of interest. First of all: wholly agree with Andy. I am not aware of any organization that would monitor the bank account transactions of its board members. Self-reporting interests, sure. I'm curious what kind of outrageous fraud you suspect that would justify such invasion of privacy. Second, any of these measures probably would require us first to have a clear picture of what would qualify as a problematic relationship that would benefit from such a cooling off period. Usually, such a cooling off period seems to be suggested in a context where people may lobby for something in the hope of getting a juicy appointment elsewhere afterwards, or because they were strongly colored by a previous appointment elsewhere. I don't think it's realistic to expect a cooling off period for voluntary board members. For its staff members, I don't know enough at this point about labor law to know if this is already covered elsewhere. Do you know of guidelines that suggest that this is a best practice at charities? I suspect most of our organizations will have some implied or explicit conflict of interest policy, to cover at least that angle. I'm fascinated what triggered this highly suspicious email. Did I miss something? Lodewijk On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:16 PM Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: