regulator

WARNINGS of potential blackouts this winter have been issued, with “tight days” for energy supply expected in early December and mid-January.

The National Energy System Operator (NESO) has warned that there may still be tight periods this winter where electricity supply struggles to meet demand.

1

In these cases, system notices could be issued to increase production, with imported electricity from Europe helping to prevent blackouts.

Despite the concerns, NESO says spare supply, known as electricity margins, is at its strongest level since 2020.

It added that new battery storage along with European imports will play a key role in avoiding disruptions.

The electricity grid operator and National Gas released their winter outlook reports as energy prices rose earlier this month following an increase in the price cap.

NESO’S report said: “We expect a sufficient operational surplus throughout winter, although there may still be tight days that require us to use our standard operating tools, including system notices.”

System notices are how the grid operator informs the wider energy industry that electricity supply has not matched demand, allowing for production to increase if needed.

Early data from electricity firms and forecasters has suggested that “tight days” are most likely to take place in early December or mid-January.

Neso added that imports will be available when needed to help cover demand, supported by “adequate electricity supply across Europe”.

Deborah Petterson, director of resilience and emergency management at NESO, said: “A resilient and reliable energy supply is fundamental to our way of life.

“At NESO we are looking at the upcoming winter and can report this year’s winter outlook sets out the strongest electricity margins in six years.

“It is critical that we continue our work with the wider energy industry to prepare for the coming months to build on this foundation and maintain our world-leading track record of reliability.”

What about gas supplies?

The latest analysis from National Gas indicated that Great Britain has enough gas supply capability to meet peak demand.

It indicated supply can meet demand, even “even accounting for unforeseen network outage scenarios”.

The gas network operator said gas demand is expected to be 3% lower than last winter, easing pressure on supply.

It said high-demand days are still expected but it stressed that it is “confident” the market will operate as needed.

Glenn Bryn-Jacobsen, director of energy systems and resilience at National Gas, said: “As we head into winter, we remain confident in the resilience of our gas system and our ability to meet Britain’s energy needs during periods of peak demand.

“The energy landscape is evolving, with a growing reliance on imports and the continued decline of UK continental shelf supplies.

“Meeting these challenges requires a co-ordinated, forward-looking approach, and we’re working closely with Government, industry, and regulators to develop the right solutions that safeguard security of supply for the future.”

But the report from National Gas shows a fall in Britain’s gas storage capabilities, thanks to the Rough storage site off the coast of Yorkshire no longer storing gas, which means there is an increased reliability on importing liquified natural gas (LNG) to plug the gap in times of high demand.

The facility in the North Sea is the largest of its kind in the UK, but owner Centrica has stopped filling it with natural gas amid concerns over its financial viability.

The Rough site comprises about half of Britain’s storage capacity, and acts as a buffer when the weather is especially cold and demand for gas spikes.

Centrica has long warned it will be decommissioned without government support to allow investment in the site.

Last winter, Britain narrowly avoided blackout warnings as freezing weather caused wind power to plunge, leaving the grid struggling to meet demand.

NESO paid £21million – ten times the usual rate – to keep gas power plants running to balance the shortfall in January.

Experts criticised the system operator for failing to predict peak energy demand and relying too heavily on renewable energy during winter.

Wind power dropped to 17.6%, while gas provided half of the country’s electricity.

Critics argued this reliance on weather-dependent energy left Britain vulnerable and called for more investment in gas and nuclear power for reliable supply.

In April Nandy said Kogan was the “outstanding candidate” to fill the position, despite not being on the original three-person shortlist.

A spokesperson for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport told BBC Sport: “The Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee found David Kogan appointable after his scrutiny hearing and we are now pleased to proceed in announcing him as chair.

“It is vital that the work to set up the regulator continues at pace to strengthen the governance of the national game and for that we need a chair in post and a board put in place.

“We have co-operated fully with the inquiry by the Commissioner of Public Appointments and await the report’s publication.”

In May Kogan told MPs on the Culture, Media and Sport Committee (CMS) during a pre-appointment hearing that he was being “utterly transparent” by declaring his donations.

The committee endorsed Kogan but said he must work to “reassure the football community that he will act impartially and in a politically neutral way”.

Committee chair Dame Caroline Dinenage warned that Kogan’s “past donations to the Labour Party will inevitably leave him open to charges of political bias in a job where independence is paramount”.

Kogan said he had donated “very small sums” to the campaigns, as well as thousands of pounds to Labour MPs and candidates in recent years, but had “total personal independence from all of them” and pledged “total political impartiality” if appointed.

However, his proposed appointment was criticised by the Conservative Party, with Shadow Culture Minister Stuart Andrew saying it was “Labour cronyism”.

“The public has a right to know whether this was a fair and impartial process, or yet another case of political patronage disguised as due diligence,” he said.

Kogan has been appointed for a five-year term until 19 May 2030. Dame Helen Stephenson and Simon Levine have also been appointed to the board.

One of Kogan’s biggest priorities is expected to be Sheffield Wednesday. Last month Nandy warned owner Dejphon Chansiri that “change is coming” amid continued calls for the Thai businessman to sell the cash-strapped Championship club.

Various embargoes have been placed on the club for tax debts and late payments to players and staff.

Last week it was revealed that player and staff wages were again not paid on time for the fifth time in seven months.

Nandy said that “if necessary, the football regulator can intervene in order to remove an owner who is threatening the future of the club”.

She said: In Sheffield Wednesday’s case, I am really extremely concerned about the current ownership and the lack of willingness to sell the club and invest in the club, something I’ve been discussing very closely with local MPs.”

WASHINGTON — When Bill Pulte was nominated as the country’s top housing regulator, he told senators that his “number one mission will be to strengthen and safeguard the housing finance system.”

But since he started the job, he’s distinguished himself by targeting President Trump ‘s political enemies. He’s using property records to make accusations of mortgage fraud and encourage criminal investigations, wielding an obscure position to serve as a presidential enforcer.

This week, Trump used allegations publicized by Pulte in an attempt to fire Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve board, as he tries to exert more control over the traditionally independent central bank.

Pulte claims that Cook designated two homes as her primary residence to get more favorable mortgage rates. Cook plans to fight her removal, laying the groundwork for a legal battle that could reshape a cornerstone institution in the American economy.

Trump said Tuesday that Cook “seems to have had an infraction, and you can’t have an infraction,” adding that he has “some very good people” in mind to replace her.

Pulte has cheered on the president’s campaign with a Trumpian flourish.

“Fraud will not be tolerated in President Trump’s housing market,” he wrote on social media. “Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

Pulte targets Democrats but not Republicans

Pulte, 37, is a housing industry scion whose official job is director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. He oversees mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were placed in conservatorship during the Great Recession almost two decades ago.

Like other political appointees, he routinely lavishes praise on his boss.

“President Trump is the greatest,” he posted over the weekend.

Pulte has made additional allegations of mortgage fraud against Sen. Adam Schiff, one of Trump’s top antagonists on Capitol Hill, and New York Attorney General Letitia James, who filed lawsuits against Trump. Those cases are being pursued by Ed Martin, a Justice Department official.

“In a world where housing is too expensive, we do not need to subsidize housing for fraudsters by letting them get better rates than they deserve,” Pulte wrote on social media.

Pulte has ignored a similar case involving Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general who is friendly with Trump and is running for Senate in his state’s Republican primary. Paxton took out mortgages on three properties that were all identified as his primary residence.

He also has mortgages on two other properties that explicitly prohibit him from renting the properties out, but both have been repeatedly listed for rent, according to real estate listings and posts on short-term rental sites.

Asked about Pulte’s investigations and Trump’s role in them, the White House said that anyone who violates the law should be held accountable.

“President Trump’s only retribution is success and historic achievements for the American people,” said Davis Ingle, White House spokesman.

It’s unclear whether Pulte is using government resources to develop the allegations he has made. Mortgage documents are generally public records, but they are typically maintained at the county level across most of the U.S., making them difficult to comprehensively review. However, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are both government-sponsored entities, purchase large tranches of mortgages from lenders, which could centralize much of that information, real estate and legal experts say.

FHFA did not respond to a detailed list of questions from the AP, including whether Pulte or his aides used government resources to conduct his research.

It’s not just mortgages

Pulte’s broadsides go beyond mortgages. He’s been backing Trump’s criticism of Jerome Powell, chair of the Federal Reserve, over expensive renovations at the central bank’s headquarters. Trump is pressuring Powell to cut interest rates in hopes of lowering borrowing costs, and his allies have highlighted cost overruns to suggest that Powell is untrustworthy or should be removed from his position.

“This guy is supposed to be the money manager for the world’s biggest economy, and it doesn’t even look like he can run a construction site,” Pulte said while wearing a neon safety vest outside the building. “So something doesn’t smell right here.”

Since returning to the White House, Trump has reached deep into the government to advance his agenda. He’s overhauled the federal workforce with the Office of Personnel Management, pushed ideological changes at the Smithsonian network of museums and fired the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics when he didn’t like a recent report on job numbers.

With Pulte in charge, the Federal Housing Finance Agency is becoming another instrument of Trump’s mission to exert control and retaliate against enemies.

It’s a contrast to the Internal Revenue Service, where Trump has unsuccessfully discussed ways to use tax policies as a pressure point. For example, during battles over higher education, Trump threatened to take away Harvard’s long-standing tax-exempt status by saying, “It’s what they deserve.”

However, there are more restrictions there, dating back to the Watergate scandal under President Richard Nixon.

“It’s been hard for the administration to use the inroads it wants to use to pursue its enemies,” said Vanessa Williamson, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.

She said, “The law is very clear about taxpayer privacy and the criminal penalties at play are not small.”

Before going on the attack, Pulte played nice online

Pulte is heir to a home-building fortune amassed by his grandfather, also named William Pulte, who founded a construction company in Detroit in the 1950s that grew into the publicly traded national housing giant now known as the Pulte Group.

He spent four years on the company’s board, and he’s the owner of heating and air conditioning businesses across the U.S. He had never served in government before being nominated by Trump to lead the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

“While many children spent their weekends at sporting events, I spent mine on homebuilding jobsites with my father and grandfather,” Pulte said in written testimony for his nomination hearing. “From the ground up, I learned every aspect of housing — whether it was cleaning job sites, assisting in construction, or helping sell homes.”

He once tried to make a name for himself with good deeds, describing himself as the “Inventor of Twitter Philanthropy” and offering money to needy people online. He was working in private equity at the time, and he told the Detroit Free Press that he funded his donations with some “very good liquidity events” to power his donations.

Even six years ago, he appeared focused on getting attention from Trump.

“If @realDonaldTrump retweets this, my team and I will give Two Beautiful Cars to Two Beautiful Veterans on Twitter.”

Trump replied, “Thank you, Bill, say hello to our GREAT VETERANS!”

Pulte, whose most recent financial disclosure shows a net worth of at least $180 million, was also ramping up his political donations.

Over the past six years, he and his wife have donated over $1 million to the political efforts of Trump and his allies, including a $500,000 contribution to a super PAC affiliated with Trump that was the subject of a campaign finance complaint made with the Federal Election Commission.

The Pultes’ $500,000 contribution was made through a company they control named ML Organization LLC, records show. While such contributions are typically allowed from corporations, the same is not always true for some limited liability companies that have a limited business footprint and could be set up to obscure the donor.

The FEC ultimately exonerated the Pultes, but found in April that the Trump super PAC, Make America Great Again, Again! Inc., did not properly disclose that the Pultes were the source of the donation, said Saurav Ghosh, the Campaign Legal Center’s director of federal campaign finance reform.

Ghosh said the donation raises serious questions about Pulte’s appointment to lead FHFA.

“Why is Bill Pulte even in a government position?” he said. “Maybe he’s qualified, maybe he isn’t. But he did pour hundreds of thousands of dollars into a pro-Trump super PAC. And I think it’s clear there are these types of rewards for big donors across the Trump administration.”

Megerian, Slodysko and Hussein write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Behind a White House effort to saddle President Trump’s political foes with accusations of mortgage fraud is a 37-year-old home construction executive with a deep partisan past.

Bill Pulte, a Florida native, rose in Trump’s orbit toward the end of his first term. After courting Trump for years on social media and through generous donations, he now runs the Federal Housing Finance Agency — a perch that has allowed him to target prominent figures who have crossed the president.

In the last five months, Pulte has referred three claims of mortgage fraud against Trump’s foes to the Justice Department, leveled against Letitia James, the attorney general of New York; Adam Schiff, the Democratic senator from California; and this week, Lisa Cook, a governor on the board of the Federal Reserve.

Each has denied wrongdoing. Trump announced on Monday night that he was moving to fire Cook.

It is an unusual role for a director of the FHFA, which regulates Fannie Mae — the nation’s largest company by assets — and Freddie Mac. The two mortgage financing organizations, which support nearly half of the U.S. residential mortgage market, were taken over by the FHFA during the 2008 economic crisis.

The grandson of one of Michigan’s wealthiest and most prolific homebuilders, Pulte made a name for himself on Twitter in 2019 with public cash giveaways to individuals in need. He dubbed himself the “inventor of Twitter philanthropy,” vowing to give two cars away in exchange for a Trump retweet that year, which he received. He subsequently built a following of over 3 million.

Records show Pulte donated substantially to Trump, the Republican National Committee and related super PACs leading up to the 2024 election.

Pulte’s letters to Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi have been tightly and cautiously written. But his social media posts, celebrating the targeted attacks, have not.

“Trump becomes the first president ever to remove a sitting Federal Reserve governor,” he wrote on X, between retweets of right-wing commentators praising the move. “Mortgage fraud can carry up to 30 years in prison.”

In another post on X, quoting a CNN headline, Pulte wrote that Trump’s firing of Cook was “escalating his battle against the central bank” — seeming to acknowledge that targeting Cook was motivated by Trump’s ongoing grievances with Fed leadership.

Cook’s firing is legally dubious, and her attorney, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement that Cook plans on suing the administration while continuing to perform her duties for the Fed. Lowell also represents James in her defense against the Justice Department case.

While the Supreme Court ruled in May that Trump may fire individuals from independent federal agencies, the justices singled out the Fed as an exception, calling it a “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity.” The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 states that the president may fire a member of its leadership only “for cause.”

But cause has not been definitively established to fire Cook, with Pulte writing in his letter to Bondi that the Fed governor had only “potentially” committed mortgage fraud, accusing her of falsifying bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms.

Pulte has accused Cook of listing two homes — in Ann Arbor, Mich., and in Atlanta — as her primary addresses within two weeks of purchasing them through financing. Cook said she would “take any questions about my financial history seriously” and was “gathering the accurate information to answer any legitimate questions and provide the facts.”

Pulte’s other accusations, against James and Schiff, have been similarly superficial, publicly accusing individuals of potential criminality before a full, independent investigation can take place.

And whether those investigations will be impartial is far from clear. Earlier this month, Bondi appointed Ed Martin, a conspiracy theorist who supported the “Stop the Steal” movement after Joe Biden’s election victory over Trump in 2020, as a special prosecutor to investigate the James and Schiff cases.

Pulte accused James — who successfully accused Trump of financial fraud in a civil suit last year — of falsifying bank statements and property records to secure more favorable loan terms for homes in Virginia and New York. He made similar claims weeks later about Schiff, who maintains residences in California and the suburbs of Washington, D.C.

Schiff, who led a House impeachment of Trump during the president’s first term and has remained one of his most vocal and forceful political adversaries since joining the Senate, dismissed the president’s claims as a “baseless attempt at political retribution.”

A spokesperson for Schiff said he has always been transparent about owning two homes, in part to be able to raise his children near him in Washington, and has always followed the law — and advice from House counsel — in arranging his mortgages.

In making his claims, Trump cited an investigation by the Fannie Mae “Financial Crimes Division” as his source.

A memorandum reviewed by The Times from Fannie Mae investigators to Pulte does not accuse Schiff of mortgage fraud. It noted that investigators had been asked by the FHFA inspector general’s office for loan files and “any related investigative or quality control documentation” for Schiff’s homes.

Investigators said they found that Schiff at various points identified both his home in Potomac, Md., and a Burbank unit he also owns as his primary residence. As a result, they concluded that Schiff and his wife, Eve, “engaged in a sustained pattern of possible occupancy misrepresentation” on their home loans between 2009 and 2020.

The investigators did not say they had concluded that a crime had been committed, nor did they mention the word “fraud” in the memo.

Indian tax authorities and market regulator are considering widening their probe of United States trading giant Jane Street Group to investigate it for tax evasion in addition to an earlier charge of price rigging in the Bombay Stock Exchange’s benchmark Sensex, according to media reports.

The tax evasion charge comes on the heels of market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), seizing 48.43 billion rupees ($570m) and banning four Jane Street-related entities from operating in the market for alleged price manipulation in the National Stock Exchange (NSE).

SEBI’s order has roiled the Indian markets, raising questions about regulator surveillance and investor protection in the world’s largest options trading market. Trading in India’s weekly equity index options has slumped by a third on the ban on Jane Street, the Reuters news agency reported on Thursday.

Trading of equity options lets investors buy or sell a stock at a predetermined price and date. As the Indian market rapidly grew to handle more than half of all global options trades, retail investors entered the market too.

Questions of price manipulation have dogged this rapid rise but remained vacuous until a New York court case in April 2024, where Jane Street alleged that its rival, Millennium Partners, had stolen its algorithms that helped it make in the Indian options market. A whistleblower, Mayank Bansal, then made presentations to SEBI showing Jane Street’s trading patterns. Bansal had agreed to speak to Al Jazeera about his interaction with SEBI on the matter, but then backtracked.

On July 3, in a detailed interim order, the regulator said that “by preponderance of probability, there is no economic rationale that can account for this sudden burst of large and aggressive activity … other than the intent to manipulate the price of securities and index benchmark”.

SEBI has alleged that Jane Street accumulated large long positions in stocks that are a part of the NSE’s Bank Index and built large short positions in index options at the start of trade. Around market closing time, it would reverse its trades in the cash and futures segments, pushing down the index and earning large profits in the options segment.

This activity was blurred by its offshore entities making some of these trades.

“Lawyers [can] push back with SEBI on jurisdiction-related issues, but when underlying [Indian] securities are issued, SEBI can take action,” Joby Mathew, managing partner at the law firm Joby Mathew and Associates and a former legal officer at SEBI, told Al Jazeera.

Jane Street has disputed SEBI’s findings and has hired lawyers to represent it before SEBI in the case. It has deposited the 48.43 billion rupees ($563m) of allegedly ill-gotten gains in an account pending the investigation and final report.

“Such processes typically take eight to 24 months,” especially in “complex manipulation cases”, Sumit Agarwal, a former SEBI officer and cofounder of Regstreet Law Advisors, told Al Jazeera in an emailed response.

But the investigation can only be part of a broader questioning of Jane Street and the regulator’s role in identifying and curbing such trades sooner and protecting retail investors.

‘Highly speculative and volatile’

As India’s options market grew, retail investors were drawn to it, enticed by the growing volumes, the prospect of quick gains and less fettered trades than the equities market, where a rapidly rising stock could hit circuit breakers, leading to a halt in trading to prevent manipulation.

Mathew says his clients from the options trading segment range from students to award-winning cardiologists who may not have a refined knowledge of the market but were sold on the idea by traders or social media influencers. Most ended up losing money.

Deven Choksey, managing director at the Mumbai-based stock brokerage KR Choksey Shares and Securities, says retail investors form nearly half the Indian options market, while Jane Street and other sophisticated institutions form a little more. “It’s like a bullock cart facing a race car. Their meeting is bound to cause accidents.”

If Jane Street is found to have manipulated the market, its earnings would have come through losses for retail investors.

Bhargavi Zaveri, a financial regulations researcher formerly at the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy and currently a doctoral researcher at the National University of Singapore, says retail investors have made losses in the options segment, but the total amount is not clear.

Identifying and compensating investors can be hard in such cases. So even if the final order goes against Jane Street and the 48.43 billion rupees fine goes into an investor protection fund, it may be hard to distribute it onwards to retail investors who incurred losses. The best protection may be to stem irregular trades early, experts say.

“SEBI has a surveillance system and they can well monitor the markets in a timely way.,” says Choksey.

SEBI’s interim order is based on trades made by Jane Street between January 1, 2023 and March 31, 2025, a period in which retail investors may have incurred substantial losses, going by SEBI’s estimates.

Regstreet’s Agarwal says, “SEBI’s own 2024 consultations flagged expiry day options as highly speculative and volatile.”

India has fortnightly expiry dates for options, which is when they have to be settled. That is when Jane Street allegedly manipulated prices.

In a February 6 letter, SEBI told Jane Street, “The above trading activity prima facie appears to be fraudulent and manipulative.” But it did not issue its order curbing Jane Street until July 3.

SEBI’s recent measures limiting weekly expiries, tightening spreads and higher margins “reflect a push for greater protection” for retail investors, Agarwal says.

But the best way to protect retail investors would be to have them trade separately from proprietary trading firms in the options segment, Choksey points out.

“India is unique … and in no market will you see so many retail investors. So, SEBI must create product differentiation by customer segment.” to protect retail investors Chiksey says.

Challenges in proving manipulation

In an internal email, Jane Street reportedly told employees it was using “basic index arbitrage trading” and called SEBI’s allegations “extremely inflammatory”. It has hired Mumbai-based law firm, Khaitan and Co, to represent it before SEBI.

Proving price manipulation involves showing intent, which can be hard, and experts are divided on whether a SEBI investigation will be able to demonstrate that. “Trading to incur losses makes no sense, and so it indicates manipulation,” says Mathew, the former legal officer.

But NUS’s Zaveri says it is not so clear. “I think three problems are being conflated here. One, the size of the options segment being manifold the underlying cash segment. Two, that retail investors have made losses on the options segment, which I’m not sure have been quantified. Three, Jane Street arbitraged between an illiquid cash and highly liquid options segment.”

According to her, the three occurrences may not prove the intent to manipulate.

Under Indian law, proving manipulation is challenging and “Jane Street can argue its expiry day trades were legitimate index arbitrage recognised by regulators, making a manipulation finding difficult without clear intent evidence,” Regstreet’s Agarwal says.

Any action by SEBI could affect Jane Street’s reputation. Last month, an investigation by Bloomberg found that Jane Street cofounder Robert Granieri was duped into funding weapons for an attempted coup to overthrow the government in South Sudan.

If SEBI’s final order lays out any action against Jane Street, “they may well have to disclose it in their filings, which will affect them elsewhere in the world”, says Mathew.

In April, Nandy said the 68-year-old sports media rights executive was the “outstanding candidate” to fill the position, despite not being on the original three-person shortlist.

She has now removed herself from the final decision, delegating responsibility to the Sports Minister.

Last month, Kogan told MPs on the Culture, Media and Sport Committee (CMS) during a pre-appointment hearing that he was being “utterly transparent” by declaring his donations.

The committee endorsed Kogan, but said he must work to “reassure the football community that he will act impartially and in a politically neutral way”. Committee chair Dame Caroline Dinenage warned that Kogan’s “past donations to the Labour Party will inevitably leave him open to charges of political bias in a job where independence is paramount”.

Kogan said he had donated “very small sums” to the campaigns, as well as thousands of pounds to Labour MPs and candidates in recent years, but had “total personal independence from all of them” and pledged “total political impartiality” if appointed.

A DCMS spokesperson said: “We have received the letter from the Commissioner for Public Appointments and we look forward to co-operating fully with his office.

“The appointment is in the process of being ratified in the usual way.”

Kogan declined to comment.

It has also emerged that Nandy has written to the CMS Committee and told them: “I heard clearly the Committee’s comments regarding David’s transparency and candour regarding previous political donations that he had made and the need for him to take concrete steps to avoid the perception of any bias or lack of independence from government.

“As a first step to avoid any risk of this, I am writing to inform you that I have delegated the final decision on the chair’s appointment to the Minister for Sport.”

Conservative shadow sports minister Louie French has previously said the failure to disclose the donations when first put forward for the role was “a clear breach of the governance code on public appointments”.

A spokesman for the Prime Minister added Kogan had been appointed through a “fair and open competition”, and the BBC has been told his donations were below the threshold that requires declaring.

The Football Governance Bill, which is currently passing through Parliament after being reintroduced by the Labour government in October, will establish a first independent regulator for the professional men’s game in England.

The legislation will hand power to a body independent from government and football authorities to oversee clubs in England’s top five divisions.

Kogan – a former BBC journalist who also previously advised the Premier League, EFL and other leagues on broadcast rights – said he wants to put “fans at the heart of the regulator” and help the football pyramid.