‘A conflict of interest’ is now almost the worst thing known to modern theories of governance. It is considered disgraceful, for example, that the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, who is a government minister and was made a peer by Tony Blair, will be the man who decides whether or not there should be prosecutions in the ‘cash-for-peerages’ affair. But it is a strange fact that attempts to sort out such conflicts can make matters worse. Who can doubt, for example, that the Church of England is so scrupulously moderate because it knows that its position as the established Church conflicts with modern ideas of freedom of thought, not to mention the divine injunction to take no thought for the morrow? The governance of the BBC has now been rebuilt, after the Hutton affair, so that the chairman now has a clear duty only to licence-payers, where before he faced both ways, acting to defend the Corporation as well.
Charles Moore
The Spectator’s Notes | 28 April 2007
‘A conflict of interest’ is now almost the worst thing known to modern theories of governance
issue 28 April 2007
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in