UAE delegation visited No 10 before law change that paves way for stake in Telegraph
Ministers disclosed the cap this week as part of a long-awaited clarification on the rules around state ownership of British newspapers. It is higher than the 5-10% ceiling envisaged by the previous Conservative government.
It has now emerged that a few weeks earlier in March, a senior Emirati delegation held a meeting in No 10 with officials including Varun Chandra, the business adviser to Keir Starmer. While details of the meeting are unknown, it is understood the delegation sought clarity on the state ownership law. Downing Street and IMI declined to comment. The UAE government has been approached for comment.
The move effectively paves the way for the United Arab Emirates to take a 15% stake in the Telegraph, most likely through the IMI investment vehicle backed by Abu Dhabi.
The law change ends a lengthy consultation involving intensive lobbying by newspaper owners. It is also a sign of Downing Street's desperate search for economic growth and determination to make the UK an attractive place for overseas investment. However, the decision has come under attack from MPs and industry figures for opening up the British media to more state ownership.
Fraser Nelson, a former editor of the Spectator and current Times columnist, described the decision as an 'indefensible sellout, in defiance of parliament's vote to protect press freedom'. Andrew Neil, a former Sunday Times editor, said Lisa Nandy should lose her job over the decision.
The Liberal Democrats are also opposing the new law and will launch an attempt to block it in the House of Lords with a so-called 'fatal motion'. The tactic is likely to split the Conservative party. Max Wilkinson, the Lib Dem culture spokesperson, said the plan put editorial independence 'at risk'.
'It's a plan we wholeheartedly reject,' he said. 'No 10 must come clean on their meeting with UAE delegates, and clarify whether they were lobbied to roll back on what parliament agreed last year.'
Should the law change go through as expected, it marks the beginning of the end for the Telegraph's ownership saga, which has rumbled on for two years. The Telegraph titles were originally bought by RedBird IMI, a UAE-backed venture that was blocked from taking control by the last government.
Under the new law, RedBird Capital, a US private equity firm, is expected to buy the Telegraph, with 15% of the money coming from IMI, which is linked to Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the Emirati royal.
RedBird is also said to be talking to other possible British investors in the deal. A mooted attempt to buy the Telegraph by the Chelsea FC owner and chair Todd Boehly and the Fleet Street veteran David Montgomery has not materialised.
While there has been significant interest in the Telegraph from other groups, the asking price of £500m has proved too high for most. In 2023, Lord Rothermere's Daily Mail and General Trust had been involved in talks with Qatari investors over a potential bid, but subsequently pulled out. However, the peer still has contacts in the region.
This week, Rothermere was among the high-profile media figures spotted in Doha meeting president Trump and the Qatari emir, Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. His group's events business is understood to be prominent in the region. Others in the party included Piers Morgan, who now owns and runs his own YouTube channel, and Patrick Soon-Shiong, the medical investor and Los Angeles Times owner.
Industry sources said that the UAE delegation was not the only group to have been seeking clarity on the laws around media ownership by foreign states. Other media groups were also said to have concerns over a ban on state ownership, or a very low ceiling on such ownership.
It is a sign of the financial strains the media world is under, as print sales decline and the digital revolution has brought huge change, with previously different kinds of media groups now competing with each other online. The development of AI is also seen as an opportunity as well as a threat by media executives, and the Gulf states have significant money to invest.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
Pound and gilts slump amid doubts over Chancellor's future
The value of the pound and long-term Government bonds slumped sharply after Sir Keir Starmer failed to back Chancellor Rachel Reeves. Ms Reeves was visibly tearful in the House of Commons over a 'personal issue', as her position and Government credibility faced scrutiny after a U-turn on welfare plans. The U-turn on the Welfare Bill is now expected to stop the Labour Government from securing almost £5 billion worth of savings as it seeks to balance the books. Financial markets were knocked as a result, with the value of the pound and gilts dropping noticeably as the Prime Minister spoke in Parliament. The pound slid by 1.14% to 1.358 against the US dollar on Wednesday. Sterling had risen to a fresh three-year high against the dollar on Tuesday. The currency also fell by 0.8% to 1.155 against the euro, striking its lowest level since April. Meanwhile, the yield on Government bonds, called gilts, jumped in the face of concerns among investors. The yield on 10-year gilts rose by 0.17 percentage points to 4.63%, while the 30-year gilt rose by 0.22 percentage points to 5.45%. Both of these were the sharpest increases since US President Donald Trump's tariff plans shook up financial markets in April. Gilt yields move counter to the value of the bonds, meaning that their prices were lower on Wednesday because of the change. The rise in yields also means it will be more expensive for the Government to pay off debts, putting further pressure on its finances. Kathleen Brooks, research director at XTB, said: 'UK bond yields have taken a step higher as we progress through Wednesday, and Prime Minister's Questions has not eased concern that the bond vigilantes are circling. UK bonds are tanking today. 'If yields continue to rise at this pace for the next few days, the PM and Chancellor will have to decide if they want to have a sensible fiscal policy whereby public sector debt is reined in, or whether they want to please the Labour backbenches, who don't seem worried by rising debt levels and forget that we are in a new era, where bond investors can shun sovereign debt in favour of less risky, less indebted corporate debt. 'Overall, this could be the start of another fiscal crisis for the UK.'
The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
Dunn family raise concerns Foreign Office will try to ‘hide' final review report
The family of Harry Dunn have expressed concerns the Foreign Office will attempt to 'hide' the final report from a parliamentary review into the case following an eleventh hour invite to meet the Foreign Secretary. Harry's mother, Charlotte Charles, as well as other family members, are due to meet David Lammy on Wednesday following an invitation for him to 'hear the family's views and concerns'. The review is not set to scrutinise the role or actions of the US government, but will examine the support the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) offered the Dunn family after the teenager was killed by a former US state department employee in a road crash in 2019. The Dunn family spokesman Radd Seiger told FCDO officials they were concerned there was 'no explicit provision for the publication of the final report' in the review's proposed terms of reference. His words prompted an invitation to meet with Mr Lammy on Wednesday afternoon ahead of the review's official announcement, which is expected on Thursday. Mrs Charles said she was 'apprehensive' ahead of the meeting, adding: 'I won't accept anything less than a full, open and transparent process.' Mr Seiger told the PA news agency the family will 'have no part in any process that lacks transparency'. Anne Sacoolas, the American driver who killed Harry, had diplomatic immunity asserted on her behalf following the incident outside RAF Croughton in Northamptonshire before a senior Foreign Office official said the US government should 'feel able' to put her on the next flight home. Ahead of the meeting, Mr Seiger told PA: 'We are grateful to the Foreign Secretary for making time to meet us today. 'That said, it is not lost on us that the only reason we appear to have been called in is because we asked for only one basic and reasonable assurance – that Anne Owers' report will be published. 'That request appears to have put the cat amongst the pigeons ahead of the government formally announcing the inquiry tomorrow. 'The fact that it has prompted such an urgent response gives us real concern that publication of the report may not have been the Government's intention.' Mr Seiger continued: 'Although we will not get ahead of ourselves, if that proves to be the case, I can say categorically on behalf of the family that we will have no part in any process that lacks transparency. 'It would defeat the entire purpose of the inquiry and would represent a betrayal of everything Harry stood for and the brave fight the family put up on his behalf. 'We have always been grateful for David Lammy's support over the years. 'It must follow that Anne Owers' report, the first and only detailed look into those failures must be published. Without that, we cannot move forward. 'We owe it to Harry, to our public institutions, and to every future family who might find themselves in a similar nightmare.' Mrs Charles said any attempt by the Government to 'hide' the final report 'fills me with dread'. She told PA: 'I feel incredibly apprehensive going into this meeting. 'After everything we've been through, the idea that the Government might try to hide Anne Owers' report fills me with dread. 'We have never wanted anything more than the full truth and for lessons to be learned, not just for Harry, but to stop any other family from suffering like we have. 'I won't accept anything less than a full, open and transparent process.' In a statement, the FCDO said: 'The Foreign Secretary has always made clear his commitment to support Harry Dunn's family and learn lessons from this tragedy. 'It is right we brief the family first on any developments and will announce further details in due course.'
The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
‘Premature' to decide whether MI5 should face contempt probe, judges rule
MI5 could still face contempt of court proceedings over incorrect evidence provided in a bid for an injunction against the BBC pending the outcome of an investigation, judges at the High Court have said. In 2022, then-attorney general Suella Braverman went to the High Court to stop the broadcaster airing a programme that would name a man who has allegedly abused two women and is a covert human intelligence source. An injunction was made in April 2022 to prevent the corporation disclosing information likely to identify the man, referred to only as 'X', though Mr Justice Chamberlain said the BBC could still air the programme and the key issues, without identifying him. But at a hearing earlier this year, the London court was told that part of the written evidence provided by MI5 was false. Lawyers for the BBC told the court the 'low threshold' for launching contempt proceedings against MI5 and a number of individuals, for not being fully transparent with the court, had been met. In a decision on Wednesday, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said that a further investigation should be carried out and that it would be 'premature to reach any conclusions on whether to initiate contempt proceedings against any individual'. The senior judge said that the new investigation should be carried out on behalf of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner. Baroness Carr, sitting with Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Chamberlain, also said: 'The investigations carried out by MI5 to date suffer from serious procedural deficiencies. 'Their conclusions cannot presently be relied on.' The written witness evidence, now accepted to have been false, said the Security Service had maintained its policy of neither confirming nor denying (NCND) the identities of intelligence sources. However, MI5 disclosed X's status to a BBC reporter, but then said it had kept to the NCND policy. Lawyers on behalf of MI5 apologised earlier this year and carried out two investigations, which concluded the false evidence was given due to a series of mistakes with no deliberate attempt by any staff member to mislead. In Wednesday's 26-page ruling, the three judges said they were not 'satisfied' with the investigations or their conclusions. They added: 'It is regrettable that MI5's explanations to this court were given in a piecemeal and unsatisfactory way — and only following the repeated intervention of the court.' In the programme about X, the BBC alleged the intelligence source was a misogynistic neo-Nazi who attacked his girlfriend, referred to by the pseudonym Beth, with a machete. Beth is bringing related legal action in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), with the judges finding on Wednesday that the specialist tribunal – which investigates allegations against the UK intelligence services – was also misled. Baroness Carr later said: 'Whilst we accept the genuineness of the apologies proffered on behalf of MI5, the fact remains that this case has raised serious issues. 'MI5 gave false evidence to three courts. This was compounded by inadequate attempts to explain the circumstances.' Following the ruling, MI5 director-general Sir Ken McCallum said: 'I wish to repeat my full and unreserved apology for the errors made in these proceedings. 'We take our duty to provide truthful, accurate and complete information with the utmost seriousness. 'Resolving this matter to the court's satisfaction is of the highest priority for MI5 and we are committed to co-operating fully with the Investigatory Powers Commissioner's Office and the court. 'MI5 is now embarked on a programme of work to learn all lessons and implement changes to ensure this does not happen again. This programme will build in external challenge and expertise – with independent assurance to the Home Secretary on our progress. 'MI5's job is to keep the country safe. Maintaining the trust of the courts is essential to that mission.' A BBC spokesperson said: 'We are pleased this decision has been reached and that the key role of our journalist Daniel De Simone in bringing this to light has been acknowledged by the judges. 'We believe our journalism on this story has always been in the highest public interest.'
