Donations to Labour made by the chairman of the new football watchdog were discussed in his interview for the role, Lisa Nandy has said amid Opposition calls for an ethics probe into the appointment.
But the Culture Secretary said any contribution by David Kogan to her former leadership campaign was not raised, as she apologised âunreservedlyâ for failing to meet âthe highest standardsâ during the process.
An independent investigation found Ms Nandy âunknowinglyâ breached the code on public appointments by failing to declare she had received two donations totalling ÂŁ2,900 from Mr Kogan, a media rights expert, in 2020.
Following its conclusion, Sir Keir Starmer reprimanded her by saying âthe process followed was not entirely up to the standard expectedâ but said that Ms Nandy had âacted in good faithâ.
However, the Tories have demanded the Governmentâs independent standards adviser investigate whether the Prime Minister risked a conflict of interest over the appointment.
Ms Nandy says Mr Kogan was approached by the previous Conservative government âwho began this processâ for the role.
Asked whether it was discussed at the interview that Mr Kogan was a Labour donor, the Culture Secretary told the BBCâs Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg show: âIt was discussed at the interview, it just wasnât discussed that he donated specifically to me because I didnât know about that.
âHe hadnât recalled it, but as soon as that was discovered, as I said, as soon as I was given that information, that same day, Iâd put that information into the public domain and recuse myself from the process.â
She denied that Labourâs manifesto pledge to clean up public life with âthe highest standards of integrity and honestyâ looks âfarcicalâ following the saga.
âI donât think it does, and Iâll tell you why: because as this lengthy and very thorough report has concluded from an independent commissioner, I didnât know about the donation,â she said.
âI was the leadership candidate. I was out on the road, I was doing several hustings, I was doing interviews with you on that process⌠I wasnât involved in fundraising for the campaign, and as soon as I found out I declared it and recused myself and I complied fully with the process.â
She added: âIâve said âhands up, this was not a perfect process. I apologise for them, and more importantly Iâll put in place processes to make sure that doesnât happen againâ.â
The Tories have written to Sir Laurie Magnus, the ethics watchdog, calling for the Prime Minister to face further scrutiny over donations he received from Mr Kogan, who was named as the Governmentâs preferred candidate to chair the Independent Football Regulator in April.
They pointed out that Mr Kogan had also made donations to Sir Keir during the 2020 Labour leadership race, and gave ÂŁ2,500 to the Prime Ministerâs Holborn and St Pancras constituency Labour Party in the run-up to last yearâs general election.
Alex Burghart, a shadow Cabinet Office minister, wrote to Sir Laurie questioning whether the Prime Minister had âexactly the same conflict of interest, if not a greater one, given the 2024 general election donationâ as his Culture Secretary.
The senior Tory also suggested Sir Keirâs âextensive hospitality from the football industryâ meant he should have recused himself from any part in the process of appointing Mr Kogan.
In his report published on Thursday, commissioner Sir William Shawcross said that when announcing Mr Koganâs preferred candidacy, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport should have publicly disclosed his political activity.
The commissioner in particular highlighted the ÂŁ33,410 donated by him and his company to the Labour Party and Labour candidates in the five years prior.
Asked why her department had not disclosed this information, Ms Nandy said on Sunday: âThey did, they disclosed it on a number of occasions, but what they didnât do was add a line to a particular press release about David Kogan having donated previously to the Labour Party.â
She insisted she took âfull responsibilityâ for the process.
Mr Kogan, in response to the findings, said he had never been âaware of any deviation from best practiceâ in the appointment process and could ânow draw a line under the processâ.
