A Premier League footballer is “very likely” to announce he is gay next year, Justin Fashanu’s niece has said, after the foundation dedicated to her uncle counselled two top flight players who are yet to come out publicly.
Amal Fashanu, whose uncle was Britain’s first and only openly gay male professional footballer, told Sky News the Justin Fashanu Foundation is offering support to the players and wants to avoid a “sensationalist story”.
Image: Amal Fashanu founded the Justin Fashanu Foundation in honour of her uncle
“It’s about figuring out their mental state… and if they are suffering, that they have a place to talk,” Ms Fashanu said of the footballers.
“The more comfortable they feel, it gives me hope they will be closer to coming out.
“I can’t promise that’s going to happen because it’s their decision.”
Advertisement
Ms Fashanu, whose uncle took his own life in 1998, said the recent decision of Josh Cavallo to reveal his sexuality had shown gay footballers in the UK it is now “a safer place” to come out.
Cavallo, a 21-year-old footballer who plays in Australia’s A League, came out publicly in October, making him the world’s only current openly gay male top-flight professional footballer.
Ms Fashanu said Cavallo had shown footballers coming out “might not be the drama they think it will be”.
“They won’t lose their sponsorship deals, they won’t get rejected by their teammates, the fans won’t abuse them every time they get on the pitch or touch a ball,” she said.
“For Josh coming out, this is what I think it’s helped, essentially.”
She now believes it is “very likely” a gay Premier League footballer will come out in 2022, as players have better awareness of the importance of mental health and are “talking about things more openly”.
Ms Fashanu said: “With mental health, it’s impressive that footballers are finally coming forward and saying: ‘This is what I have, this is who I am and I want to change it’. That’s a big step.
“The fact we’re stepping forward makes me think in 2022, there will be a footballer who is ready.”
But Ms Fashanu warned that hosting next year’s World Cup in Qatar – where it is illegal to be gay – is “definitely not a positive thing” in the effort to make it easier for players to come out.
She said it was even more troubling as the last World Cup in 2018 was held in Russia which has faced criticism for its treatment of LGBT+ people.
“It’s concerning and it’s stressful because we don’t know what will happen in Qatar,” Ms Fashanu said.
“It feels like they’re not being considerate towards the fact there might be gay players who feel such a level of anxiety they can’t even perform properly.”
Ms Fashanu said there should be “serious conversations” about a country’s record on LGBT+ rights before it is chosen to host a World Cup in the future.
Image: The next World Cup is being in Qatar in December 2022. Pic: AP
“I’m not sure this was taken into consideration for Russia or for Qatar,” she added.
One football supporters’ group has called for England to boycott future World Cups if they are held in countries where it is illegal to be gay after next year’s tournament in Qatar.
Gareth Southgate’s team are aiming to qualify for the event from November 2022 despite concerns about Qatar’s human rights record, including their ban on same-sex relationships.
Homosexual behaviour is illegal in Qatar and could result in a prison sentence.
Qatar also runs Sharia courts where the punishment for Muslim men engaging in same-sex activity could be the death penalty. However, there have been no recorded cases of this happening.
Calling for a potential future boycott, Paul Amann, the founder of Liverpool’s LGBT+ fans group Kop Outs, told Sky News he would be “disgusted” if FIFA announced another World Cup had been awarded to country where being gay is outlawed.
He said: “If another country was awarded (the World Cup) that had an appalling human rights record, we would be campaigning against that.”
An FA spokesman told Sky News it “stands firmly against all forms of discrimination and prejudice and believes that our game is to be enjoyed and participated in by all”.
“We believe football is everybody’s game, and we will continue to do our utmost to use our influence to drive meaningful change so that our game is for all,” he added.
Rachel Reeves has not offered her resignation and is “going nowhere”, Downing Street has said, following her tearful appearance in the House of Commons.
A Number 10 spokesperson said the chancellor had the “full backing” of Sir Keir Starmer, despite Ms Reeves looking visibly upset during Prime Minister’s Questions.
A spokesperson for the chancellor later clarified that Ms Reeves had been affected by a “personal matter” and would be working out of Downing Street this afternoon.
UK government bond prices fell by the most since October 2022, and the pound tumbled after Ms Reeves’s Commons appearance, while the yield on the 10-year government bond, or gilt, rose as much as 22 basis points at one point to around 4.68%.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch branded the chancellor the “human shield” for the prime minister’s “incompetence” just hours after he was forced to perform a humiliating U-turn over his controversial welfare bill.
Emotional Reeves a painful watch – and reminder of tough decisions ahead
It is hard to think of a PMQs like it – it was a painful watch.
The prime minister battled on, his tone assured, even if his actual words were not always convincing.
But it was the chancellor next to him that attracted the most attention.
Rachel Reeves looked visibly upset.
It is hard to know for sure right now what was going on behind the scenes, the reasons – predictable or otherwise – why she appeared to be emotional, but it was noticeable and it was difficult to watch.
Speaking at Prime Minister’s Questions, Ms Badenoch said: “This man has forgotten that his welfare bill was there to plug a black hole created by the chancellor. Instead they’re creating new ones.”
Turning to the chancellor, the Tory leader added: “[She] is pointing at me – she looks absolutely miserable.
“Labour MPs are going on the record saying that the chancellor is toast, and the reality is that she is a human shield for his incompetence. In January, he said that she would be in post until the next election. Will she really?”
Not fully answering the question, the prime minister replied: “[Ms Badenoch] certainly won’t.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:58
Welfare vote ‘a blow to the prime minister’
“I have to say, I’m always cheered up when she asks me questions or responds to a statement because she always makes a complete mess of it and shows just how unserious and irrelevant they are.”
Mrs Badenoch interjected: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”
A total of 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill – the largest rebellion in a prime minister’s first year in office since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s Lone Parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.
After multiple concessions made due to threats of a Labour rebellion, many MPs questioned what they were voting for as the bill had been severely stripped down.
They ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to Universal Credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.
Ms Badenoch said the climbdown was proof that Sir Keir was “too weak to get anything done”.
Ms Reeves has also borne a lot of the criticism over the handling of the vote, with some MPs believing that her strict approach to fiscal rules has meant she has approached the ballooning welfare bill from the standpoint of trying to make savings, rather than getting people into work.
Experts have now warned that the welfare U-turn, on top of reversing the cut to winter fuel, means that tax rises in the autumn are more likely – with Ms Reeves now needing to find £5bn to make up for the policy U-turns.
Asked by Ms Badenoch whether he could rule out further tax rises – something Labour promised it would not do on working people in its manifesto – Sir Keir said: “She knows that no prime minister or chancellor ever stands at the despatch box and writes budgets in the future.
“But she talks about growth, for 14 years we had stagnation, and that is what caused the problem.”
Prosecutors are considering whether to bring further criminal charges against Lucy Letby over the deaths of babies at two hospitals where she worked
The Crown Prosecution Service said it had received “a full file of evidence from Cheshire Constabulary asking us to consider further allegations in relation to deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital”.
“We will now carefully consider the evidence to determine whether any further criminal charges should be brought,” it added.
“As always, we will make that decision independently, based on the evidence and in line with our legal test.”
Letby, 35, was found guilty of murdering seven children and attempting to murder seven more between June 2015 and June 2016 while working in the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester Hospital and is currently serving 15 whole-life orders.
Image: Letby worked at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital
She is understood to have carried out two work placements at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, where she trained as a student, between October and December 2012, and January and February 2015.
Police said in December that Letby was interviewed in prison as part of an investigation into more baby deaths and non-fatal collapses.
A Cheshire Constabulary spokesperson said: “We can confirm that Cheshire Constabulary has submitted a full file of evidence to the CPS for charging advice regarding the ongoing investigation into deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neo-natal units of both the Countess of Chester Hospital and the Liverpool Women’s Hospital as part of Operation Hummingbird.”
Detectives previously said the investigation was looking into the full period of time that Letby worked as a nurse, covering the period from 2012 to 2016 and including a review of 4,000 admissions of babies.
Letby’s lawyer Mark McDonald said: “The evidence of the innocence of Lucy Letby is overwhelming,” adding: “We will cross every bridge when we get to it but if Lucy is charged I know we have a whole army of internationally renowned medical experts who will totally undermine the prosecution’s unfounded allegations.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:09
Three managers at the hospital where Lucy Letby worked have been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
Earlier this year, Letby’s lawyers called for the suspension of the inquiry, claiming there was “overwhelming and compelling evidence” that her convictions were unsafe.
Their evidence has been passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hopes her case will be referred back to the Court of Appeal.
The Crown Prosecution Service has said it is considering whether to bring further criminal charges over the deaths of babies at hospitals where Lucy Letby worked.
The CPS said it had received “a full file of evidence from Cheshire Constabulary asking us to consider further allegations in relation to deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital”.
“We will now carefully consider the evidence to determine whether any further criminal charges should be brought,” it added.
“As always, we will make that decision independently, based on the evidence and in line with our legal test.”
Letby, 35, was found guilty of murdering seven children and attempting to murder seven more between June 2015 and June 2016 while working in the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester Hospital and is currently serving 15 whole-life orders.
She is understood to have carried out two work placements at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, where she trained as a student, between October and December 2012, and January and February 2015.
Earlier this year, Letby’s lawyers called for the suspension of the inquiry, claiming there was “overwhelming and compelling evidence” that her convictions were unsafe.
Their evidence has been passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hopes her case will be referred back to the Court of Appeal.