Post-ministerial jobs watchdog closes as part of UK government ethics shake-up23 hours ago7 min read999 comments

In a move that signals a profound restructuring of Britain's ethical guardrails, the much-derided Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) is being formally dissolved today, its functions cleaved between two existing regulators as part of a broader governmental ethics overhaul announced by the Cabinet Office. For decades, Acoba has stood as the nominal gatekeeper for former ministers seeking lucrative private sector roles, a body critics have long lampooned as fundamentally toothless, a paper tiger whose gentle admonitions were routinely ignored by the very political class it was meant to police.This dissolution is not merely an administrative tidying-up; it is a tacit admission of systemic failure, a recognition that the old mechanisms for preventing the insidious trade of insider knowledge for corporate favor have proven woefully inadequate in an era of hyper-partisanship and brazen political entrepreneurship. The historical parallels are stark and troubling.One need only glance back to the post-war period or the Thatcherite revolutions to see the recurring specter of the 'revolving door,' where public service becomes a mere stepping stone to private enrichment. The new Ethics and Integrity Commission, tasked with overseeing this fragmented new landscape, now shoulders a Herculean burden.It must establish a credibility that Acoba never possessed, navigating a political culture where precedent is fragile and the temptation for departing ministers to monetize their contacts and confidential insights remains immense. The core challenge, as veteran political analysts note, is one of enforcement and political will.A watchdog, no matter how well-designed, is only as powerful as the government's commitment to its bite. Without genuine transparency, severe penalties for breaches, and a fundamental shift in the unwritten rules of engagement between Whitehall and the City of London, this reshuffling risks becoming little more than a cosmetic change, a new facade on a crumbling edifice. The integrity of British governance itself hangs in the balance, awaiting proof that this new structure can withstand the pressures that its predecessor so clearly could not.