Richard Sharp saga confirms rules are different at the top

In recent days, it has become abundantly clear that Sharp cannot continue in his role at the BBC.

Yesterday, the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee released a report into the circumstances around Sharp’s appointment.

The report is damning and the fact Sharp’s didn’t offer his resignation immediately upon its release is shameful. The DCMS committee approved Sharp’s appointment two years ago. But he didn’t give them all the information they needed to make an informed judgement as to whether he was suitable for the job.

READ MORE: Who is under-fire BBC chairman Richard Sharp?

They now say his failure to notify them of his involvement in organising a £800,000 loan for then prime minister Boris Johnson amounted to a “breach of the standards expected” of those applying for public appointments.

The committee, which is made up of a cross-party group of MPs, hasn’t explicitly called on Sharp to quit but it got pretty damn close, saying he should “consider the impact his omissions will have on trust in him, the BBC and public appointments process”. They are right. Trust in the BBC will be eroded further the longer this goes on.

The process by which Sharp was appointed has been shown to be flawed. Given the comments made by the committee, it seems unlikely it would have approved him for the position had it known about the financial fixer role he fulfilled for Johnson.

Sharp didn’t think it necessary to mention the private conversations he had with Johnson before he applied for the job, or his meeting with Simon Case about the prime minister’s finances.

In any other job, if you were found to have lied – or if you missed out relevant information that was integral to the hiring process – you’d be sacked.

As yet, the only response we’ve had from Sharp after the publication of this report is a half-arsed comment from his spokesperson to say he “regrets” that MPs didn’t feel they had all the information they needed.

He also offered an apology. That’s simply not good enough. This is more than a mere oversight, or an error of judgment, or any of the other sanitised phrases that are so often applied to powerful people who have acted deceitfully.

Trust matters in public life. It matters because in those places where enormous power lies and where public money is spent, transparency has to be expected.

It has to be enforced. And there have to be consequences when we find it lacking.

These checks and balances should never be seen as optional extras. The BBC holds a profoundly important position in the UK. Public service broadcasting can’t be overseen by a man who helped facilitate a loan for a sitting prime minister and failed to let the relevant people know about it.

READ MORE: SNP and Labour call Richard Sharp's position 'untenable' and 'murky'

There will be a General Election next year. Every election is significant but this one will be truly momentous. A resurgent Labour Party hopes to return to power for the first time in over a decade. Current polling suggests the Conservatives could be facing a near-total wipeout.

The contest is going to be ferocious. Spin and dirty tricks will be even more prevalent than usual. The BBC is supposed to be fair and impartial, though readers will cast their own judgement on how well they think the BBC has met that particular remit in recent years.

But in an election where Tory sleaze and corruption will be a key focus, how on earth can the BBC have a chairman who is implicated in one such example of the government’s dodgy dealings?

Labour MP Lucy Powell said Sharp’s position is “increasingly untenable” because it “throws into serious doubt the impartiality and independence that is so fundamental to trust in the BBC. The Conservatives’ cronyism is dragging down the BBC when we should be building it up”.

It’s no wonder BBC staff are said to be furious at the way this story has unfolded and Sharp’s refusal to stand down. His actions are damaging for the corporation as a whole and they impact on the good work they do.

Ordinary people are sick and tired of the shortcuts, special favours, VIP lanes and backroom deals that always seem to be available to aid a tiny minority of powerful people.

Sharp has thus far shown no indication that he intends to quit. If he is still in post by the end of the week then that would once again confirm the rules are different for those at the top.

In the BBC Charter it says: “Trust is the foundation of the BBC – we’re independent, impartial and truthful.”

Convincing the public that that statement is true will be a lot more difficult if Sharp remains as chairman.