Arsene Wenger Interviewed: Part I

(Photo by Paul Gilham/Getty Images)

This is the first part of the full transcript of the interview with Arsene Wenger conducted by Sportmail's Chief Sports Writer Martin Samuel at Great Ormond Street hospital on August 6, 2009.

He spoke at length to two journalists, the other being Matthew Syed of The Times. Before the tapes were switched on, considering the nature of the surroundings, we were talking politics, which is one of Wenger’s interests. It seemed as good as any place to start...

Q: It is interesting that we should be talking about politics, what are your politics, what do you believe?

Politically, I am for efficiency. Economically first. Until the 1980s the world was divided into two, people were either communist or capitalist. The communist model does not work economically, we all realised that, but the capitalist model in the modern world also looks to be unsustainable.

You cannot ignore individual interests, but I believe the world evolves slowly. The last 30 years have brought a minimum amount of money for everybody in the west, the next step, politically, would be a maximum amount of money earned by everybody.

That would have to be enforced globally, though, because if one country had a maximum wage, a lot of people might leave and go to a country where it did not exist.

Exactly. But if you look at the world and what is happening at the moment, the biggest issue is the need for a world government. There is no other way out. It will happen, in 50 years maybe, but it will happen. Otherwise you just transfer the problem from one country to the next.

It is not the case any more that you are isolated as an employee, that if it does not go well in the other country you are unaffected and continue to live well. Everywhere is inter-connected. That is logical, the inter-dependence requires a unifying authority to make sure the rules are enforced.

Yes, we are all trying to live now as if that will not happen but in 50 years time Europe will be four per cent of the world’s population. Do you really think you can leave England isolated, France isolated? That’s impossible.

Mastermind: Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger

Q: Applied to football, though, what you are saying suggests there should be global rules that are consistent. For example, you could have a maximum wage in football.

It does not look like that at the moment at all. But people continue to accept that 50 people in the world own 40 per cent of the wealth. Is that defendable humanly? Can you accept that when two billion people have two dollars to live per day? I don’t believe that will be accepted for much longer.

Q: So how do you square these beliefs which are quite egalitarian, socialist even, with your work in football which is a completely dog-eat-dog profession, which many think epitomises what is wrong with the capitalist system?

I also think we live in a competitive world, and I love competition. People who are competitive should get rewarded. But the money I am talking about is nothing to do with football players. Football players are small earners compared to these people. They are not a world problem. The best football players in the world still earn very little money compared to people who really earn money.

What I mean is that we have seen the first signs in America during the economic crisis of people revolting against the bonuses, and Barrack Obama said it cannot be acceptable to pay such a huge amount of money anymore. It is the first sign. Even in America, a pure capitalistic country, it is not accepted. It is the first time I have heard a president of the United States say something like that.

It will take ten, 20 years but there will be common sense. In a competitive world not everybody can follow the pace, you will leave people out. We now accept that we must take care of these people. You cannot let them die in the streets, people will not accept it. And that is right, too.

You are articulating what Blair would call the third way. Competition, an efficient economic system which creates wealth and the people who are very, very rich give up some of that wealth as a safety net for the people at the bottom.

Maybe the wealth will be limited, yes. But you have to reward the people who make the world progress, the guys who invent vaccines, who invent new aeroplanes, because these are people who work day and night, not people who lie in bed waiting for the next day. People who work make the world live better and to reward these people well is normal. Yet they are not the people who are the wealthiest.

So how do you rationalise that philosophy with the money in your sport? Not just player wages, but the cost of club ownership, of transfers?

I accept that what I say is in contradiction with our football world because the money looks as if it has gone higher and higher since I have been in the job. You compare the average wage ten years ago with today and it has gone up. But we live in a competitive world and that is why I say some of what happens now is financial doping. At Arsenal, we live with the money we produce.

Other clubs have artificial income, from owners. They do not live with the money from the game. We have gates, merchandising, sponsorship, television money, but nothing beyond that. What I fight for it to live within the resources we produce and to pay the players according to our real potential, considering the size of the club. That, to me, is normal.

But you still have massive debts. We have big debts because we have built the stadium.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?