Ex-Unite boss Len McCluskey took private jet flights and football tickets arranged by firm behind controversial multi-million hotel project
The probe, ordered by his replacement as Unite general secretary, concluded Liverpool-based firm the Flanagan Group was appointed to build the hotel and conference venue in Birmingham 'with no competitive tendering process, and despite having a history of poor performance, delays, cost overruns' and alleged incompetence on previous contracts.
It also found Mr McCluskey 'signed the contracts, overruled Unite staff who raised questions about the firm, and overruled lawyers who advised against' the contracts.
His predecessor Sharon Graham tonight admitted: 'Money left our union when it should not have. And other money that should have come into the union did not.'
Mr McCluskey, nicknamed 'Red Len', was one of the most powerful men in the industry and was a close ally of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn before quitting the trade union in 2021.
He had been an enthusiastic supporter of the Unite hotel project, which intended to be a financial investment for union members.
But it ran massively over budget - indeed, the report found Unite paid roughly triple the actual value of the Birmingham Hotel Development.
In fact, the union - which represents more than a million workers across the UK - forked out at least £110 million for the project, despite being valued at only £37.5 million.
The contract to build it was awarded to the Flanagan Group, whose bosses McCluskey described as his 'good friends', the report found.
Scrutiny of Unite emails subsequently showed the firm arranged and paid for tickets to matches including to the Champions League finals in 2018 and 2019, as well as matchday hospitality Liverpool home matches against Premier League rivals including Manchester City and Arsenal.
McCluskey also received flights, including at least one private jet flight, to their Champions League final success against Tottenham in Madrid in 2019.
It also identified a £500,000 payment to the firm without an explanation - something the report described as 'very unusual'.
The report found emails also show how Flanagan Group bosses 'sought to leverage their relationship with Len McCluskey (and Len McCluskey's own political connections) to assist with their business dealings.'
Ms Graham said the situation was summed up by unforgettable examples of egregious spending, including paying £1.3 million to 'drill holes in walls' that should have cost just £90,000.
She said: 'Of course, incompetency isn't a crime. Nor is lending money. But how could this eye-watering overcharging happen not once, but on multiple occasions?'
The report found 'potential wrongdoing by a few was enabled by what Unite's auditors called a pervasive fraud environment.'
Mr McCluskey told the report investigators that the Birmingham project was not his 'brainchild', and 'the view that Unite's monies were best invested in property was generally endorsed by other individuals' he spoke to.
He said he signed the contract without seeing the legal advice raising concerns, and was 'totally unaware of the escalating costs of the project, he had no visibility of them, and hardly ever' spoke to the Flanagan Group.
The Serious Fraud Office and the police are now investigating, including a possible criminal investigation into bribery, fraud and money laundering.
This does not include Unite or any current member of its staff.
The Flanagan Group declined to comment tonight.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
Business news live: FTSE 100 reaction to Rolls Royce and Unilever profits plus latest Nationwide house price data
Earnings season among notable FTSE 100 firms continues on Thursday with Rolls Royce, Shell and Unilever all in the frame - the latter being a good indicator of consumer spending power this year. There are also reports due from bank Standard Chartered, miner Endeavour and owner of the stock exchange itself, the London Stock Exchange Group. London's benchmark index finished largely flat on Wednesday and is slightly down for the week so far, but with the US economy growing more than expected in the second quarter of 2025 and further trade clarity coming with the EU and India arranging deals, it's no surprise to see many indices at or near all-time highs. Meanwhile, Thursday also brings the latest house price data from Nationwide, while CASS have revealed which UK banks benefited most from customers switching current accounts over the past three months.
Reuters
2 minutes ago
- Reuters
Bank of England set to split again in face of inflation, job risks
LONDON, July 31 (Reuters) - The Bank of England is expected to cut interest rates next week but the likelihood of a fresh three-way split among policymakers underscores the conflicting risks posed by rising inflation and a weakening job market to Britain's economy. The BoE's Monetary Policy Committee still appears divided between those who want aggressive action to offset the slowing job market, others who worry about persistent inflation pressure and a majority in the middle who favour gradual rate cuts. The MPC's vote broke three ways in May when the BoE cut its benchmark rate by 25 basis points. Many analysts expect a similar outcome on August 7 with the majority backing another quarter-point cut in Bank Rate while others call for a bigger half-point move and some favour no cut at all. Governor Andrew Bailey and most of his colleagues have stuck to their "gradual and careful" messaging about how quickly they are likely to ease the burden of high interest rates on Britain's economy. But some analysts think the BoE might be approaching the end of its run of reducing borrowing costs. Robert Wood and Elliott Jordan-Doak, economists at Pantheon Macroeconomics, predict a "one-and-done" cut next week and expect inflation to hold above the BoE's target of 2% through 2026 and 2027 - in contrast to the BoE's view that CPI will return to 2% early in 2027. "We think the Monetary Policy Committee will have to press pause after one more cut," they said. "Six years of near-continuous inflation overshoots cannot be ignored." By contrast, most economists polled by Reuters earlier this month expected the BoE to cut rates in November as well as next week, followed by two more quarter-point cuts in 2026. That would take Bank Rate down to 3.25% from its peak of 5.25% following a surge in inflation above 11% in 2022. But it would still be a lot higher than its level of 0.5% that held for much of the decade after the 2007-08 global financial crisis. Finance minister Rachel Reeves has often pointed to the four rate cuts since last August as a sign of recovery in the British economy since her Labour Party took power just over a year ago. However, some economists see the BoE's gradualist approach to cutting rates turning even more cautious after a run of data that suggests Britain's high inflation rate is stickier than previously thought. Headline consumer price inflation unexpectedly rose to 3.6% in June and surveys of inflation expectations have shown the public is largely expecting stronger price growth. Elizabeth Martins and Chris Hare, economists at HSBC, said the BoE might increase its forecast for inflation's peak this year to as high as 4% - double its 2% target - from a previous estimate of 3.7%. Policymakers could also sound more concerned about a potential knock-on impact from higher inflation on the public's expectations for inflation and pay growth over the medium term. "The June minutes noted that rising food inflation increases the risk," Martins and Hare said. But they added that the signs of weakness in the labour market meant the BoE was likely to keep its forecast for inflation in two years' time just below target at 1.9%. The BoE will announce the MPC's latest decision and forecasts for the economy at 1100 GMT, half an hour before Bailey and other top officials hold a press conference. The central bank is also expected to assess the impact of its programme of running down its stockpile of government debt ahead of a decision in September on the pace of sales over the following 12 months, a key decision for bond investors.
Telegraph
2 minutes ago
- Telegraph
How much Labour's foot-dragging is costing your retirement
Labour promised a wide-reaching pensions overhaul in its election manifesto to improve the nation's financial security in retirement. True to its word, just a month after its landslide victory, a comprehensive two-part review was announced. Eyebrows were quickly raised, however, as phase one rolled out and it became clear the overhaul was more about generating economic growth for the Government than boosting savers' returns. Even when phase two was finally outlined earlier this month, the review shunned any immediate action and instead set up a Pensions Commission. It will take around 18 months to report back on how to tackle key issues like savings rates and auto-enrolment – the mechanism that signs workers up for a pension unless they opt out. In the meantime, ministers have confirmed that a major pillar of the reforms – the amount which savers and employers must contribute – will not increase this Parliament. It's a decision that could cost workers six figures by the time they stop working. With a fifth of Britain's 15 million pension savers on course to retire in poverty, and reliance on the state pension increasing, Telegraph Money teamed up with Hargreaves Lansdown to explain how much Labour's delays could cost you in retirement. Workers Cost to pension pot: £106,000 Under the current rules, workers must be automatically enrolled into a pension if they earn at least £10,000 and are aged between 22 and state pension age. In return for a 5pc minimum contribution from the employee, their employer must add at least 3pc. There are widespread calls from experts to increase both minimum saving rates to 6pc. With any changes ruled out for this Parliament, however, this now won't happen for at least four years, and any eventual progress is expected to be gradual. According to Hargreaves Lansdown, a 22-year-old earning £23,500 and putting 8pc into their pension until age 68 would have an eventual pot of £213,000. But if the rates were increased to 12pc overall, they would have £319,000 – meaning they would miss out on £106,000. Self-employed Cost to pension pot: £160,000 Self-employed people are not currently automatically enrolled into a pension, leaving many to fall through the cracks and at risk of struggling in retirement. In fact, researchers Nest Insight recently found that just 18pc of self-employed people pay into a pension, despite three quarters saying they want to. If they were automatically enrolled, a self-employed person earning £23,500 would contribute the minimum 5pc, since there is no employer to pay in. If they did this from age 22, they would have £133,000 in their pot by age 68. If the rate was increased to 6pc, their pot would hit £160,000. Young people Cost to pension pot: £39,000 If workers aged between 18 and 22 were automatically enrolled, it could put tens of thousands more into their pension pot. The legislation for this change has already passed but has yet to be enacted. A young worker on the minimum wage working 40 hours a week would currently be paid £20,800 a year. If the age of auto-enrolment was lowered to 18, they would have an extra four years of pension contributions, meaning their pot would hit £7,000 by age 22. Given the long period it would be able to grow for, that amount would be £26,000 by the time they retired. If the minimum contribution rates were also increased to 12pc, this would be £39,000. Low earners Cost to pension pot: £4,000 Anyone earning at least £6,240 is allowed to join a pension scheme. However, they are not automatically enrolled, nor does their employer have to pay in, until their salary passes £10,000. This also hits people with multiple low-paying jobs, as they still wouldn't be enrolled into a pension for any roles paying below £10,000 – even if their combined earnings were higher. If someone earned £9,000 at age 22 and increased their earnings by 3pc a year, they wouldn't cross the £10,000 threshold until age 26. Missing those four years of paying in would leave them with a pension pot of £77,000, rather than £81,000. There are calls to remove this lower earnings limit, which was also included in the legislation passed and is yet to be put into effect. Susan Hope, of Scottish Widows, said: 'Lowering the age to 18 and removing the lower earnings limit could be absolutely transformative for young people. 'It would move them from a retirement of having no car, takeaways and foreign holidays towards one with more financial freedom and choice – without having to rely on other people.' Helen Morrissey, of Hargreaves Lansdown, said: 'Changes to auto-enrolment contribution levels have the potential to transform people's retirement outcomes. However, there is nuance – if the contribution limits are raised across the board there is potential for lower earners to put themselves in financial difficulties today because they are contributing more into their pensions. 'More widely, what the Pensions Commission has shown is that there are a lot of people under-saving for retirement and not heading for the income they want or need. The commission has the potential to have an enormous impact on these people's retirement security.' The Department for Work & Pensions said Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, had addressed the rationale behind the timings in a speech. She said: 'Cost of living pressures mean many workers are more concerned about putting food on the table and keeping a roof over their heads than saving for a retirement that seems a long, long way away. And many businesses face huge challenges in keeping profitable and flexible in an increasingly uncertain world. 'That's why we have already said there will be no change to minimum auto-enrolment contribution rates during this Parliament.'
