2017/18. At least 1,800 full time equivalent jobs were supported due to events at the stadium in this period and there had been £190m gross expenditure in local businesses in Brent on accommodation, tickets, food and drink, retail, groceries, travel and other expenditures. Overall the local economy of Brent had been boosted by £150m due to Stadium events. Spectator perceptions had been surveyed and consultations held with key stakeholders including Brent Council, local businesses and local residents’ groups. Spectators had been largely positive about the Stadium and Brent. Local residents had in particular expressed concerns around issues with noise, antisocial behaviour and littering. The FA was working with the council and other organisations to address these issues.

The Chair thanked the representatives of the FA and Deloitte for the presentation and invited questions from the committee.

Several queries were subsequently raised. Members questioned whether the economic impact could be broadened to include areas outside the immediate vicinity by discouraging car use and directing public transport users to surrounding tube stations. It was queried how the FA encouraged visitors to use public transport and concern was expressed regarding the impact on neighbouring boroughs which did not have event day enforcement in place. It was further queried whether the views of residents from the neighbouring borough of Harrow had been surveyed for the report. Questions were raised regarding the consultation and feed-in of the FA into kick-off times and the consideration given to ensuring viable public transport routes out of Wembley following events. Members sought details of parking and other transport provision made for disabled customers attending events at the Stadium. Queries were also raised regarding consultation between the FA and the council regarding low capacity events and event day parking.

The committee sought clarification regarding the £150m total economic impact figure for Brent, whether this included expenditure in the Stadium itself, and for those areas outside of the Stadium, whether any further detail could be provided about those benefiting most from this economic boost. It was subsequently queried whether any economic risk assessment had been completed to assess the harm that event days could cause to some of the more outlying businesses. Members questioned what had been learnt with regard to maximising the economic benefit of future events as a result of the use of the Stadium by Tottenham Hotspur and what the council could do to maximise opportunities to engage spectators in additional activities around Wembley.

Members further questioned whether the Stadium was a London Living Wage employer and if not, whether the FA would be willing to meet with the London Living Wage organisation. Members queried what proportion of the 1,800 jobs supported by Wembley Stadium events paid the London Living Wage or were zero-hours contracts. The committee then questioned how the Section 106 funds from Tottenham Hotspur’s residency at Wembley had been used and sought an update on enforcement against pirate (illegal) car parks operating on event days.

Discussing the Stadium’s community outreach activities, the committee questioned whether these could be targeted at hard to reach groups, particularly those activities for children and young people. In concluding their questioning, members queried how work experience and employment programmes provided by the Stadium were advertised and what the eligibility criteria for these were. 

In response to the committee’ questions Chris Bryant advised that the FA strongly advertised Wembley Stadium as a public transport destination, with all spectator communications promoting public transport. Limited parking was provided by the Stadium to meet hospitality obligations. The provision of travel cards to spectators did incentivise public transport but could be a costly and complicated solution. The FA would be very willing to engage in a broader discussion regarding a transport review for the Stadium, with appropriate representation from the Head of Transport at the FA. Members further heard that the process of determining kick-off times for football matches at the Stadium was complex and involved a large number of parties, including the FA. The timings were often largely dictated by commercial broadcast times.

Councillor Tatler asserted that further work could be undertaken to explore opportunities to broaden the economic impact for local businesses by encouraging different transport routes and via the Town Centre Managers, considering how to make these areas attractive to passing spectators. Furthermore, late kick-off times could be seen as opportunities to promote overnight stays in Wembley

Chris Whyte explained that the council had a significant role in the transportation planning for events, both on a case by case basis and in terms of the overall strategy. Within this process, consideration was given to the full journey length for spectators across all transport networks including motorways and rail links. There was a frequent use of private taxis by spectators and spaces had now been created for these cars to park to ensure they were less obstructive, alongside specific road blocks to better protect local neighbourhoods from associated parking pressures. The stadium did make provision for disabled spectators to access the stadium. Tony Kennedy advised that the council liaised closely with the FA regarding anticipated capacities and advance sales for events and confirmed that the Wembley event day parking scheme would not be implemented for capacities under 28,000 people.

Jake Wilson confirmed that £150m economic impact on Brent did not include expenditure by spectators within the Stadium grounds. The report did not detail the specific areas or businesses which benefited from this boost, or indeed experienced a decrease in business on event days as this had not been part of the remit of the report. Consultation had however, been undertaken with local businesses, including those on spectator footfall routes and those elsewhere. Chris Bryant confirmed that further detail could be requested for any future reports of this nature. Councillor Tatler advised that Tottenham Hotspur’s residency at Wembley had afforded the council a better understanding of the nature of club football against other kinds of events. The residency of the club had brought economic benefits to Wembley but other types of events were known to confer a greater economic boost. The council was currently undertaking research around areas for growth and projections had shown that Wembley could have a shortfall in hotel accommodation – this was therefore an issue that was being explored further. More broadly, there were a number of developments that aimed to build on the existing offer for visitors to Wembley including the creation of a Business Improvement District for Wembley. Wembley had been identified in the Mayors London Plan as an area of opportunity and the Town Centre Management team were exploring ways to capitalise on that status.

Chris Bryant advised that the FA was not London Living Wage accredited but did work with contractors to encourage payment of the London Living Wage and would look into a meeting with the relevant organisation. Jake Wilson explained that the 1,800 jobs figure was a widely used statistical measure based on the average Gross Value Added contribution of the Wembley Stadium events. It was not therefore possible to determine the wages paid for these positions nor the contract arrangements from the data currently available.

Chris Whyte (Operational Director, Environment Services) outlined the various uses of the Section 106 funds from the Tottenham Hotspur’s residency at Wembley which included: event day activities of street cleaning, enforcement and licensing; installation of new CCTV on routes to and from the Stadium; installation of litter bins; new signage to support parking enforcement; and, funds to support the transport management plans for event days. There remained a sum left over and this would be put towards further improving street signage in Wembley. With regard to pirate parking sites in the borough, enforcement had driven the number down to as low as two recently, though the figure had most recently stood at nine. New sites were established regularly and continual enforcement activity was necessary to meet this challenge.

Chris Bryant confirmed that any suggestions that members’ may have with regard to targeting outreach activities would be welcomed by the FA. In addition, every effort was made to distribute thousands of event tickets to Brent’s residents and numbers distributed to the local community had increased significantly in recent years. However, it should be noted that the appeal of some events was not always particularly strong. Details of work schemes provided by the Stadium could be circulated to members.  

Data Requests

During the discussion, members requested that the following information, which was not available to be shared at the meeting, be circulated to the committee subsequently:

·         Full details of the Section 106 funds from Tottenham Hotspur’s residency at the Stadium and how these had been utilised by the Council.

·         Details of the work experience programmes provided at the Stadium, including eligibility criteria and information on how these opportunities were advertised.

·         Confirmation of whether residents in the neighbouring borough of Harrow were consulted.

RESOLVED:

The Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee recommended:

     i)        That the Strategic Director Regeneration and Environment and Lead Member for Regeneration, Highways and Planning ensure that a summit is arranged to discuss ways to increase the number of spectators travelling to Wembley using public transport to over 90 per cent, with all the relevant parties including Transport for London, the Football Association and the Council.

    ii)        That the terms of reference for the next iteration of the report on the economic impact of Wembley Stadium be agreed with the council and include the following information requested by the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee:

a.    An assessment of how different sized businesses are affected by Wembley Stadium events, including a risk assessment for smaller businesses;

b.    Sample details of the types of jobs supported by events at the Stadium and whether these are London Living Wage positions and/or are offered as zero-hours contracts.

   iii)        That the Strategic Director Regeneration and Environment, in conjunction with the FA ensure that a creative approach is taken to managing and utilising the Wembley event day parking scheme, particularly with regard to events with low ticket sales.

   iv)        That the FA meet with representatives of the London Living Wage organisation.

    v)        That a meeting be arranged between the FA and officers within the Children and Young People department to maximise the impact of Stadium outreach activities on hard to reach groups and to discuss targeted distribution of unsold event tickets to these groups.