Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Alamy Stock Photo

BBC chairman steps down after not disclosing role in Boris Johnson loan guarantee

Richard Sharp helped facilitate an £800,000 loan guarantee for then UK prime minister Boris Johnson before being recommended for the chairman role.

RICHARD SHARP HAS resigned as BBC chairman after conceding a report found he breached the UK governance code for public appointments.

He announced this morning that he will stand down at the end of June after reading the findings of barrister Adam Heppinstall KC’s review into his appointment, which has just been published.

The report was ordered after it emerged he played a role in facilitating an £800,000 loan guarantee for then UK prime minister Boris Johnson before being recommended for the influential role overseeing the public broadcaster’s independence.

featureimage Richard Sharp will stand down at the end of June PA PA

In a statement, he said: “Mr Heppinstall’s view is that while I did breach the governance code for public appointments, he states that a breach does not necessarily invalidate an appointment.

“Indeed, I have always maintained the breach was inadvertent and not material, which the facts he lays out substantiate. The Secretary of State has consulted with the BBC Board who support that view.

“Nevertheless, I have decided that it is right to prioritise the interests of the BBC.

“I feel that this matter may well be a distraction from the Corporation’s good work were I to remain in post until the end of my term.

“I have therefore this morning resigned as BBC Chair to the Secretary of State, and to the Board.”

Close
47 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Linda Mooney
    Favourite Linda Mooney
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 8:11 AM

    Why was he never held accountable? Why? Ireland’s very own Goebels.Despicable. Why didn’t it get taken to the Human Rights Court when out own system let these women down .

    69
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Catherine Mill
    Favourite Catherine Mill
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 11:38 AM

    Yes I agree he should be in jail. Everyone in Drogheda knew about him and many went North or to Dublin to have their babies. Everyone was too scared to speak out lest they loose their own jobs.
    Clearly Irish women’s wombs and creativity are not worth much with the amount of money they will receive. For a lifetime of misery.
    The worst feeling has to be that Neary has never been jailed
    Justice has to be SEEN, To be done.!

    12
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute rotund jocularity
    Favourite rotund jocularity
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 8:41 AM

    Its a shame that when he was burgled and assaulted that he didnt have his head removed when he went there for medical assistance. Why isnt he in jail?

    33
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute rotund jocularity
    Favourite rotund jocularity
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 8:42 AM

    ‘there’ being hospital

    7
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Ed Appleby
    Favourite Ed Appleby
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 11:21 AM

    Neary should be behind bars along with those who helped him and those in management who should have stopped him. The hospital at the centre of this also needs to be held accountable, did they not have any checks in place to stop this kind of abuse of patients taking place? I cannot believe he has never been arrested and charged, only in Ireland would a monster like Neary be allowed to walk around scot free.

    11
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Catherine Mill
    Favourite Catherine Mill
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 11:42 AM

    Well, I heard one nurse tried to get the truth out and lost her job.
    These doctors were treated like “gods”
    Even see the way the nurses have to walk feet behind them on their rounds and the fear in the nurses body language.
    We just need to see old patriarchy for what it was and is.

    7
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Catherine Mill
    Favourite Catherine Mill
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 11:44 AM

    This hospital had a terrible reputation- not just Neary.
    People even carried cards stipulating that in emergency Do not bring me to MMM Drogheda.
    Also in the 1990′s unmarried girls were treated like sinners and made to suffer. You had to have seen it and experienced it to comprehend.

    8
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute brian walters
    Favourite brian walters
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 10:16 AM

    Why was this man not jailed

    9
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Catherine Mill
    Favourite Catherine Mill
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 11:39 AM

    its Ireland.
    They were just women after all, second class citizens. That was the mentality and no one can say otherwise.

    6
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute b flynn
    Favourite b flynn
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 4:44 PM

    Well done to the women, their persistence with the support of Patient Focus – they now have got for us what our solicitors couldn’t

    6
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Marie O Connor
    Favourite Marie O Connor
    Report
    Nov 11th 2013, 3:55 PM

    Redress? What redress? Still the same old, same old. Trying to save money at the expense of justice. The Supreme Court awarded one of these women 250,000 10 years ago: today the Government offers 60,000 – 100,000 for the same injury. Women over 40 were having children when Judge Harding Clark excluded them on age grounds from the terms of a so-called redress scheme that was then rubber stamped by HSE funded patient groups. And what’s this about 30 days in which to apply? Is this another cost saver, drawn up in the hope that late applications will disqualify some?

    3
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

Leave a commentcancel

 
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds