AN official review of the process to appoint the embattled BBC chairman implicated in securing a £800,000 loan to Boris Johnson will take place, it has been announced.
The Commissioner of Public Appointments, William Shawcross, said he will examine whether the process which saw ex-banker Richard Sharp appointed as chair of the broadcaster was up to standard.
It comes after The Sunday Times revealed Sharp had facilitated a loan to the then-prime minister before his appointment to the role in 2021.
He had connected Johnson with Sam Blyth, a multimillionaire Canadian businessman who acted as guarantor for a loan of £800,000 to the disgraced former prime minister.
Earlier on Monday, Rishi Sunak said there had been a "rigorous" process in Sharp's appointment, while Johnson told reporters the BBC chairman knew "absolutely nothing" about his personal finances.
Sharp issued a statement on Monday morning which said the corporation's nominations committee would review any potential conflicts of interest in his appointment when it next meets.
In an email to BBC staff, Sharp said: "I was not involved in making a loan, or arranging a guarantee, and I did not arrange any financing. What I did do was to seek an introduction of Sam Blythe [sic] to the relevant official in Government."
Questions around his appointment centred on why Sharp had connected Blyth, who was guaranteeing the loan, with Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, who facilitated his interactions with the PM.
The events in question took place in December 2020, prior to Sharp's appointment in January 2021.
In his message to BBC staff, Sharp acknowledged “distractions such as this are not welcome” and said he has asked the nominations committee of the corporation’s board to look at the matter.
“Our work at the BBC is rooted in trust,” he said.
“Although the appointment of the BBC chairman is solely a matter for the Government, I want to ensure that all the appropriate guidelines have been followed within the BBC since I have joined.
“The nominations committee of the BBC board has responsibility for regularly reviewing board members’ conflicts of interest and I have agreed with the board’s senior independent director, Sir Nicholas Serota, that the committee shall assess this when it next meets, reporting to the board, and in the interests of transparency publish the conclusions.”
Speaking to Sky News on Monday morning, Johnson said: “This is a load of complete nonsense – absolute nonsense.
“Let me just tell you, Richard Sharp is a good and wise man but he knows absolutely nothing about my personal finances – I can tell you that for 100% ding-dang sure.
“This is just another example of the BBC disappearing up its own fundament.”
Canadian education entrepreneur Blyth said the guarantee he provided was for less than the reported sum of up to £800,000.
“The guarantee that was provided was much less than reported and was pre-approved by the Cabinet Office and Ethics prior to it being put in place,” he told the National Post in Canada.
Shawcross said: “The role of the commissioner is to oversee the public appointments process and ensure appointments are made fairly, openly and on merit.
“I intend to review this competition to assure myself and the public that the process was run in compliance with the Government’s governance code for public appointments, using my powers under the order in council 2019 and the governance code.
“My office has today called for the relevant papers from the Department for Media, Culture and Sport.”
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