Tate accused of conflict of interest over exhibition of trustee's work It was later revealed that Mr Ofili's agent had even asked the Tate's boss Sir Nicholas Serota to speed up the payment because his client was getting married and needed the money. A withering report by the Charity Commission at the time said there had been "serious shortcomings" in the way the Tate board had operated. While Miss Abts" work has not been bought, but lent to the gallery, critics claim the boost in profile for her work means she is still benefiting unfairly from the decision to show her collection. Artist Charles Thompson said: "This is all very wrong. There are tens of thousands of artists in this country who would give anything to have their work at the Tate. It seems blatant favouritism that works by their own trustees should be repeatedly selected. And it goes without saying that having a painting exhibited at a prestigious national gallery can only enhance the artist's earning power. But a spokesman for the Tate insisted that the decision had been above board and had even been approved by the charity commission. The spokesman said: "Tomma Abts was not involved in the decision to include her work in the exhibition, Painting Now: Five Contemporary Artists, at Tate Britain. Tate's policy is that artists who are Tate trustees never contribute to Board discussions or decisions relating to the exhibition of their work at Tate. As a matter of diligence Tate asked the Charity Commission to consider the case. They advised that Tate should follow its policies and processes concerning the management of conflicts of interest in the event of the inclusion of trustees' works in exhibitions. The Charity Commission concluded that it did not need to authorise the arrangement and that they were satisfied that there was no further role for the Commission in this matter.