Govt rejects GSD criticism of draft conflicts legislation 

The Government on Wednesday rejected GSD claims that it had ignored the recommendations of the Openshaw Report on conflicts of interest, insisting draft legislation drew on expert advice and extensive work to produce a modern and enforceable conflicts legislation. 

No.6 Convent Place was reacting after the Opposition said the draft legislation was heavy on bureaucracy” but “low” on ensuring conflicts were restricted.  

For the GSD, the draft Bill was “weighed down by layers of administration” that would “hamper rather than ensure” conflicts were prevented and penalised, describing it as “toothless and overly bureaucratic”. 

It said that, in government, the GSD would ensure “robust controls” on conflicts of interest based on the Canadian law and “tougher rules” that prevented abuse.   

In its reply, No.6 accused the GSD of attempting to capitalise on the McGrail Inquiry to push its own political agenda. 

It said Sir Peter Openshaw, the chairman of the inquiry, had broadly accepted the submissions of lawyers for former Commissioner Ian McGrail that Gibraltar needed to establish a framework that ensured transparency, accountability and adherence to ethical principles, to safeguard the integrity of public office and to restore public confidence. The lawyers had commended the Canadian Conflict of Interest Act 2006. 

Sir Peter recommended in his report “… that consideration is given to whether this, or some similar legislation, is suitable for implementation in Gibraltar.”  

No.6 said that “at no point” had it argued against the Canadian model but rather, following the recommendation in the Openshaw Report, had sought the advice of one of the most qualified experts in this field in the UK, the UK Parliament’s Commissioner for Standards.  

“The recommendation was clear that Gibraltar could either adopt the Canadian model directly or develop a tailor-made model suited to Gibraltar’s own constitutional and political system,” No.6 said in a statement. 

“The advice of Daniel Greenberg CB, the UK Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, was that a bespoke model is more beneficial for Gibraltar as it is principles based, rather than heavily dependent on definitions which could invite avoidance.” 

No.6 said the Bill covered similar ground to the Canadian model “and more”, but in a more “certain, enforceable and structured way that fits in with Gibraltar's legal system” and was “flexible to adapt to changing circumstances”.  

The Government said it was following that advice and that Mr Azopardi “for his own reasons” has chosen to ignore it.  

“That does not mean rejecting the Canadian principles,” the Government statement added. 

“It means adapting best practice into bespoke legislation that works effectively and proportionately for Gibraltar’s institutions and legal framework.” 

No.6 said this had been clearly explained when a Command Paper for public consultation was published, which itself followed an extensive period of discussion with a wide cross-section of public officials, statutory bodies, law enforcement agencies, representatives of the business community and, indeed, the Opposition.  

It said Mr Azopardi “has clearly forgotten” that the Command Paper procedure – whereby proposed legislation is opened to public consultation prior to formal publication as a Bill – had been introduced by the GSLP/Liberal administration in 2011 and that the former GSD administration in which Mr Azopardi had served as Deputy Chief Minister “did not hold themselves to the same standards of transparency”. 

“The GSD is trying to create the false impression that the Government ignored the Openshaw recommendations when the exact opposite is true,” No.6 said. 

“The draft Bill is the product of expert advice, careful consideration and extensive work to ensure Gibraltar has modern, workable and enforceable conflicts legislation.” 

“Mr Azopardi is not aligning himself with the Chair of the Inquiry, but - once again - with Mr McGrail and his lawyers.” 

“Mr Azopardi has done this throughout the process of the Inquiry, even repeating some of the most outlandish and defamatory allegations made against Gibraltar as a whole by Mr McGrail’s team, all of which allegations were rejected by the Inquiry, something the GSD does not remind the public of.” 

“As always, Mr Azopardi is conflicted by his own political ambition getting in the way of what is best for Gibraltar.”