Decision

Advice Letter: Jonathan Slater, Governor, Morley College London

Updated 21 February 2022

October 2021

1. BUSINESS APPOINTMENTS APPLICATION FOR ADVICE: Jonathan Slater, Morley College London

Jonathan Slater, former Permanent Secretary at the Department for Education (DfE) has sought advice from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (the Committee) under the government’s Business Appointments Rules for former Crown servants (the Rules) on an appointment he wishes to take up with Morley College London as a Governor. The material information taken into consideration by the Committee is set out in the annex.

The purpose of the Rules is to protect the integrity of the government. Under the Rules, the Committee’s remit is to consider the risks associated with the actions and decisions made during time in office, alongside the information and influence a former Crown servant may offer Morley College London.

The Rules^{[footnote 1]} set out that Crown servants must abide by the Committee’s advice. It is an applicant’s personal responsibility to manage the propriety of any appointment. Former Crown servants are expected to uphold the highest standards of propriety and act in accordance with the 7 Principles of Public Life.

2. The Committee’s advice

When considering this application, the Committee^{[footnote 2]} took into account this role as a Governor is unpaid. Generally, the Committee’s experience is that the risks related to unpaid roles are limited. The purpose of the Rules is to protect the integrity of the Government by considering the real and perceived risks associated with former Crown servants using privileged access to contacts and information to the benefit of themselves or those they represent; and to mitigate the risks that individuals may make decisions or take action in office to in expectation of rewards, on leaving government. These risks are significantly limited in unpaid cases due to the lack of financial gain to the individual.

The Committee took into account that Mr Slater had a range of occasional meetings with representatives of college groups and individual colleges. He was involved in discussions on the future of further education policy and regulation in general however, did not meet with Morley College and did not make any decisions specifically on the college or its competitors. Given the above and the unpaid nature of this role, the Committee considered there was no evidence to suggest he was offered this role as a reward for actions or decisions taken in office.

The Committee noted that this proposed role overlaps with Mr Slater’s time in office. Therefore, there could be a risk he had access to relevant privileged information and knowledge, which could unfairly benefit Morley College. However, the unpaid nature of this appointment limits the real and perceived risk of Mr Slater making improper use of information he had access to while in government for his personal benefit. Further, over a year has passed since Mr Slater was in office, and he has an ongoing duty of confidentiality.

As above the Committee recognised that the risks in this unpaid appointment are limited. The Committee did not consider this appointment raises any particular proprietary concerns under the government’s Business Appointment Rules. The standard conditions below, preventing him from drawing on his privileged information and using his contacts to the unfair advantage of his new employer, will sufficiently mitigate the risks in this case.

Taking into account these factors, in accordance with the government’s Business Appointment Rules, the Committee advises this appointment with Morley College London be subject to the following conditions:

• he should not draw on (disclose or use for the benefit of himself or the persons or organisations to which this advice refers) any privileged information available to him from his time in Crown service;
• for two years from his last day in Crown service, he should not become personally involved in lobbying the UK government or its Arms’ Length Bodies on behalf of Morley College London and all its constituent parts (including parent companies, subsidiaries, partners and clients); nor should he make use, directly or indirectly, of his contacts in the government and/or Crown service to influence policy, secure business/funding or otherwise unfairly advantage of the Morley College London and all its constituent parts (including parent companies, subsidiaries, partners and clients); and
• for two years from his last day in Crown service he should not undertake any work with Morley College London and all its constituent parts (including parent companies, subsidiaries, partners and clients) that involves providing advice on the terms of, or with regard to the subject matter of a bid with, or contract relating directly to the work of, the UK government or its Arms’ Length Bodies.

Mr Slater must inform us as soon as he takes up employment with this organisation(s), or if it is announced that he will do so and we will publish this letter on our website.

Any failure to do so may lead to a false assumption being made about whether he had complied with the Rules.

Mr Slater must inform us if he proposes to extend or otherwise change the nature of his role as, depending on the circumstances, it may be necessary for them to make a fresh application.

Once the appointment(s) has been publicly announced or taken up, we will publish this letter on the Committee’s website and where appropriate refer to in the annual report.

3. Annex - Material information

3.1 The role

Mr Slater sought the Committee’s advice on taking up an unpaid and part-time role with Morley College London as a Governor.

Mr Slater said Morley College is a further education establishment and outlined his responsibilities as below:

‘The Board has overall responsibility for articulating the college’s mission, vision and values, setting strategic direction, setting corporate objectives, and promoting the interest of students, among other things. As a Governor I would not be involved in any engagement with central Government.’

3.2 Dealings in office

Mr Slater stated he had ‘occasional meetings with representatives of colleges groups (e.g. the Association of Colleges), and with a range of individual colleges too’. He added: ‘I was also involved in numerous discussions on the future of further and continuing education policy and regulation in general, but never in respect of Morley College in particular’.

He did not make commercial decisions on Morley College, though informed the Committee: ‘During my time as Permanent Secretary the North Kensington College merged with Morley College. I was not personally involved in the approval of this merger, but I was aware of it, as the future of the North Kensington College was a sensitive issue given its proximity to Grenfell Tower. As Accounting Officer I approved the purchase of the site. I had no involvement in any discussions with Morley College (or indeed with North Kensington College) about any of this’.

3.3 Department Assessment

DfE and Cabinet Office confirmed the details provided in Mr Slater’s application. The below was stated:

‘The applicant has had access to policy information about the further education sector as a whole. Due to the seniority of his official role, he would have had access to a wide range of departmental policy and regulatory information on further education. However, this is over a year old and the government has made a number of announcements in this field. In addition, information was about wider policy and the system as a whole, rather than anything of specific commercial advantage to this individual organisation.’

‘In the application, the applicant notes that he has been involved in discussions about further and continuing education policy and regulation. In particular, during his tenure North Kensington College merged with Morley College. He states that he was not personally involved in the approval or the discussions with the colleges. However, he was aware of it and as Accounting Officer, he approved the purchase of the site.’

Neither department had any concerns with this application, noting the standard conditions preventing lobbying the UK government and use of privileged information be applied, in addition to a reminder of the applicant’s ongoing duty to confidentiality.

1. Which apply by virtue of the Civil Service Management Code, The Code of Conduct for Special Advisers, The Queen’s Regulations and the Diplomatic Service Code. ↩

2. This application for advice was considered by; Richard Thomas; Mike Weir; Larry Whitty; Jonathan Baume; Isabel Doverty; Susan Liautaud; The Rt Hon Lord Pickles. Andrew Cumpsty and Sarah de Gay were unavailable. ↩