Good case for ‘all-party’ involvement in BBC chair appointment, says Lord Patten
The former BBC Trust chairman said that Richard Sharp did the ‘right and sensible’ thing in quitting.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A former BBC Trust chairman has suggested that there could be merit in reforming how the next chair of the broadcaster is appointed, following the resignation of Richard Sharp.
Mr Sharp’s resignation from the position came after he was found to have broken the rules by failing to disclose he played a part in getting Boris Johnson an £800,000 loan guarantee.
Lord Patten, who said that Mr Sharp did the “right and sensible” thing in quitting following a report by barrister Adam Heppinstall KC, was asked on BBC Radio 4’s World At One programme whether the Government should have the last word on who chairs the broadcaster.
“I think the case has been made very strongly and very well that the Government should go along with the idea to have a sort of all-party basis for making an appointment.
“But on the whole, chairmen of the BBC have done pretty good jobs, even though very few of them have been in a position where they could help secure a loan for the Prime Minister.”
The role is currently decided through an open competition of candidates who are interviewed by an advisory panel, but the Prime Minister ultimately has the final say.
On Mr Sharp, the peer said: “I do think that his view of what constituted a perception of a conflict of interest, and the perception that I would have and many others would have, and that the select committee of the House of Commons would have… I think there is a difference there, which would have always been rather difficult to bridge.
“So, I think he did the right and sensible thing.”
Lord Patten, who chaired the BBC Trust between 2011 and 2014, said he hoped that the controversy had not damaged trust in the BBC.
“One of the things which is most important for the future of an open society, of a liberal society in this country, is to continue to have a world-renowned public service broadcaster, and it’s really important that we continue to defend it and we give it more money to do what is an incredibly important job,” he said.