Manchester City Council has has been accused of promoting enormous tracts of public land at low cost costs to the Abu Dhabi funding fund that owns the Premier League champions.
The metropolis’s popularity has been put in danger by the authority coming into right into a “bad deal for the council and its citzens” regardless of human rights issues concerning the United Arab Emirates, in keeping with a brand new report that raises questions on how the possession of soccer golf equipment is used for political goals that aren’t helpful to wider society.
The 65-page report by lecturers on the University of Sheffield concludes council’s sale of websites to with Manchester City’s proprietor, Sheikh Mansour, is “instructive” on each sportswashing and “city-washing”. The researchers mentioned the scenario ought to result in scrutiny of different cities similar to Newcastle, the place Saudi Arabian traders have invested in Newcastle United Football Club.
One of the commonest criticisms of those ownerships is such golf equipment are used for different functions, not least the mixing of problematic states into the infrastructure of society.
The analysis primarily covers the Manchester Life partnership, a three way partnership that has constructed 1,468 personal residences within the gentrified Ancoats district. In distinction to the frequent counter-argument that Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) funding has regenerated east Manchester, the report was “unable to identify any income received by the council from its joint venture stakes… despite being exposed to some of the risks of the project”.
It goes on to say that, beneath the phrases of the deal, the council allowed ADUG to carry all land leaseholds, property belongings and revenue rights by way of subsidiaries registered in “the secrecy jurisdiction of Jersey”.
Most notably, it factors out that the enterprise’s administration firm paid solely £4,000 in company tax in 2021 on rental revenue of £10.1m.
The evaluation of the researchers is that Manchester City Council “sold the family silver too cheap” in what they describe as a “sweetheart deal” that “represents a transfer of public wealth to private hands that is difficult to justify as prudent” and is tantamount to “offshoring local democracy”.
The report, Manchester Offshored, reads: “The partnership benefitted from considerable public subsidies in different forms: the below comparable leasehold rates for land transferred offshore for sites in a neighbourhood that had received prior public investment; no affordable housing requirements (whether delivered on- or off-site or negotiated via section 106 financial contributions) and a series of public loans.
“For the authors, this raises concerns about value for money and the protection of public resources, as well as key questions of transparency, accountability and local democracy.
“The researchers estimate the value of the Manchester Life property portfolio to be around £350m and the rental income approximately £10m per annum after VAT. The council does not appear to own any portion of the property assets and does not receive any rental or sales income directly from those assets.”
The analysis was undertaken by Dr Richard Goulding, Professor Adam Leaver, and Dr Jonathan Silver. The authors argue that, “given the contentious nature of this development, it was all the more important to be open about its economics. From the limited information available in the public domain – this looks like a bad deal for the council and its citizens. If you’re comfortable taking the reputational risk, you should be sure to get the best price.
“Longer-term, it raises questions about what values – and whose values – the city represents. The potential for the relationship to become an ethical, political and economic liability are growing against the backdrop of concerns about the foreign policy and geo-politics of authoritarian regimes. Manchester’s self-image as a vibrant, open, tolerant city may be compromised if the council is seen as aiding elites from authoritarian regimes to generate investment returns that shore up their political and economic power back home.”
The report concludes with arguments for a sequence of short-term actions to be undertaken by Manchester City Council to open up transparency and accountability, in addition to longer-term suggestions to deal with wider issues concerning the challenge of worldwide funding into UK cities.
A Manchester City Council spokesperson mentioned: “We reject any suggestion that the sale of the sites involved in the Manchester Life joint venture was not a good deal for the council and the city.
“Land was valued by independent experts, using the nationally accepted ‘red book’ valuation benchmark, and we got the best overall deal we could for each site at a time when there was very little market interest in the area. The value of that deal includes not just the initial receipt for the land but also site-specific overage arrangements, and profit sharing payments. These were always envisaged as longer-term arrangements – the council is due to receive several million pounds in this financial year through the first such payments.”
The council added the Manchester Life developments had “acted as a catalyst, creating confidence and attracting further investment into the area” and had paved the best way for brand new houses and enterprise, producing “significantly more for the city in extra council tax and business rates income”.
Source: www.unbiased.co.uk