Labour politicians have received nearly £300,000 of freebies from Manchester City and the United Arab Emirates while the PM personally oversaw a £55million taxpayer loan to the Arab state.
It has emerged that thousands of pounds in free tickets, hospitality and foreign trips were given to the party’s MPs – including VIP seats for the PM’s right hand woman, Labour deputy leader Lucy Powell, according to the MPs Register of Interests.
Meanwhile the granting of the huge loan – which was meant to finance key property projects which would otherwise struggle – is the first piece of evidence that Andy Burnham, then Mayor of Manchester, was directly involved in pro-UAE decisions.
The latest revelations come after Mr Burnham appeared to back Man City’s UAE owners after the club was found guilty of massive financial fraud.
He said he would be ‘really concerned’ to lose Sheikh Mansour’s City Football Group, thanking them for the ‘money that they didn’t just put into the Etihad and the campus around it but also into the city’.
But after a row erupted over his comments, red-faced Downing Street officials insisted no club was ‘above the rules’.
In total, Labour MPs have received £273,396 worth of handouts from the UAE – more than all other political parties combined – including executive boxes at the football and luxury flights.
Over half of the VIP football tickets went to MPs with a Manchester connection including long-term Burnham ally Ms Powell, MP for Manchester Central, which covers the Man City Etihad stadium.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Education Secretary and Labour deputy leader Lucy Powell at the Labour Party Conference
Khaldoon Al Mubarak, chairman of Manchester City, during a match against Sunderland at the Etihad Stadium
Over an 11-month period she was given freebie tickets to five matches worth £2,360 including one £849 VIP ticket to watch Man City take on Newcastle in March 2024.
Now a minister at the Department for Work and Pensions, Andrew Western, Labour MP for Stretford and Urmston, accepted handouts for four matches, including two VIP hospitality tickets for the Community Shield at Wembley in August 2024 worth £880.
Manchester Withington MP Jeff Smith also snaffled VIP tickets to Man City including a ticket to the local derby FA Cup final against Man Utd worth £1,798.
Former PM Sir Keir Starmer, previously under fire for accepting over £100k in handouts, also accepted a UAE freebie – a £900 ticket to watch his beloved team Arsenal play Man City in March 2024.
An investigation by The Sun looking at the MPs’ Register of Interests found that the Arab state’s government ministries, royal offices and state-funded bodies have spent more than £467,000 funding UK politicians – around £3,000 a month – since 2012.
Labour had 28 entries for 25 MPs while the Tories had 43 entries for 38 MPs, worth £174,133. The SNP, Liberal Democrats and Reform also received handouts from the UAE, of £15,000, £3,500 and £1,000 respectively.
The donors included the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of the UAE, the Abu Dhabi Education Council and the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi.
Between October 2014 and May 2025, Man City handouts – worth more than £25,000 – were given to politicians from all parties.
Then Mayor of Manchester, Mr Burnham pictured with the Manchester City chairman in 2019
Manchester City lift the Premier League trophy after playing Huddersfield Town in 2018
Man City deny wrongdoing and are appealing against the guilty verdict. Meanwhile the UAE has threatened to pull out of major UK investment projects including the Oxford-Cambridge planned tech corridor, the UK’s answer to Silicon Valley, in retaliation at the guilty verdict.
Mr Burnham has also been left with questions to answer after it emerged he chaired meetings which approved £55million in funding for the Manchester City owner’s property companies while Manchester mayor.
The huge sum was filtered to three Jersey-based property companies under the ultimate control of Sheikh Mansour’s investment vehicle, Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG).
One of the world’s wealthiest men, Sheikh Mansour is also a member of the Abu Dhabi royal family and vice president and deputy prime minister of the UAE.
Mr Burnham chaired the two crucial meetings in 2017 when the funding was approved from monies from the Greater Manchester Housing Investment Loan Fund (GMHILF).
The £300million fund is a pot of taxpayers’ money lent to the region by central government which was supposed to be lent to private developers to ‘kickstart housing projects that would otherwise be difficult to fund from elsewhere’, according to a Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) press release in which Mr Burnham was quoted.
All three loans went to companies that were ultimately owned by ADUG.
Two of the loans, totalling more than £30million, went to New Little Mill Developments Ltd and Vesta Street Developments Ltd.
Manchester City owner Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan at the Champions League Final
Then Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is welcomed by Khaldoon Khalifa Al Mubarak as he arrives in Abu Dhabi
Subsequent filings show that the ultimate beneficiary of the Jersey-based companies was Sheikh Mansour.
According to University of Sheffield research on Manchester city council’s joint venture with ADUG, ADUG was also the ultimate beneficiary of the third company, Lampwick Developments Ltd, at the time the GMCA approved a loan to it of £24.5million.
The money to Lampwick was apparently earmarked for building 213 apartments on privately owned land that already had planning permission.
Council documents claim that in addition to the Lampwick apartments, the loans would be used to create 68 apartments at New Little Mill, and 169 apartments and three townhouses at Vesta Street, New Islington.
All three schemes were ‘brought forward by Manchester Life’, according to a city council document. Manchester Life is a joint venture between the city council and ADUG.
But with Sheikh Mansour’s wealth estimated at £23billion, commentators are demanding to know why a sizeable chunk of the fund was ever lent to him in the first place.
And questions have been asked about why it happened on the PM’s watch.
Until now, it was not clear that Sheikh Mansour’s contribution to the city, which the PM has repeatedly praised, was partly financed by loans from taxpayers’ money.
It will be a fresh headache for the PM after his allies have repeatedly sought to distance him personally from decisions favouring the UAE.
Louie French, the shadow sports minister, said: ‘We need to know why these firms got loans from a fund intended for housing projects that would not otherwise be viable.’
Mr French told today’s Telegraph that they could ‘easily have got competitively priced loans on the private market’ so questioned ‘why did the taxpayer have to finance them instead, thanks to approval at meetings chaired by Burnham when he was mayor’?
Calling the PM’s intervention in the Man City case ‘completely extraordinary and totally out of touch’, he said: ‘But now it is beginning to make sense.
The Prime Minister needs to come clean: why did he let these loans proceed?’
And the Liberal Democrat chairman of the GMCA overview and scrutiny committee John Leech said the loans appeared out of kilter with the ‘stated aim’ of the funds, and that the committee would look into ‘this issue of public loans for housing schemes in Greater Manchester’.
‘Clearly, there would be no suggestion that the money couldn’t come from somewhere else in the case of Sheikh Mansour,’ he added.
ADUG has repaid the loans with interest. The rate of interest is not known.
Speaking after the fund’s launch in 2015, Bill Enevoldson, GMCA’s chief investment officer, said it was ‘not designed to finance unviable projects but can unlock currently unfundable ones…’.
The GMCA must return at least 80 per cent of the pot to central government by April 2028.
The pot has been lent more than three times over, delivering 11,000 new homes.
An ‘evaluation report’ commissioned by GMCA suggests that developers have been attracted to the fund’s favourable terms rather than borrowing from it ‘out of necessity’.
The terms of the GMHILF loans to the three Abu Dhabi-backed companies have not been made public.
Defending ADUG, a Manchester Life spokesman said it had to put its own capital into projects before accessing loans from GMHILF.
They said: ‘The £55.7m represented the external debt financing for the three relevant developments. It did not form part of the private-sector equity investment in Manchester Life. Presenting them as though they constituted the investment in Manchester Life materially overstates their role.’
Lampwick has since been sold to a US investor, although the properties are still marketed by Manchester Life.
The Lampwick Developments Ltd which was awarded the loan is unrelated to the UK-based company of the same name.
It was also revealed last week that Manchester City Council paid over the odds for a dilapidated retail park that it intended to reserve for development by Abu Dhabi.
LABOUR FACES £300,000 FREEBIES ROW AS ANDY BURNHAM’S £55M TAXPAYER LOAN COMES UNDER SCRUTINY!
Britain’s Labour government is facing renewed political controversy following revelations that Labour politicians received almost £300,000 in gifts, hospitality and other benefits linked to the United Arab Emirates and Manchester City. The controversy has intensified after a separate investigation revealed that approximately £55.7 million in public loans was approved for property companies ultimately controlled by Sheikh Mansour, the Abu Dhabi billionaire who owns Manchester City.
The revelations have raised serious questions about political transparency, the use of taxpayers’ money and the relationships between influential politicians and wealthy international investors. Andy Burnham, who was Greater Manchester mayor when the loans were approved in 2017, has come under particular scrutiny because he chaired the meetings at which the financial arrangements were authorised.
The issue has attracted national attention because it involves several important aspects of British public life: political hospitality, international investment, public housing funds and the responsibility of elected representatives to demonstrate that decisions are made in the public interest.
The £55 million taxpayer loan controversy
According to reports published in October 2026, three property companies ultimately connected to Sheikh Mansour received loans totalling approximately £55.7 million through the Greater Manchester Housing Investment Loan Fund.
The fund was established using public money to support housing developments that might otherwise struggle to obtain commercial financing. Its purpose was to encourage construction, support regeneration and increase the availability of housing across Greater Manchester.
The three companies involved were registered in Jersey and connected to Abu Dhabi United Group, Sheikh Mansour’s investment organisation. The funding was intended to support developments involving hundreds of apartments in Manchester.
Burnham chaired two important Greater Manchester Combined Authority meetings in 2017 when the loans were approved. This has prompted questions about why companies ultimately connected to one of the world’s wealthiest investors were able to obtain financing from a publicly supported housing fund.
Critics argue that the authority should explain why public financing was considered appropriate when the companies were connected to an extremely wealthy international investor.
However, the existence of these loans does not itself demonstrate misconduct. The companies involved have stated that the funding represented external debt financing for the developments, rather than the private equity invested in Manchester Life.
Importantly, the loans have reportedly been repaid in full, together with interest. Nevertheless, the precise interest rates and some details of the lending arrangements have not been publicly disclosed. This has increased calls for greater transparency. <Cite refs={[“turn894588search1″,”turn894588search8″,”turn894588search9”]}/>
Nearly £300,000 in political hospitality
Another major element of the controversy concerns gifts, football tickets, luxury hospitality and overseas trips received by Labour politicians.
An investigation reported that Labour politicians received approximately £273,396 in benefits linked to the UAE, including hospitality associated with Manchester City. The wider reporting also identified benefits received by politicians from other political parties.
These included VIP football tickets, executive hospitality and invitations to sporting events.
Lucy Powell, a senior Labour politician, was among those identified in the reports. She reportedly received hospitality tickets to several Manchester City matches, including a VIP ticket valued at approximately £849.
Other Labour MPs also received football hospitality, while former Prime Minister Keir Starmer reportedly accepted a ticket worth approximately £900 to watch Arsenal play Manchester City.
These figures have generated questions about the relationship between political representatives and organisations connected to wealthy overseas investors.
Nevertheless, receiving declared hospitality does not automatically mean that a politician has broken the rules or that a government decision has been improperly influenced. The relevant question is whether the benefits were properly declared and whether any potential conflicts of interest were appropriately managed. <Cite refs={[“turn894588search0″,”turn894588search4”]}/>
Andy Burnham’s Manchester City connections under scrutiny
Andy Burnham’s relationship with Manchester City has become another important part of the controversy.
During his time as Greater Manchester mayor, Burnham attended hospitality events involving senior figures at the football club. Reports have identified two dinners with Manchester City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak, one in August 2017 and another in April 2018.
The earlier records reportedly valued the hospitality at approximately £300 and £699 respectively. These declarations were previously available through the Greater Manchester Combined Authority but were subsequently removed from its website under its policy of publishing declarations from the current mayoral term.
The disappearance of older records has prompted further questions about public access to information. However, the fact that historical records were removed from the website does not mean that the original hospitality was necessarily undeclared.
The BBC has also reported that additional meetings between Burnham and Manchester City’s leadership have emerged, increasing pressure for a complete account of their relationship. <Cite refs={[“turn894588search7″,”turn894588search9”]}/>
Why are councillors demanding answers?
The £55 million loan arrangements have attracted the attention of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority’s scrutiny committee.
Councillors want to understand why companies associated with Sheikh Mansour received public financing and whether the original decisions followed the appropriate procedures.
One of the central questions concerns the purpose of the housing investment fund. It was designed to support developments that might otherwise struggle to obtain financing.
Critics argue that wealthy developers should normally be able to access commercial loans without relying on public money. They want the authority to explain how the three companies qualified and whether alternative financing options were properly considered.
The Greater Manchester Combined Authority has defended the wider fund, pointing out that it supported thousands of homes and that the loans were repaid. It has also indicated that the scheme was available to developers meeting its lending criteria.
The scrutiny process will be important in establishing whether the decisions were properly assessed and whether improvements to transparency are necessary. <Cite refs={[“turn894588search1″,”turn894588search9”]}/>
Political consequences for Labour
The controversy arrives at a particularly sensitive time for Labour. Political leaders are already facing questions about public spending, living costs, housing shortages and the government’s ability to maintain public confidence.
Opposition politicians have argued that the reported financial arrangements deserve a full explanation. They believe taxpayers should be able to understand why public funds were made available to companies connected to an extremely wealthy international investor.
For Labour, the challenge is to demonstrate that its representatives follow appropriate standards when dealing with major businesses, international investors and organisations offering hospitality.
The issue also raises wider questions about political accountability. Public officials regularly meet business leaders and investors to encourage economic development. Such relationships can be beneficial, but they must be transparent and properly managed.
What happens next?
The investigation into the Greater Manchester loans could provide important answers about the original approval process, financial conditions and the responsibilities of those involved.
There are several questions that remain particularly important:
- Why were the three companies considered eligible for public financing?
- What interest rates and repayment conditions applied?
- Were alternative commercial financing arrangements considered?
- Were all relevant hospitality meetings properly recorded?
- Did the authority follow its financial and ethical procedures?
These questions should be answered through official records and independent scrutiny rather than political speculation.
It is also important to remember that the reported £300,000 in hospitality and the £55.7 million in loans are separate matters. There is currently no established evidence that the hospitality influenced the lending decisions or that Burnham personally received the loan money.
Conclusion
The controversy surrounding Labour’s reported hospitality benefits and Andy Burnham’s involvement in the £55.7 million housing loans has reignited an important debate about transparency in British politics.
The repayment of the loans is significant, but taxpayers are also entitled to understand why the money was provided, what conditions applied and whether the decisions represented appropriate use of public resources.
Meanwhile, the reported hospitality received by Labour politicians raises questions about declarations of interests and the importance of maintaining public confidence.
For Andy Burnham and the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, the coming scrutiny will be an opportunity to provide clear answers and address concerns surrounding the historical decisions.
Ultimately, political accountability should apply equally to everyone, regardless of their position or political affiliation. Public money must be managed responsibly, financial relationships must be transparent and elected representatives must be prepared to explain their decisions. The findings of the investigation will be essential in determining whether the procedures were properly followed and whether further action is necessary.