The prolific high street investor which owns Lakeland and has backed chains including HMV and Superdry is sizing up a takeover of the UK operations of Claire’s, the struggling jewellery chain.

Sky News understands that Hilco Capital, which was also one of the recent bidders for Poundland, is among the parties expected to submit offers for Claire’s in the coming weeks, according to banking sources.

Other parties expected to examine offers for Claire’s British chain, which trades from about 280 stores, would include Alteri Investors and Modella Capital, which recently bought WH Smith’s high street chain.

The Telegraph reported earlier this month that Claire’s had hired Interpath Advisory to find a buyer for the UK business as it explores options – including bankruptcy – for its US-based operations.

Prospective buyers of the business have been told that a sale of the British chain could lead to significant numbers of store closures.

One retail industry boss speculated that as many as a third of the UK shops could be axed in a deal to salvage the rest of the chain, potentially putting hundreds of jobs at risk.

Claire’s has been a fixture in British shopping centres and on high streets for decades.

Houlihan Lokey, the investment bank, is advising on the sale of the US arm.

Claire’s, which is reported to trade from 2,000 stores globally, is owned by former creditors Elliott Management and Monarch Alternative Capital following a previous financial restructuring.

Hilco could not be reached for comment on Sunday.

An expert in financial regulation at one of the big four accountancy firms is in talks to become the inaugural boss of English football’s powerful new watchdog.

Sky News has learnt that Richard Monks, a partner at EY, is the leading contender to become chief executive of the Independent Football Regulator (IFR).

The new body will be formally established once the Football Governance Bill receives Royal Assent, which is expected this month.

Mr Monks spent 18 years at the Financial Conduct Authority and its predecessor regulator, the Financial Services Authority, before becoming chair of the G20/OECD Taskforce for Consumer Financial Protection, according to his LinkedIn profile.

He became a partner at EY, where he focuses on financial regulation, in the autumn of 2022.

The prospective choice of a chief executive of the IFR with no professional experience of the football industry may spark alarm among club executives who will face an onerous new regulatory regime overseen by the IFR.

In recent weeks, football industry executives have circulated rumours that the IFR boss was likely to emerge from the professional services sector.

It was unclear this weekend whether other candidates were vying with Mr Monks for the post.

The IFR has already been set up on a ‘shadow’ basis, with Martyn Henderson, former chief executive of the Sports Grounds Safety Authority, appointed in December 2023 as interim chief operating officer of the football watchdog.

The EY partner is understood to have held talks with David Kogan, the government’s preferred choice for the watchdog’s chairmanship but whose formal appointment has been delayed by an investigation sparked by his previous donations to Labour politicians.

William Shawcross, the commissioner for public appointments, is investigating the process through which Mr Kogan was recruited to the role, and is thought likely to produce his report in the coming weeks.

Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, told MPs last month that she was delegating the final decision on Mr Kogan’s appointment to the sports minister.

Stuart Andrew, the shadow culture minister, said at the time: “The public has a right to know whether this was a fair and impartial process, or yet another case of political patronage disguised as due diligence.

“The decision to launch an inquiry is welcome [and] must include scrutiny of [Sir] Keir Starmer, his advisers, and whether any conflicts of interest were properly declared.”

If Mr Kogan’s appointment is ratified, the appointment of a chief executive would be a crucial step in paving the way for the most radical reforms to the supervision of English football in decades.

The legislation includes a new licensing regime for clubs, measures to ensure greater fan engagement and a backstop power allowing the IFR to impose a financial settlement on the Premier League in relation to distributions to English Football League clubs.

Revisions to the Bill have seen a requirement for the IFR to take decisions about club takeovers in the context of the government’s foreign and trade policy removed.

If Mr Monks does land the IFR chief executive’s post, ministers are likely to argue that his expertise as a regulator will balance Mr Kogan’s decades of experience as a negotiator of sports media rights deals.

Last year, Mr Kogan acted as the lead negotiator for the Women’s Super League and Championship on their latest five-year broadcasting deals with Sky – the immediate parent company of Sky News – and the BBC.

His current roles include advising the chief executives of CNN, the American broadcast news network, and The New York Times Company on talks with digital platforms about the growing influence of artificial intelligence on their industries.

The creation of the IFR was pledged by the last Conservative government in the wake of the furore over the failed European Super League project in 2021.

Its establishment comes with the top tier of the professional game gripped by civil war, with Abu Dhabi-owned Manchester City at the centre of a number of legal cases with the Premier League over the club’s financial affairs.

The Premier League has also been keen to agree a long-delayed financial redistribution deal with the EFL before the regulator is formally launched.

Tentative talks between representatives of both factions failed to produce meaningful progress, however.

This weekend, EY declined to comment on Mr Monks’s behalf, while the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has been approached for comment.

An independent review of the water industry is to recommend sweeping changes to the way the sector is managed, including the potential replacement of Ofwat with a strengthened body combining economic and environmental regulation.

Former Bank of England governor Sir Jon Cunliffe will publish the findings of the Independent Water Commission on Monday, with stakeholders across the industry expecting significant changes to regulation to be at its heart.

The existing regulator Ofwat has been under fire from all sides in recent years amid rising public anger at levels of pollution and the financial management of water companies.

Read more:
Serious water pollution incidents in England up 60% last year
Why has there been a surge in water pollution?

Campaigners and politicians have accused Ofwat of failing to hold water operators to account, while the companies complain that its focus on keeping bills down has prevented appropriate investment in infrastructure.

In an interim report, published in June, Sir Jon identified the presence of multiple regulators with overlapping responsibilities as a key issue facing the industry.

While Ofwat is the economic regulator, the Environment Agency has responsibility for setting pollution standards, alongside the Drinking Water Inspectorate.

Sir Jon’s final report is expected to include a recommendation that the government consider a new regulator that combines Ofwat’s economic regulatory powers with the water-facing responsibilities currently managed by the EA.

In his interim report, Sir Jon said options for reform ranged from “rationalising” existing regulation to “fundamental, structural options for integrating regulatory remits and functions”.

He is understood to have discussed the implications of fundamental reform with senior figures in industry and government in the last week as he finalised his report.

Environment Secretary Steve Reed is expected to launch a consultation on the proposals following publication of the commission report.

The commission is also expected to recommend a “major shift” in the model of economic regulation, which currently relies on econometric modelling, to a supervisory approach that takes more account of individual company circumstances.

Read more from Sky News:
Police taking no further action over Kneecap’s Glastonbury show
New fee for Britons travelling to EU will cost more than expected

How water can teach Labour a much-needed lesson

Liz Bates

Political correspondent

@wizbates

On Monday, the government’s long-awaited review into the UK’s water industry will finally report.

The expectation is that it will recommend sweeping changes – including the abolition of the regulator, Ofwat.

But frustrated customers of the water companies could rightly complain that the process of taking on this failing sector and its regulator has been slow and ineffective.

They may be forgiven for going further and suggesting that how Labour has dealt with water is symbolic of their inability to make an impact across many areas of public life, leaving many of their voters disappointed.

This is an industry that has been visibly and rapidly declining for decades, with the illegal sewage dumping and rotting pipes in stark contrast with the vast salaries and bonuses paid out to their executives.

It doesn’t take a review to see what’s gone wrong. Most informed members of the public could explain what has happened in a matter of minutes.

And yet, despite 14 years in opposition with plenty of time to put together a radical plan, a review is exactly what the government decided on before taking on Ofwat.

Month after month, they were asked if they believed the water industry regulator was fit for purpose despite the obvious disintegration on their watch. Every time the answer was ‘yes’.

As in so many areas of government, Labour, instead of acting, needed someone else to make the decision for them, meaning that it has taken over a year to come to the simple conclusion that the regulator is in fact, not fit for purpose.

As they enter their second year in office, maybe this can provide a lesson they desperately need to learn if they want to turn around their fortunes.

That bold decisions do not require months of review, endless consultations, or outside experts to endlessly analyse the problem.

They just need to get on with it. Voters will thank them.

Sir Jon has said the water industry requires long-term strategic planning and stability in order to make it attractive to “low-risk, low-return investors”.

The water industry has long complained that the current model, in which companies are benchmarked against a notional model operator, and penalised for failing to hit financial and environmental standards, risks a “doom loop”.

Thames Water, currently battling to complete an equity process to avoid falling into special administration, has said the imposition of huge fines for failing to meet pollution standards is one of the reasons it is in financial distress.

Publication of the Independent Commission report comes after the Environment Agency published figures showing that serious pollution incidents increased by 60% in 2024, and as Thames Water imposes a hosepipe ban on 15m customers.

Ofwat, Water UK and the Department for the Environment all declined to comment.