REPORTS suggests that BBC newsroom staff are "mutinous" over claims that the broadcaster’s chair helped secure an £800,000 loan for Boris Johnson.
According to The Times, sources at the BBC said there was anger that Richard Sharp had supposedly been involved in the former prime minister’s financial affairs before getting the job.
Sharp has denied all wrongdoing and has said in a statement that his selection process was conducted “by the book”.
On Tuesday, he was asked to explain to MPs why he had failed to tell them about his involvement before his appointment.
READ MORE: De facto referendum would see Scots vote for independence, poll finds
The newspaper also reports that Sharp has hired a crisis communication specialist to help him respond to scrutiny.
Sharp, 66, is under investigation by Whitehall’s appointments commissioner and the BBC board after it was revealed that in 2020 he introduced his friend Sam Blyth to Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, to discuss setting up a credit facility for Johnson.
Around that time Sharp was applying for the BBC chairmanship and he took up the job in February 2021.
In a pre-appointment hearing with the Commons digital, culture, media and sport committee, Sharp did not disclose his involvement with Blyth.
Kevin Brennan, a Labour member who sits on the committee, told Times Radio on Monday that Sharp should have told them about the arrangement.
Damian Green, the committee’s acting chairman, said in a letter to Sharp: “Following the recent media reports regarding your appointment as chair of the BBC, the committee would like to invite you to appear before it on the morning of February 7.
“The committee intends to cover the issues raised in your pre-appointment hearing and any developments since then.”
Sharp has already insisted that he did not “know anything” about Johnson’s personal finances.
Asked why he did not disclose the meeting with Case, he said: “I don’t think having a meeting with the most senior civil servant to discuss avoiding a conflict is notifiable conflict in itself.”
A source in the BBC newsroom told The Times the mood was “mutinous”.
Elsewhere, the SNP have said the appointment of Sharp “gets murkier by the minute”.
The Guardian newspaper found that the board which appointed him was made up of a Tory party donor, prospective MP and the wife of the former chair of the Spectator magazine.
The party has reiterated calls for a full and transparent investigation into Sharp’s appointment.
MP Kirsty Blackman said: “Tory cronyism infects every level of Westminster, even in the appointment of the chair of the BBC.
“There must be a full and open investigation into Sharp’s appointment as chair and the panel’s links to the Tory party.
“With Westminster engulfed in yet more scandal, they are making the case for Scotland to become an independent country and that is the only way we will be able to rid ourselves of this scandal ridden UK Government, and utterly corrupt Westminster system.”
There was further controversy on Tuesday as it emerged that Sharp was also involved in the interview last year of Deborah Turness, the BBC’s head of news.
The revelation came in The News Agents podcast, where the former BBC presenter Jon Sopel said it raised questions about the chairman’s separation from newsgathering.
He said: “Someone who had given £400,000 to the Conservative Party was involved in the decision making on who the new head of news would be.
READ MORE: SNP should 'hold Independence Convention to mobilise Yes campaign'
“At the time, I am told, there was enormous disquiet at the top of the BBC from people who had been around news, and editorial policy, for a very long time.”
A spokesman said it was appropriate for Sharp, and other members of the board, to interview the head of news as it was also a position to become the board’s executive director.
The BBC previously said that it "plays no role in the recruitment of the chair and any questions are a matter for the government".
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