Sunday, January 22, 2023
Is the BBC compromised?
I think that most of us had worked out that the appointment of Richard Sharp as the chair of the BBC was a political act, designed to bring the corporation to heel and to help the Conservatives, few of us knew that it was also a personal appointment in which an interesting relationship between Sharp and the then Prime Minister, Boris Johnson was not disclosed as it should have been.
Today's Sunday Times has an exclusive in which they allege that the BBC chairman helped to arrange a guarantee on a loan of up to £800,000 for Boris Johnson weeks before the then prime minister recommended him for the role.
The paper says that Richard Sharp was involved in talks about financing Johnson’s Downing Street lifestyle in November and December 2020. Sharp, 66, a former banker at Goldman Sachs, had already submitted his application to become chairman of the public service broadcaster and had reached the final stages of the recruitment process:
Late in 2020, Johnson, 58, was in financial trouble as he faced divorce payments, childcare costs and bills for the refurbishment of his Downing Street flat. Sharp, a friend and former adviser to the politician who has given £400,000 to the Conservative Party, became involved that November after a dinner at the home of Sam Blyth, an old friend, in west London.
Blyth, 67, a multimillionaire Canadian businessman and distant cousin of Johnson, is said to have raised the idea of acting as the PM’s guarantor and asked Sharp for advice on the best way forward.
Sharp agreed to help and in the first week of December, he arrived at Downing Street to discuss the matter with Simon Case, the cabinet secretary and head of the civil service. Sharp later introduced Case, 44, to Blyth, and spoke to Johnson.
Before the loan was finalised, Johnson, Sharp and Blyth had a private dinner at Chequers, the prime minister’s grace-and-favour home in the Chiltern Hills in Buckinghamshire, where, according to a source, they ate chop suey and drank wine. The three insist that Johnson’s finances were not discussed.
In late December, the Cabinet Office propriety and ethics team wrote a formal letter telling Johnson to stop seeking Sharp’s advice about his personal finances, given the forthcoming BBC appointment.
By then, Johnson had selected Sharp as his preferred candidate and, days later, on January 6, 2021, Oliver Dowden, who was then culture secretary, announced him as the government’s choice for the £160,000-a-year role.
In line with the BBC’s royal charter, the chair is appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the prime minister and culture secretary. They receive advice from an appointments panel of four people, which must run a “fair and open” contest. Anyone can apply, although the government has the final say and can re-run contests if it does not like the shortlisted candidates.
The holder of the position bears responsibility for the corporation and is required to uphold its impartiality and political neutrality.
Sharp did not disclose his involvement in Johnson’s finances to the panel. Nor did he inform the BBC, and the matter was not disclosed during his pre-appointment hearing before a House of Commons select committee in February 2021.
The government’s own job application form explicitly says: “You cannot be considered for a public appointment if ... you fail to declare any conflict of interest.” It also tells candidates to report “any issues in your personal or professional history that could, if you were appointed, be misconstrued, cause embarrassment, or cause public confidence in the appointment to be jeopardised”.
Johnson never disclosed Sharp’s involvement in the MPs’ register of interests, which says members must declare any benefit that could influence, or be perceived to influence, their public work. He also omitted it from his register of ministerial interests. The ministerial code says: “Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their public duties and their private interests, financial or otherwise.”
Sharp acknowledged that he “connected” Case and Blyth, but says he did not provide financial advice and insists there was “no conflict [of interest]”. Johnson’s spokesman said he had declared his interests properly and said of the Chequers dinner: “So what? Big deal.” The BBC would not comment.
The Times points out that previous incumbents of the chair at the BBC have been political, from both Labour and the Tories, but there is no known precedent of a prime minister selecting an individual who was simultaneously helping them with their personal finances.
They add that the disclosures pose fresh questions of Johnson:
He was referred to the parliamentary commissioner for standards last week after The Sunday Times revealed the existence of the loan, which was not declared on his register of interests. He insists he did not need to register it as it was a private matter and did not give rise to a conflict of interest. Sharp will face questions of his own, including what measures he put in place to guard against the potential conflict of interest or embarrassment, and whether his decision-making has been affected by his personal proximity to the former prime minister.
The question now is whether the impartiality and integrity of the BBC has been compromised as a result of this latest news and the fact that neither party declared the link? In my view this is a resigning matter for Sharp.
Today's Sunday Times has an exclusive in which they allege that the BBC chairman helped to arrange a guarantee on a loan of up to £800,000 for Boris Johnson weeks before the then prime minister recommended him for the role.
The paper says that Richard Sharp was involved in talks about financing Johnson’s Downing Street lifestyle in November and December 2020. Sharp, 66, a former banker at Goldman Sachs, had already submitted his application to become chairman of the public service broadcaster and had reached the final stages of the recruitment process:
Late in 2020, Johnson, 58, was in financial trouble as he faced divorce payments, childcare costs and bills for the refurbishment of his Downing Street flat. Sharp, a friend and former adviser to the politician who has given £400,000 to the Conservative Party, became involved that November after a dinner at the home of Sam Blyth, an old friend, in west London.
Blyth, 67, a multimillionaire Canadian businessman and distant cousin of Johnson, is said to have raised the idea of acting as the PM’s guarantor and asked Sharp for advice on the best way forward.
Sharp agreed to help and in the first week of December, he arrived at Downing Street to discuss the matter with Simon Case, the cabinet secretary and head of the civil service. Sharp later introduced Case, 44, to Blyth, and spoke to Johnson.
Before the loan was finalised, Johnson, Sharp and Blyth had a private dinner at Chequers, the prime minister’s grace-and-favour home in the Chiltern Hills in Buckinghamshire, where, according to a source, they ate chop suey and drank wine. The three insist that Johnson’s finances were not discussed.
In late December, the Cabinet Office propriety and ethics team wrote a formal letter telling Johnson to stop seeking Sharp’s advice about his personal finances, given the forthcoming BBC appointment.
By then, Johnson had selected Sharp as his preferred candidate and, days later, on January 6, 2021, Oliver Dowden, who was then culture secretary, announced him as the government’s choice for the £160,000-a-year role.
In line with the BBC’s royal charter, the chair is appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the prime minister and culture secretary. They receive advice from an appointments panel of four people, which must run a “fair and open” contest. Anyone can apply, although the government has the final say and can re-run contests if it does not like the shortlisted candidates.
The holder of the position bears responsibility for the corporation and is required to uphold its impartiality and political neutrality.
Sharp did not disclose his involvement in Johnson’s finances to the panel. Nor did he inform the BBC, and the matter was not disclosed during his pre-appointment hearing before a House of Commons select committee in February 2021.
The government’s own job application form explicitly says: “You cannot be considered for a public appointment if ... you fail to declare any conflict of interest.” It also tells candidates to report “any issues in your personal or professional history that could, if you were appointed, be misconstrued, cause embarrassment, or cause public confidence in the appointment to be jeopardised”.
Johnson never disclosed Sharp’s involvement in the MPs’ register of interests, which says members must declare any benefit that could influence, or be perceived to influence, their public work. He also omitted it from his register of ministerial interests. The ministerial code says: “Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their public duties and their private interests, financial or otherwise.”
Sharp acknowledged that he “connected” Case and Blyth, but says he did not provide financial advice and insists there was “no conflict [of interest]”. Johnson’s spokesman said he had declared his interests properly and said of the Chequers dinner: “So what? Big deal.” The BBC would not comment.
The Times points out that previous incumbents of the chair at the BBC have been political, from both Labour and the Tories, but there is no known precedent of a prime minister selecting an individual who was simultaneously helping them with their personal finances.
They add that the disclosures pose fresh questions of Johnson:
He was referred to the parliamentary commissioner for standards last week after The Sunday Times revealed the existence of the loan, which was not declared on his register of interests. He insists he did not need to register it as it was a private matter and did not give rise to a conflict of interest. Sharp will face questions of his own, including what measures he put in place to guard against the potential conflict of interest or embarrassment, and whether his decision-making has been affected by his personal proximity to the former prime minister.
The question now is whether the impartiality and integrity of the BBC has been compromised as a result of this latest news and the fact that neither party declared the link? In my view this is a resigning matter for Sharp.
