THE former head of Whitehall procurement became an adviser to Greensill Capital while still working as a civil servant in a move approved by the Cabinet Office, it has emerged.
Downing Street has announced an independent review into how the failed firm secured Government contracts, following a series of reports on former prime minister David Cameron’s lobbying on behalf of the company.
Correspondence between the Cabinet Office and the head of the official Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) has revealed that Bill Crothers joined Greensill as a part-time adviser to the board in 2015.
READ MORE: Rishi Sunak is nowhere to be seen as MPs asks questions of Tory lobbying scandal
Crothers was still working as a civil servant when he took up the advisory role, a move which he said was approved by a conflicts of interest policy and “supported by the Cabinet Office leadership”.
He left the civil service later that year, after three years as the Government’s chief commercial officer, and subsequently became a director at Greensill.
Labour called it an “extraordinary and shocking revelation” and called for a parliamentary inquiry into the Greensill lobbying scandal.
It came after The Times and Financial Times reported that Crothers joined the board of the financial firm in 2016, less than a year after leaving his post as the Government’s chief procurement officer.
The papers reported that he failed to obtain permission from Acoba, which is supposed to vet private sector appointments by former ministers and senior servants within two years of leaving their posts.
In a letter to civil service chief operating officer Alex Chisholm following the reports, Acoba chairman Lord Pickles questioned why the committee had not received an application from Crothers in relation to his role at Greensill.
In correspondence which was published today, Chisholm said Crothers had taken a role advising the board of Greensill in September 2015 while employed as a civil servant.
A picture of the letter from Lord Pickles to Alex Chisholm can be viewed below, but for a high-quality pdf, visit this link.
The move was approved through the Cabinet Office’s “internal conflicts of interest policy, which advises on how to address real or perceived conflicts of interest”, according to Chisholm.
He added that as Crothers was already working in an advisory capacity to Greensill before he left the civil service at the end of 2015, he was not required to submit an application to Acoba when he became a director.
In a letter to Lord Pickles, Crothers claimed he did “completely respect the required process” and had been told no application was required to be submitted to the committee.
“It was seen as a way of me transitioning back into the private sector and was supported by the Cabinet Office leadership,” Crothers said in the letter.
“This advisory role was not seen as contentious, and I believe not uncommon. I then left the civil service in good stead and with best wishes.”
In response, Lord Pickles criticised the “lack of transparency” around Crothers’ part-time employment with Greensill, and urged the Cabinet Office to publish the conflicts of interest policy.
Shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Rachel Reeves said: “This is an extraordinary and shocking revelation.
“The Conservatives have weakened the rules so much they may as well rip them up and start again.
READ MORE: Greensill: Probe launched into firm David Cameron lobbied government for Covid contracts
“They must be kidding themselves if they think the current checks and measures they’ve got in place are working.
“They need to strengthen rules now and get everything about the Greensill scandal out in the open with a proper parliamentary inquiry.”
Greensill later collapsed into administration but not before Mr Cameron unsuccessfully lobbied ministers on its behalf for support through the Government’s Covid Corporate Financing Facility (CCFF).
The investigation will examine how the specialist bank – founded by Australian financier Lex Greensill – was granted access to a Covid loan scheme for businesses, putting hundreds of millions of pounds taxpayers’ money at risk.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel