Although the pace is now faster, interchange between the public and private sectors is nothing new.
Twenty years ago, when Lord Nolan was writing his first report for the Committee on Standards in Public Life, the concerns were mainly about the flow of ministers and civil servants out into the private sector but the drive to increase external recruitment into the civil service – to bring in specialist skills and share innovation from other sectors – has been a familiar theme for over a decade.
What is new is the increased blurring of the sectors and the new ways in which public services are being provided. This is throwing up more complex ethical scenarios for individuals and departments.
Take the last few weeks. There have been headlines about whether John Manzoni’s appointment as the new civil service chief executive is compatible with retaining his interest, albeit in a blind trust, in SAB Miller; the appointment of the new chief inspector of probation following the disclosure that his wife is the deputy managing director of a private justice company that runs probation services; and the resignation of Fiona Woolf as chair of the government’s child sex abuse inquiry, when she was perceived to have had conflicts of interest.
Public perception can be just as important as the reality. So how do you manage and resolve conflicts to avoid damaging situations? Transparency is key. When people are joining the public sector or delivering services on behalf of the taxpayer, conflicts of interest must be declared and explored at the outset. It is now standard practice for all public boards to have a published register of interests. Candidates joining the civil service must understand the context in which they will be operating, its ethos, and be sensitive to what that means in practice.
Interchange between sectors is clearly in the public interest if handled well. The opportunities for innovation, collaboration and career development benefit both organisations and individuals. But there must also be no suspicion of impropriety. Departments need to identify and actively manage these risks,which don’t just occur at the top. Those responsible for contracting and procurement decisions in defence or health, or policy in the financial or tax sectors, may present a particular risk, even at a relatively junior level.
In my committee’s report on strengthening transparency around lobbying, we argue for a broader approach to dealing with conflicts of interests. The public must have confidence that decisions taken by public office holders on their behalf are made fairly and on merit, without undue influence from vested interests, and in an open and transparent manner. Meetings between public officials and interested parties should be more regularly and more proactively disclosed.
As well as raising awareness and understanding of the business appointment rules for those leaving the civil service, departments should be more alert to the possible conflicts of interests around secondments and interchange and where necessary, impose restrictions or conditions to help manage risks. Preventing negative stories requires proactive consideration of conflicts by departments. There is an important role for Cabinet Office as the lead on propriety and ethics to ensure clarity, consistency and transparency across government.
In an era of new commercial relationships and increased outsourcing, being able to actively demonstrate high standards of propriety is all the more important.
Lord Bew chairs the committee on standards in public life.
Sign up for your free weekly Guardian Public Leaders newsletter with news and analysis sent direct to you every Thursday. Follow us on Twitter via @Guardianpublic
