John Whittingdale is under pressure over a potential breach of the ministerial code, after an openDemocracy investigation found that the recently-appointed culture minister and longtime BBC critic remained a paid director of a media company for more than a week – although his department claimed that he had tendered his resignation immediately.

Questions have also been raised about the “bizarre” timeline surrounding Whittingdale’s eventual resignation from the board of SWNS Media Group.

Politicians and transparency campaigners have labelled Whittingdale’s continued directorship with SWNS a “clear conflict of interest” for a minister. SWNS has paid the former culture secretary more than £30,000 since 2017 to advise the firm on “media policy” – which is now Whittingdale’s ministerial brief.

SNWS has also publicly lobbied for a weakened BBC, and the firm could stand to profit handsomely from such a move. A government source described Whittingdale’s job as being to “whack” the BBC, and he has publicly backed a number of moves to scale back the corporation’s influence.

The Department of Culture, Media and Sport told openDemocracy that Whittingdale had resigned from SWNS "upon taking up his role at DCMS." He was appointed as a minister on February 14.

However, on February 25, Companies House records still identified Whittingdale as a director of SWNS. That day, openDemocracy called the firm to verify if this information was correct. After checks with senior officials, a company spokeswoman in London confirmed Whittingdale was “a director”, and “on the board”.

The following day, February 26, new documents appeared on Companies House stating that Whittingdale's directorship had been terminated on February 22.

But the termination document was filed electronically on February 26: the day after openDemocracy’s call.

"If openDemocracy had not asked about Mr Whittingdale's on-going directorship, when would he have resigned?" asked Tamasin Cave, of the transparency campaign Spinwatch. "The culture minister could still be the director of a media company today."

SWNS, which boasts of employing over 100 journalists in nine offices stretching from London to New York, was repeatedly asked to explain why the company initially confirmed a government minister with media responsibilities was on their board, and why the document ending Whittingdale's directorship was submitted to Companies House following openDemocracy’s call.

The firm said that Whittingdale had "stated his intention to resign" on February 14 and had "formally" done so on February 22 (a Saturday). When asked to produce evidence to support this timeline, the firm did not do so. Andrew Young, a SWNS director speaking on behalf of the company, said that he had only become aware of openDemocracy's interest in Whittingdale's directorship on February 26, the day after our call.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport also declined to explain the discrepancy between the date of Whittingdale’s supposed resignation, February 14, and the account provided by SWNS.

“Not appropriate behaviour"

Sir Ian Kennedy, the former chair of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, said Whittingdale had “form” in “engaging in behaviour that is not what one regards as appropriate for tribunes of the people.”

Meanwhile the former Shadow Culture Secretary, Chris Byrant, said Whittingdale’s failure to end his directorship at SWNS was “clearly inappropriate” adding: “Ministers have to be genuinely impartial but this conflict of interest means that John Whittingdale should at the very least step away from any issue that involves the BBC, broadcasting and media ownership.”

The Scottish National Party’s culture spokesman John Nicolson MP said: “It can't be right that ministers leave government, then take lucrative jobs in the private sector in the industry for which they held ministerial responsibility."

And Tamasin Cave said: "John Whittingdale has earned tens of thousands from a company that has been lobbying for a slice of the BBC’s budget. At the point that he was given public responsibility for reforming the BBC, he should have quit that job immediately. That he didn’t suggests a relaxed attitude to ministerial standards and rules.”

Whitehall sources told openDemocracy they were surprised that Whittingdale had not immediately resigned from SWNS and said any continuing link to a media group was a grave ministerial error.

An experienced executive with links to some of the UK’s largest media companies, called the timeline of Whittingdale’s exit from SWNS, “bizarre”.

SWNS Media has previously told Parliament that the BBC should treat news agencies like independent producers and be legally compelled to hand over 25 percent of key news budgets to outside commercial organisations. The reported reforms of the BBC championed by Whittingdale, including scrapping the licence fee, could be a financial bonanza for firms like SWNS.

Boris Johnson last year restated his commitment to a hard-line ministerial code where there can be “no perceived conflicts of interest”. But under the current rules, only the prime minister can order an investigation of potential breaches of the ministerial code.

Sir Ian Kennedy said it was now time for a new “conduct and standards regulator to be established… You can’t have MPs regulating compliance with their own standards”