The ‘pre-appointment hearings’ system overseen by parliament’s select committees doesn’t exactly set the heart racing; a pale imitation of the American system, where presidential nominees (to the Supreme Court for instance) are savaged by senators sitting as a kind of hanging jury, our version is generally bloodless. Certainly Richard Sharp, the government’s candidate for chairman of the BBC, who dutifully presented himself for cross-questioning last week, emerged with never a scratch on him.
Under the British system (unlike the American) the committee has no power of veto — the worst they can do is publish a disobliging report on the candidate and hope that will be sufficiently damaging to stop the appointment; that was never going to be Mr Sharp’s fate. This was an armour-plated candidate with impeccable establishment credentials and a manner that combines imperturbability with a certain watchful steeliness. He treated the MPs with a cool politeness and showed no rancour when they tried to rile him.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
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