Managing Conflict of Interest - Organisation for Economic Co ...
Managing Conflict of Interest - Organisation for Economic Co ... Managing Conflict of Interest - Organisation for Economic Co ...
20 Managing Conflict of InterestBy the early 1800s, standards of governance were still a longway from being considered transparent and clean. Further advancestook place in the 19th century, in large part as a result of the followingfactors:• The extension of the vote to all males, which created a strongerconstituency for honest and effective government; 6• The influence of political philosophers like Adam Smith,Tom Paine, J. S. Mill, and Jeremy Bentham, who placedemphasis on the limits and efficiency of government;• The growth, partly through the revival of religious belief, ofso-called Victorian values—with their emphasis on honesty,duty, and hard work;• Reforming political leaders, especially four-time PrimeMinister William Gladstone;• The creation of a professional civil service appointed throughcompetitive examination following the Northcote-Trevelyanreport in 1854;• The spread of education, making people more politicallyaware and providing the basis for a competent civilservice;• The passing of legislation aimed at curbing corrupt practicesin elections (including the introduction of the secret ballot)and in other areas of public life; and• The establishment of an independent National Audit Officereporting directly to Parliament.By the early 20th century, public life in Britain was relatively ethical.The control mechanisms that had developed over the previous200 years, plus a supportive culture, ensured that the misuse of publicposition for personal or party gain became rather rare. There werea few high-profile scandals such as Prime Minister Lloyd-George’saward of peerages (and therefore membership in the House ofLords) to his cronies as a reward for financial support—and this ledin 1925 to legislation outlawing such behavior. Probably the mostpersistent abuse of power was at the local level—in the zoning ofland for development and the award of contracts.6Women did not get the right to vote until 1916.ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific
Defining Conflict of Interest 21Government at the national and local levels became moretransparent as the 20th century progressed. Government decisionsbecame more open to public scrutiny, the electorate becamepolitically more aware, and the opportunity for politicians and officialsto place contracts with their favorites was sharply constrainedby the extension of competitive tendering. Britain was generallyreckoned to be among the most honest in the world in terms ofgovernance.Nonetheless, there continued to be the occasional scandaland the press became much more aggressive in spotting relativelyminor transgressions. As a consequence, in the early 1990s thepublic called for more effective measures of control. This demandwas sparked by the “cash for questions” scandal, which involvedConservative MPs who accepted cash for asking questions aboutparticular issues in the House of Commons. The amounts werequite trivial (in the hundreds of pounds) but the scandal reinforcedthe public’s growing distrust of politicians. The biggest concern,in fact, pertained to the funding of political parties. This came to ahead under Tony Blair’s premiership when the Labor party first ofall received a 1-million-pound donation from the boss of FormulaOne racing, who, it was alleged, in return received exemptionfrom a ban on promotions by the tobacco industry. Secondly, therewere accusations that the Government had awarded peerages inreturn for donations to the Labor party in contravention of the1925 Act. There was a 16-month police investigation, but eventuallythe prosecuting authorities decided not to bring chargesagainst anyone.Prior to these particular events, in 1994 a new standing Committeeon Standards in Public Life was established, chaired initially bya senior judge. This committee produced a series of reports, which,along with pressure from other quarters, led to new or strengthenedmechanisms for regulating the conduct of MPs, political parties,ministers, and civil servants. These mechanisms and measuresincluded:• A new Code of Conduct for MPs, requiring them to act solelyin the interests of their constituents and the wider public; 77http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmcode.htmADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific
- Page 11 and 12: AcknowledgmentsThe Asian Developmen
- Page 13 and 14: AbbreviationsACFEADBAPSCEOCFOCOICRP
- Page 15 and 16: Executive SummaryThere is growing c
- Page 17 and 18: Executive Summary xvThe Organisatio
- Page 19 and 20: Executive Summary xviiThe People’
- Page 21 and 22: Keynote AddressesADB/OECD Anti-Corr
- Page 23 and 24: Keynote Addresses xxiI, therefore,
- Page 25 and 26: Keynote Addresses xxiiiConvention A
- Page 27 and 28: Welcome RemarksTaufiequrachman Ruki
- Page 29 and 30: Welcome RemarksArjun ThapanDirector
- Page 31 and 32: Keynote Addresses xxixIt is also he
- Page 33 and 34: Remarks at the Opening DinnerH. E.
- Page 35 and 36: Keynote Addresses xxxiiibe struck b
- Page 37 and 38: Keynote Addresses xxxvthe best huma
- Page 39 and 40: Closing RemarksHidayat Nur WahidCha
- Page 41: Keynote Addresses xxxixeasier than
- Page 45 and 46: Chapter 1Defining conflict ofintere
- Page 47 and 48: The United Nations Convention Again
- Page 49 and 50: Defining Conflict of Interest 7•
- Page 51 and 52: Defining Conflict of Interest 9Conc
- Page 53 and 54: Defining Conflict of Interest 11dut
- Page 55 and 56: Defining Conflict of Interest 13Cou
- Page 57 and 58: Defining Conflict of Interest 15Pol
- Page 59 and 60: Defining Conflict of Interest 17Con
- Page 61: Defining Conflict of Interest 19A C
- Page 65 and 66: Defining Conflict of Interest 23•
- Page 67 and 68: Defining Conflict of Interest 25to
- Page 69 and 70: Defining Conflict of Interest 27abu
- Page 71 and 72: Defining Conflict of Interest 29by
- Page 73 and 74: Defining Conflict of Interest 31Pet
- Page 75 and 76: Defining Conflict of Interest 33sai
- Page 77 and 78: Defining Conflict of Interest 35of
- Page 79 and 80: Defining Conflict of Interest 37Est
- Page 81 and 82: Defining Conflict of Interest 391,5
- Page 83 and 84: Defining Conflict of Interest 41Tab
- Page 85: Defining Conflict of Interest 43to
- Page 88 and 89: 46 Managing Conflict of Interestand
- Page 90 and 91: 48 Managing Conflict of Interestref
- Page 92 and 93: 50 Managing Conflict of InterestImp
- Page 94 and 95: 52 Managing Conflict of Interestof
- Page 96 and 97: 54 Managing Conflict of InterestThe
- Page 98 and 99: 56 Managing Conflict of Interest•
- Page 100 and 101: 58 Managing Conflict of Interestpub
- Page 102 and 103: 60 Managing Conflict of Interestwor
- Page 104 and 105: 62 Managing Conflict of InterestRes
- Page 106 and 107: Asset declaration in the Philippine
- Page 108 and 109: 66 Managing Conflict of InterestImp
- Page 110 and 111: 68 Managing Conflict of Interestwit
Defining <strong><strong>Co</strong>nflict</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Interest</strong> 21Government at the national and local levels became moretransparent as the 20th century progressed. Government decisionsbecame more open to public scrutiny, the electorate becamepolitically more aware, and the opportunity <strong>for</strong> politicians and <strong>of</strong>ficialsto place contracts with their favorites was sharply constrainedby the extension <strong>of</strong> competitive tendering. Britain was generallyreckoned to be among the most honest in the world in terms <strong>of</strong>governance.Nonetheless, there continued to be the occasional scandaland the press became much more aggressive in spotting relativelyminor transgressions. As a consequence, in the early 1990s thepublic called <strong>for</strong> more effective measures <strong>of</strong> control. This demandwas sparked by the “cash <strong>for</strong> questions” scandal, which involved<strong>Co</strong>nservative MPs who accepted cash <strong>for</strong> asking questions aboutparticular issues in the House <strong>of</strong> <strong>Co</strong>mmons. The amounts werequite trivial (in the hundreds <strong>of</strong> pounds) but the scandal rein<strong>for</strong>cedthe public’s growing distrust <strong>of</strong> politicians. The biggest concern,in fact, pertained to the funding <strong>of</strong> political parties. This came to ahead under Tony Blair’s premiership when the Labor party first <strong>of</strong>all received a 1-million-pound donation from the boss <strong>of</strong> FormulaOne racing, who, it was alleged, in return received exemptionfrom a ban on promotions by the tobacco industry. Secondly, therewere accusations that the Government had awarded peerages inreturn <strong>for</strong> donations to the Labor party in contravention <strong>of</strong> the1925 Act. There was a 16-month police investigation, but eventuallythe prosecuting authorities decided not to bring chargesagainst anyone.Prior to these particular events, in 1994 a new standing <strong>Co</strong>mmitteeon Standards in Public Life was established, chaired initially bya senior judge. This committee produced a series <strong>of</strong> reports, which,along with pressure from other quarters, led to new or strengthenedmechanisms <strong>for</strong> regulating the conduct <strong>of</strong> MPs, political parties,ministers, and civil servants. These mechanisms and measuresincluded:• A new <strong>Co</strong>de <strong>of</strong> <strong>Co</strong>nduct <strong>for</strong> MPs, requiring them to act solelyin the interests <strong>of</strong> their constituents and the wider public; 77http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmcode.htmADB/OECD Anti-<strong>Co</strong>rruption Initiative <strong>for</strong> Asia and the Pacific
Change language