Azopardi pledges to cut law firm ties as part of conflicts reform plan 

Keith Azopardi, the Leader of the Opposition, said he would sever all professional and financial links with his law firm if he becomes Chief Minister after the next general election. 

He made the commitment on Tuesday as he set out a package of proposed reforms aimed at tightening rules on conflicts of interest. 

They included a maximum eight-year term for future chief ministers and a pledge to prohibit ministers, their close family members and people closely connected to the governing party from benefiting from public contracts.  

The GSD said the measures were intended to address issues it believed had emerged from the McGrail Inquiry and would form part of a broader programme on transparency, public spending and standards ahead of the next general election. 

“We need to learn the lessons of the last few years,” Mr Azopardi said.  

“The commitments I have made today emphasise how we would run things in a very different way to this GSLP leadership.” 

“A Chief Minister has a special role that can exercise influence and power well beyond other ministers.” 

“It is right that there should be higher commitments attached to that role to ensure better democratic protections now and always.” 

In setting out the proposals, Mr Azopardi noted that Chief Minister Fabian Picardo had been a partner on sabbatical of law firm Hassans during his time in office, adding that his likely successor, Health and Business Minister Gemma Arias-Vasquez, was also a sabbatical partner of the same law firm. 

He argued Mrs Arias-Vasquez would represent “more of the same in a repackaged form”. 

Mr Azopardi said the GSD would “run a very different form of Government” from the top down, adding he would resign or retire from his law firm, TSN, and divest himself of any partnership interest if elected and appointed Chief Minister. 

He would not remain a partner on sabbatical, would receive no pay as a lawyer and would have no professional ties with any law firm while serving as Chief Minister. 

The decision is a personal commitment “at this stage”, but Mr Azopardi said a requirement for chief ministers to sever professional links should ultimately be enshrined in legislation. 

The second proposal would limit a Chief Minister to a maximum of two terms or eight years in office.  

The GSD would establish that limitation in law and will also consider constitutional change to ensure future governments cannot simply repeal the legislation. 

The party said the measure was intended both as a limit on tenure and to encourage political regeneration. 

The third strand of the proposals would introduce legal prohibitions preventing ministers from holding a beneficial interest in companies seeking or benefiting from public contracts. 

The same prohibition would apply to close family members of ministers and other people closely connected to the party in power. 

A separate category of people would remain eligible for contracts but face additional restrictions and disclosure requirements. 

Asked how widely those restrictions would extend, Mr Azopardi said ministers, their immediate families and executive members of the political party in power were among those he envisaged as being prohibited. 

He said people involved closely in a party's electoral operation, including election agents and others working closely with it politically, could also fall within the definition, although the precise boundaries would have to be settled when legislation was drafted. 

Wider family members or ordinary party members, he said, could instead fall into a restricted category requiring declarations rather than facing an outright prohibition. 

“I don't believe it's as complicated as the Government purports it to be and I think it's high time that we should be controlling these things,” Mr Azopardi said.  

And he later added: “I don't think that this will make it more difficult, it will just make it more transparent.”  

“It will make it regulated like everywhere else in the world.” 

“Why do we believe that Gibraltar needs to be unique to the point that we are willing to have systems that are capable of abuse?” 

The backdrop to the proposals was the GSD’s belief that Gibraltar must reflect on and learn lessons from the findings of the McGrail Inquiry. 

While the Inquiry's remit was confined to examining the circumstances surrounding former Commissioner of Police Ian McGrail's early retirement, Mr Azopardi said it had also raised wider questions around conflicts of interest that should not be ignored. 

“This really was about the corrosive conflicts of interest that were at the heart of Government,” Mr Azopardi said.  

“And therefore, to learn the lessons, we must break those conflicts and deal with them, and that means having a robust law that deals with conflicts of interest.” 

“It means also that we change the way that we govern and, for me, a clear signal in changing the way that we govern is that I give a personal commitment that even though the law does not require it at present, I will sever those links with my law firm because we will govern differently, and I will therefore not be subject to any perception of conflicts or influences because I will not be linked to any particular law firm.” 

The Leader of the Opposition also pointed to Principal Auditor reports in recent years and controversies over public contracts as part of what he described as a broader need for stronger controls on public spending, conflicts and governance. 

The GSD has previously criticised the Government’s proposed conflicts of interest legislation as a “toothless monster of bureaucracy”, arguing that a new law should instead contain clear prohibitions setting out what ministers and other specified people can and cannot do. 

Mr Azopardi said the Government's Bill contained 46 sections, 23 of which created powers for further regulations, codes or guidance, and contrasted that approach with Canadian conflicts’ legislation which he said provided clearer prohibitions. 

Ultimately, it was about setting a clear line between government and commercial interests to avoid any potential conflict of interest, real or perceived. 

“You can either be in Government or in business with the Government but not both,” Mr Azopardi said. 

“The first set of changes unveiled today marks a distinct approach by the GSD as to how we would intend to run a very different form of Government that is more robust on conflicts, more accountable to you and more committed to govern in a different way.”  

The GSD said a wider programme covering conflicts of interest, waste, abuse and corruption would be set out ahead of the next election.