The ethics committee assessing George Osborne’s new job as editor of the Evening Standard is understood to be actively considering a call for the former chancellor to delay or decline the role.

The former chancellor was widely criticised for his decision not to quit his Tatton seat in north-west England since it was announced that he would take up the position. He irritated the advisory committee on business appointments (Acoba), which considers whether new jobs for former ministers could present a conflict of interest, by announcing the appointment before they were given time to review any potential conflict with his duties as MP and his former role at the Treasury.

The committee is usually given at least a month to carry out research into what contacts a former minister had in his or her department that could constitute a conflict of interest in any new role, but it is understood that some members of the committee were informed less than an hour before Osborne’s appointment was made public. They are now expected to give advice within two weeks.

Osborne defended his new job on Monday, telling the House of Commons that parliament benefited from members bringing in experience of different sectors alongside their constituency work. He was responding to an urgent question from Labour’s election co-ordinator Andrew Gwynne over a potential conflict of interest.

“I thought it was important to be here, though unfortunately we have missed the deadline of the Evening Standard,” the former chancellor joked in the House of Commons, to a mixture of cheers and jeers. “In my view, Mr Speaker, this parliament is enhanced when we have people from all walks of life and different experience in the debate and when people who have held senior ministerial office continue to contribute to the debate,” he said.

George Osborne’s new role means we may find ourselves agreeing with him | Zoe Williams Read more

However, Osborne added that he would “listen to what my colleagues have to say in this debate.”

The former chancellor has been rebuked previously by Acoba for failing to wait for their advice before announcing his Northern Powerhouse project, and similar criticism is likely to be levelled in this case.

The committee relies on giving guidance that might embarrass a former minister or senior civil servant were they to take up the role against their advice. Few decisions are published where the applicant has been advised not to take up the role – normally because those who are told that the committee will not endorse the appointment decide to withdraw their applications.

Osborne’s decision to announce the high-profile role as a newspaper editor – the first case of its kind considered by the committee – may be seen as an attempt to tie their hands. However, the Guardian understands that the option to recommend that Osborne withdraw or delay is being actively considered. Whether the former chancellor follows the advice – which will be made public – depends on his embarrassment threshold.



One particular concern is the Standard’s business model as a freesheet dependent on selling advertising on the basis of its reach and readership, and Osborne’s old connections as chancellor with business leaders, as well as the advertising spend by the Treasury on adverts in the London paper.

There is also frustration that the committee could be blamed if Osborne continues in the role despite it raising conflicts of interest, when it in fact has no legal power to stop him. All work is done via email, and the workload is high, with members considering up to 10 cases a week.

However, some members of the committee who have been pushing for it to be given statutory powers to prevent ministers or civil servants taking up roles that would be a conflict of interest may view the furore over Osborne as helpful in making their case for a more robust process. Andrew Gwynne said that the failure to give Acoba greater notice “deeply undermines public trust in the democratic process” and urged the government to give the watchdog more powers.

“To hold one outside interest is perhaps defensible, but to hold several time-consuming outside commitments that have a deep overlap with the political, full-time commitment to this house is impossible to defend,” he said. Gwynne said MPs and voters wanted to see a “stronger system able to commend the confidence of this house and the public, because it’s what we deserve”.

In response, Cabinet Office minister Ben Gummer said the government welcomed a review of the rules over second jobs and said the ministerial code was a “matter of high concern” to the prime minister.

Gummer said he did not want to prejudice Acoba’s guidance. “The important thing is to say that it is indeed independent,” he said. “They are considering it and it would be wrong for me to prejudice it and say my view or the government’s view on it, not that we have a view until the committee reports on it.”

Among the Tory MPs defending Osborne in the Commons was his former cabinet colleague and Times columnist Michael Gove, a former journalist who himself has been tipped as a potential future newspaper editor. “Is it not the case that we believe in a free press and that proprietors should have the right to appoint who they like to be editor, without the executive or anyone else interfering with that decision?” he said. “And isn’t it also the case that who represents a constituency should be up to its voters, not the opposition or anyone else?”

Osborne’s appointment will be subjected to wider scrutiny. On Tuesday, the economy committee of the London Assembly will consider whether the appointment could “affect the neutrality and objectivity of news coverage in London”.

Osborne will be questioned by his constituents in Tatton, Cheshire, on Friday, when he is expected to attend his local Conservative Association’s annual general meeting.

A petition signed by more than 175,000 people was delivered to his constituency office on Monday, calling on the MP to “pick one job and stick to it”.