14/02/2012 Newsnight Scotland

Tonight on Newsnight Scotland: the latest on the problems facing

Rangers Football Club. As the historic organisation goes into

administration, we'll ask if this is the end, or possibly a new

beginning for the club. And what does it mean for the rest of

Scottish football? Also tonight, we visit north west England - do they

relish the prospect of an independent Scotland on their

doorstep? Good evening. Another day, another spectacular series of

events in the 140 year history of Rangers football club. This evening

the club is formally in adminstration, and ten league

points further away from the top of the SPL. There have arguments

inside and outside courtrooms, and tears, literally, in the street

outside Ibrox. But there have also been promises that this process

will result in a stronger, fitter football business. Catriona Renton

has been following the events of a very complicated day. I should warn

you her report contains some flash The end of a long day, as manager

Ally McCoist leaves the building. And this was the reaction of the

fans to their club going into administration. There is such

history to the club, there are families that come here together.

am gutted for every single Rangers fan. What can you do? It has

happened. We need to move on, now. 140 years of history. Just start

again, now it. People across the world and the country will be

watching this with bated breath. People have made bad decisions.

is a bad day for the whole of Scottish football because it will

go through the old Scottish football. The study was dramatic

enough, when Owen, Craig Whyte, said he intended to put Rangers

into administration, to avoid the uncertainty of its tax problems,

hanging over into next season. That gave it up to 10 days of protection

from action by creditors. But, this morning, the taxman up the pace,

and the clock was ticking. Just after 12 noon, HMRC asked the Court

of Session to put Rangers into administration. Then there was

legal argument over Rangers appointing an administrator. Then,

Rangers QC, Roddy Dunlop, said there had been an outbreak of

common sense and that Rangers could appoint an administrator by half-

past three. At half-past Two he HMRC asked for their petition to be

dismissed and Rangers said they would cover the legal costs.

Rangers then appointed administrators, Duff and Phelps. A

monster other things, administration means Rangers lose

10 points immediately in the SPL. Now remember 10 points, the League

is gone and that is it, the big house must stay open! That is the

bottom line as lavish and Mark some of these boys have taken shuts off

their work, some of them have park money to see Rangers and that is

the thanks they get for it. could they not prolong this to the

end of the season? He is four points behind in the championship

race, pulling the wool over our eyes when we had a chance of

winning the league! Strathclyde police said they wanted to make

administrators to ensure that policing costs for future games

would be met. For more on us so David Murray said words cannot

express how disappointed he was. Then the administrator spoke to the

media. We have a statutory duty to act and the best interests of

creditors and we will pursue that function diligently. We recognise

that the great history of this club means a great deal to people

throughout the world. Today is a sad day for Windows and its fans

but the administration will bring to an end the uncertainty that has

been hanging over the club. The administration period, whilst

difficult for all involved, will give stability to the club, in

order for the club to move forward. I can assure all Rangers supporters

that all aspects of administration will be carried out with the

interests of the club, firmly in mind. As a first step, the

administration team will ensure that Saturday's match at Ibrox will

proceed as planned, and all other routine club business will continue.

This evening, Ally McCoist asked everyone at the club, and fans, not

to lose heart. There are people here who are under I -- undeniably

concerned about their jobs and welfare. We fully appreciate that.

Everyone is of the same opinion, that we must rally together, the

work force, the fans and the players, and take this great club

forward. Maybe once the dust has settled, Rangers fans will feel

differently about the day's manoeuvres. But for now, many fans

that we spoke to were angry, frustrated and fearful for the club

of whose 140 year history they have been so proud. I'm joined now from

Edinburgh for a second night by Stephen Morrow, expert in football

finance, and here in Glasgow by the Daily Record's Jim Traynor. Jim

Traynor, the big new thing that we know today is that, actually the

reason the taxman went to court this morning had nothing to do with

this tribunal they have been talking about four weeks. It would

appear, on the face of it, that Rangers have not been paying the

tax or the VAT that they owe over the past few weeks. HMRC are saying

that they are owed �9 million. This has been spoken about for a long

time, four months in fact, that this might well be the truth, but,

until now it could not be written about or broadcast, but the taxman

as they made it clear, that Rangers have not been paying their dues.

And that is why the taxman is concerned, and rightly so. It is

almost inconceivable that you can run a club of that size, a business

of that size, so much in the public domain, and not paying taxes. It is

unforgivable. I hope that Craig Whyte was watching, particularly

those fans. If there is any humanity there, any spark of

understanding what this club means to those people, I do not think

that he will sleep tonight. I imagine he probably will, because I

don't think he fully understands just what he has done to so many

people. Stephen Morrow, what should be read into the fact that the tax

authorities went to court today, rather than allowing Rangers to do

what they said they wanted to do, yesterday? We read into it the fact

that there was information that had not been put into the public domain.

Yesterday Rangers put into the public domain information about the

big tax case. But HMRC have said that there is much more to the

story, and there is other things going on, too. They are reclaiming

part of the story, saying that we put some of this into the public

domain, because it is not currently there. I think, Steven, we have to

focus, and that is what the fat -- the tax people did today. This

nonsense that Craig Whyte has talked about, about the �9 million

tax bill with penalties, it is fantasy. It will not be more than

48 million. That is huge enough. But the chances are that Rangers

might not have to pay that, there might be �12 million penalties, for

instance, but this nonsense about it being as much as �75 million,

that is a red herring. There is a view that, despite the

understandable upset and anger of Rangers fans, that the current

situation may be where Craig Whyte would rather like to be. You could

look at it and make a strong argument, from the beginning, to

say that this is where this was always going to end up, in

administration, and I still think that liquidation is a very real

threat, with the assets of the club being bought by someone, perhaps

Craig Whyte, and you have a Rangers? What is to stop one of his

companies or somebody else offering the administrator money for Ibrox,

for Moray Park, for the Albany car- park? You do not have to go through

shareholders now, especially when it is liquidation, and these assets

could be sold off. The administrator said that his

priority is to look after predators. The main creditor is Craig Whyte so

he has to look after him. This process could lead to stronger,

fitter, better Rangers. It could lead to a much weaker Rangers, and

a club, after 140 years, that is damaged beyond repair. I want to

stick on this point, that it may be in the interests of Craig Whyte to

go into liquidation if he buys of some of the assessed. What I do not

understand is that, if it is the case that he HMRC want to play

hardball, not just on Rangers, but to get tough on tax avoidance by

football clubs the length and breadth of Britain, if they allow

Rangers to go into liquidation, how do the proceeds? Because they would

have lost all the money. There is a political case been made that they

have to be seen to be being tough on football clubs. The other thing

they are concerned about is there for other obligations of the tax

authorities. It is not a case of trying to get money back, it is

also about... Because it appears that Rangers have not been paying

the current tax, they might want to intervene, now, just to stop that

bill from running any higher? is a perfectly sensible obligation,

to try to work in the public interest. They also know that they

are not paying tax as they :, and that is why they might have

intervened. -- as they grew along. It is in the public interest and

the Government's interest, in terms of the Exchequer. If you were them,

it is difficult to see an outcome from administration or liquidation.

It is easy to see, in both cases, how Craig Whyte could still emerge

as the owner of Rangers, perhaps a week in Rangers, but it is

difficult to see how HMRC emerges, saying, where the white knight

coming in on behalf of the taxpayers, we're getting the

taxpayer's money back. HMRC could get almost nothing promise and that

to be the case whether Rangers is in administration or goes out of

business altogether. It is living beyond his means and does not have

the funds available to meet these debts. There is �9 million which he

HMRC say is due to them. What does that mean? We have as the �24.4

million money to Ticketus come from? Fans will be paying for this

for the next four seasons. If that money is still there, Craig Whyte

could say to the Inland Revenue, there is some money, could you

settle the tax bill with that? But it might well be their own money

that he is offering, because, where is this �9 million? What has he

Why do you suggest that should - even should Craig Whyte emerge -

and we should make clear, presumably at this point if it goes

into liquidation or even administration, it would be open to

someone else, perhaps with more money than sense to step in and say,

no, I'll outbid Craig Whyte and take over the assets of Rangers

because I love the club and... administration, it is open to other

predators, but it's in administration. Why would anyone

offer money to take it? Because the big tax bill is still looming. I

mean, that would be folly. You can come out of an administration, but

there is no ruling on the big tax case, so if you buy it now, you

have that liability. So in that sense, if someone else is going to

come in, the club would have to be in liquidation, is that right?

think what's most likely to happen is when it goes into liquidation

because at that point you have a clear picture of what you're

actually buying. That's a more likely outcome. It'ss feasible

outcome, isn't it? You might say it doesn't make sense financially, but

you could they about people who have been take over football clubs

across the UK, couldn't you? Absolutely. The one thing we can

say with some certainty is someone will come along and reform this

club in some shape or form at the end of this process. I think it

won't disappear, but it will be markedly different organisation...

You might not own your assets. was going to ask you that because

you said about three or four minutes ago that you thought if

this scenario comes to past pass, whether it's Craig Whyte or not,

that owns the assets of what would be a new Rangers that it might be a

significantly weaker club than it has been historically for some

considerable time. Why do you think that? I mean, if you have to - if

you're weakened significantly through this process, whether it

remains in administration or becomes worse in its liquidation,

if you're looking to the extent that it will take you years the

recover but you don't own your assets, Ibrox, Murray Park or even

the car park, you'll have to rent those. That'll cost you money.

Therefore, you might not become strong enough again to compete

because you're always paying massive amounts in rent every year

to someone else who owns the ground. Right. You could imagine a Rangers,

what? What are you suggesting? A kind of mid-table team for awhile?

Yeah, I think the worst case scenario is they emerge from this

process or liquidation, and they may be - maybe one or two or all

their assets have been sold off. I am not saying that's what Craig

Whyte is planning, but it's a possibility. Someone else might buy

them. Where would Rangers be then? Obviously one big factor in that is

players. I am intrigued by a technical aspect of this. As I

understand it, if the club is in administration or liquidation,

players could be sold off to get money to pay creditors, but if

you're one of the Rangers' players tonight, do Rangers have to honour

your contract in administration? I understand in England, there was

some sort of test case about this. It was ruled that compensation in

player contract came ahead of secure creditors. That's right.

There are different rules south of the border than north - the

football creditors' rule that exists that protects all football

debt that doesn't apply in Scotland. There is still an expectation that

the players' contracts will be honoured if at all possible.

Nevertheless, it still gives the administrator the opportunity to

try to sell players if that is going to help to meet the

obligation... But do they have to honour the players' wages laid down

in those contracts? That is the given. It's expected to honour

those players' wages if possible. That then comes back to the extent

if that is feasible given that it's an organisation that is no longer

to actually exist as it's currently structured.

We have to leave it there. Thank you very much indeed.

$$NEWLINEnow the latest in our series of films in which our

reporter Ian Hamilton has been travelling to find out what the

English think about Scottish independence. So far he's been to

Cornwall and Corby. Tonight we hear from a part of England which was

part of the Kingdom of Scotland until about 800 years ago, West

Cumbria, and in particular the town of Whitehaven. Given that they are

so near the border and with geography so similar to Scotland,

how do they see the prospect of Freezing February fog rose across

Whitehaven's ancient harbour. It's here 250 years ago where they built

impressive oak ships, where the tine and Cumbrian were at the

centre of adventure and change. Pirates and sailors brought spices

and rum from the Caribbean. Whitehaven itself has been a

trading port until Glasgow established itself. Whitehaven was

the provider of a lot of goods. They're using the spirits of the

past to attract tourists to revive the local economy. I don't think

there will be a negative impact. I don't think that we would feel any

particular loss at our neighbours declaring independence. In fact

there, might be one positive thing that might arise from it is there

is quite a bit of funding to come out of Europe for projects that we

can cooperate across international boundaries, and we would definitely

have one with Scotland, and this could benefit one of the few

industries that we've got in joint areas, and that is fishing.

Consequently it could be a net gain for this area. While I have been

here in Cumbria some have said to me that independence in Scotland

could be good for them in this corner of England because it could

give them access to European money and cash from London.

From the high seas to the High Street, the mood music is that

they're not that concerned about what the neighbours are up to.

# I'm all out of faith # This is how I feel #

Quite a few people I have spoken to and a few in the chamber of traid,

they quite welcome it because they think we may just get more visitors

to this town, and more important, more money coming in through the

Government. # No regrets now

# They only hurt # I think I read somewhere that

Scotland receive 34 billion from the English Government. If it goes

independent, Scotland, that means hopefully the Government is saving

money, and Cumbria is the smallest receiver of money from Government

of the counties in England, so hopefully we may get more

Government money to help us. It's hard to believe that these towns in

the north-west corner of England were once at the heart of Britain's

maritime or industrial revolution. Ship building and mining have gone.

What is left is nostalgia. Thomas Henry as Mayor was the founder of

the White Star Line. For this reason we like to say that the

Mersey port is the route of the Titanic's story. Scotland, if

that's what they want to do, they should go for it. I mean, we feel

even in this part of England that we're often forgotten about by

London and Parliament, and I can imagine how the people of Scotland

would feel even more so. I don't think that it would affect us

enormously because I don't see border posts being set up and the

wall being manned again or the forts that used to litter this area.

2,000 years ago the Romans built a fort, and Hadrian installed a wall

- even to keep us in or keep us out. For more than a thousand years this

area of Cumbria was a part of Scotland. At one time it was. Up

until the 12th century, it was part of Scotland anyway, so here was

more Scottish than anywhere else. Here, the mood swings from apathy

to enthusiasm for Scottish independence - not about what it

can do for us but what opportunities it can present for

them. So could any potential change upset the tranquility between north