Who would have thought that JJB's suspended chief executive Chris Ronnie would be one of the first symbols of “the new era of responsibility” outlined by newly elected President Barack Obama?

The timing of the Stock Exchange announcement of Ronnie’s suspension, just minutes before Obama’s fumbled swearing in, was uncanny.

In Obama’s inauguration speech to 2 million Americans eager for change and transparency after a term in office rocked by sleaze and misgivings, Obama talked of the need to “spend wisely, reform bad habits and do our business in the light of day” to restore trust between a people and their government.

The words could be applicable to a retail sector that is undergoing its own allegations of immorality.

Ronnie is among a string of directors whose conduct has been called in to question in recent weeks. Carphone Warehouse co-founder David Ross was caught up in a storm earlier this year when it was discovered he had pledged shares as collateral for a personal loan.

In contrast to Ross, however, Ronnie’s alleged indiscretion – an investigation has been launched into a transfer of shares he previously controlled – has raised concerns over his ability to run the beleaguered sportswear chain, which has been teetering on the brink since before Christmas.

It seems that all that rival sportswear retailer Mike Ashley’s former right-hand man has achieved in his time heading up JJB is a falling share price and the disastrous acquisition of JJB’s lifestyle brands, Qube and Original Shoe Company – the two brands that respected new executive chairman Sir David Jones has had to all but write off.

The emergency drafting in of Jones and former Selfridges boss Peter Williams immediately unearthed the circumstances surrounding the missing share holding and surely must precipitate Ronnie’s inevitable departure.

The conduct of company directors is increasingly coming under scrutiny by the media, with pre-pack administrations providing the fodder for Fleet Street’s most recent offensive.

Rising concerns over the use of pre-packs, as outlined in Retail Week last week, are warranted when the creditors’ best interests are not at the heart of the pre-arranged sale of a struggling business and when bad management is back at the helm within hours of forcing the business in to administration.

While administrators are required to investigate directors’ conduct as part of the pre-pack process, they are required to complete their investigations within six months of being appointed, by which time the deal has been done, debts dodged and negative obligations stripped.

The issue of conflict of interest between the owners and directors and the administrators is open to abuse by the nature of the administrators very appointment by mangement.

The use of pre-packs is likely to continue but toleration of shady practices will not in the recession-hit UK.

A toothless attempt to tighten up the guidelines surrounding pre-packs has been outlined. An investigation in to the practice by MPs will take place next week. It will allow MPs to be seen to put pressure on a controversial practice as the Government attempts to claw back support following the banking world’s own crisis revelations.

In the “new era of responsibility” it will be unacceptable if retailers are not more accountable to their creditors, staff and customers.

In the words of the man finding his feet in the world’s most powerful position: “Our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions – that time has surely passed.”