Page 8 - Layout 1

Law
Managing conflicts
By Marcus Killick, Chief Executive Officer, Isolas LLP
Recently the UK media have debated, at some length, the appointment of Sir David Green, former director of the Serious Fraud Office, to a new job at the law firm Slaughter and May, given that Slaughter and May represented some of the biggest companies that Sir David prosecuted during his six years as head of the Fraud Office.
Sir David had to wait six months (which is common practice) from leaving his role in the public service. He also had to wait for approval from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments which vets the suitability of new jobs for former senior civil
servants and ministers. Despite all the above Slaughter and May
still announced that Sir David effectively had been ring-fenced at the law firm, which he is joining as a consultant, after concerns were raised over his new role, namely, that there was a risk that his new job could lead to conflicts of interest.
The process now followed in the UK is designed as much to prevent the perception of conflict, as the reality. It came about as a result of a perceived “revolving door” where senior public figures left their role to turn up on the boards of the very firms they had been negotiating with, taking action against or giving contracts to. Few seriously believed that these people may have acted in an inappropriate way to secure their new appointment but anything that left a perception that they might have done debased both the individual and the organization they previously worked for.
Six months time period
Having the requirement for independent approval removes that risk as does the imposition of a six month gap.
Six months is, by itself a compromise. It is wrong to deny an individual the right to continue to work after they leave (and it is logical that their future employment will be linked to the skills they have built up during their working life, including in their previous role). However it does allow their knowledge of specific ongoing matters to become dated. I was subject to this six month rule when I left the FSC although this was reduced to four and a half as I was asked to stay six weeks after my agreed leave date because my successor was unable to start then. My predecessor had been subject to a 12 month prohibition. The work restriction during this period is, by necessity, wide, as conflicts are not always apparent on day 1.
Conflicts of interest are not simply an issue for former public servants, Non- Executive Directors (NEDs), given their
Continued p10
8
Gibraltar International
www.gibraltarinternational.com
Avoiding the reality and perception of conflicts of interest