Decision

Advice letter: Jonathan Slater, Visiting Professor and Lecturer, Kings College London

Updated 21 February 2022

February 2021

BUSINESS APPOINTMENT APPLICATION: Jonathan Slater, Kings College London

The Committee has been asked to consider an application for Jonathan Slater, former Permanent Secretary for the Department for Education between May 2016 - August 2020. His last day in service was 1 September 2020.

1. Application details

Mr Slater sought advice on taking up two roles with Kings College London (King’s College): an unpaid, part-time role as Visiting Professor for King’s College London (. He stated this role will involve occasionally lecturing and participating in roundtables. He stated that while lecturing, he may teach civil servants who attend the university however the role will not include contact with the Government itself. A paid, part-time role as Lecturer for King’s College London (King’s College). He stated that his role will be teaching students within the International Education Division.

Mr Slater stated that as Permanent Secretary for the Department for Education (DfE), he had official contact with Russell Group Universities, of which King’s College is a member of. However, he said he had no specific dealings with King’s College themselves. He confirmed that he had no direct involvement in any commercial dealings regarding the university. He also confirmed he did not have access to commercially sensitive information on competitors of the organisation while in post. However, he noted that as Permanent Secretary at DfE he was involved in the development of departmental policy on higher education, and in the development of the regulation of higher education. However, he said none of it featured Kings College in particular, as it was generic policy development for the whole sector.

DfE and the Cabinet Office provided their views on this application. The details Mr Slater provided in his application were confirmed and it was also confirmed that:

Any meetings would have been as part of ‘ a wider stakeholder engagement programme rather than about specific issues relating to the institution’. He is seeking to join Kings College to lecture, rather than to provide advice on running the organisation. As such, ‘there is little chance that King’s College would gain an unfair advantage from his working for them’. Neither department had any concerns with this appointment and it was recommended that he be prevented from using privileged information gained in post and from lobbying the Government.

2. The Committee’s Consideration

There is a clear link between Mr Slater’s role as the Permanent Secretary of the Department for Education and his joining a higher education institute. The Committee^{[footnote 1]} noted that whilst Mr Slater had official contact with the partner organisation, the Russell Group this was through wider stakeholder engagement meetings, and he and the departments confirmed he did not make any decisions specific to Kings College alone and rather developed policy and regulation affecting the sector. Therefore, despite the overlap in the sector he has responsibility for, the Committee considered the risk he could be seen to have been offered these academic roles as a reward for decisions made, or actions taken in office was low.

The Committee noted, there are inherent risks - Mr Slater will undoubtedly have general access to policy and information that could be perceived to benefit any organisation within the education sector. However, the Committee noted that these are academic lecturing positions. Nevertheless, the Committee would draw to Mr Slater’s attention the ban on using privileged information, subject to all former Crown servants on leaving post.

Additionally, there is a risk Mr Slater may offer an unfair advantage to the organisation in relation to access to the contacts he gained while in service. The lobbying ban imposed below makes clear that it would be inappropriate for him to use his contacts to the unfair advantage of the organisation. Further, he is prevented from providing advice on bids and contracts with the UK Government, mitigating the risk of impropriety in relation to funding from DfE and its Arms’ Length Bodies.

The Committee’s advice to the Prime Minister, that under the Government’s Business Appointment Rules, this appointment with King’s College London should 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 of King’s 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 King’s College London and all its constituent parts (including parent companies, subsidiaries, partners and clients); and

• for two years from your last day in Crown service you should not undertake any work with King’s College London 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.

By ‘privileged information’ we mean official information to which a Minister or Crown servant has had access as a consequence of his or her office or employment and which has not been made publicly available. Applicants are also reminded that they may be subject to other duties of confidentiality, whether under the Official Secrets Act, the Civil Service Code or otherwise.

The Business Appointment Rules explain that the restriction on lobbying means that the former Crown servant/Minister “should not engage in communication with Government (Ministers, civil servants, including special advisers, and other relevant officials/public office holders) – wherever it takes place - with a view to influencing a Government decision, policy or contract award/grant in relation to their own interests or the interests of the organisation by which they are employed, or to whom they are contracted or with which they hold office.”

I should be grateful if you would inform us as soon as Jonathan Slater takes up this appointment, or if it is announced that he will do so, either by returning the enclosed form or by emailing the office at the above address. We shall otherwise not be able to deal with any enquiries, since we do not release information about appointments that have not been taken up or announced. This could lead to a false assumption being made about whether he has complied with the Rules.

Please also inform us if Jonathan Slater proposes to extend or otherwise change the nature of appointment as, depending on the circumstances, it may be necessary for her to make a fresh application.

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

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