the report's author, adam heppinstall kc, says mr sharp informed the former prime minister, that's borisjohnson before he had made his application. and on a separate occasion, that he could make an introduction to someone who might assist the former prime minister with his personal finances. in my subsequent interview with the appointments panel, i wish, with the benefit of hindsight, this potential perceived conflict of interest was something i'd considered to mention. i would like once again to apologise for that oversight, inadvertent though it was, and for the distraction these events have caused the bbc. what's at stake here, was the bbc chairman able to be truly independent of the government, or, as this report says, was there a risk people might think, for example, he was beholden to the prime minister? the report goes on to say none of this need be true for there to be a potential perceived conflict of interest. the role is a political appointment. richard sharp was backed by borisjohnson. he was also once the current prime minister's boss, when they worked together in banking. rishi su