Labour MPs turn on Lord Hermer as ethics watchdog urged to investigate
Another Labour MP said: 'If you've got financial interests you should be declaring them, that's a given. From the local councillor up to the Cabinet minister. No questions. It's an absolute aberration to have a senior minister avoiding that transparency. I'm surprised this still hasn't been sorted.'
'It's clearly a cause for concern. Some of us feel he's not assisting the Government's cause,' said another.
In a letter sent to the Prime Minister on Saturday and seen by The Telegraph, Sir Gavin Williamson, the former defence secretary, wrote: 'I am writing to you to raise concerns that the Attorney General, Lord Hermer, has breached the Ministerial Code, and to ask you to refer him to the Independent Advisor on Ministerial Standards.'
He cited articles 3.1 and 3.8 of the code, which relate to the perception of a conflict between personal and ministerial interests.
Sir Gavin wrote that Lord Hermer's 'lack of transparency on this issue has led to the widespread perception of a conflict of interest and as such is a breach of the obligation under the Ministerial Code'.
Allies of the Attorney General insist he has followed the procedures for interest declarations for the House of Lords, which are more lax than for the House of Commons.
'He's thinking as a lawyer, not as a politician'
However, a Cabinet source said: 'Anyone with political nous would see the problem of not declaring your interests as a minister. But if you're looking for someone with political nous, it is not Richard Hermer.
'He's thinking as a lawyer, not as a politician. He thinks 'what are the rules in the Lords, I'll follow them so there's no problem'. He doesn't think about how it looks. But there is what is legal and there is the perception of what is right, which are not always the same thing. There is a court of public opinion too and he needs to realise that.'
Explaining the wider animosity towards Lord Hermer, the source said: 'There's a clash of ideas about politics and the law which is more fundamental than just one person, but Hermer embodies it. The question is, for example, how do you treat the threat of going to court? Hermer's view is that you shouldn't fight if there's a chance you could lose on ECHR grounds or whatever. But sometimes you really should fight even if you might lose. Because you might win but also because you want to show the public that you care. It's about ideas, not just process.'
On Tuesday Lord Glasman, an influential Labour peer, called Lord Hermer an 'arrogant, progressive fool' and said 'he's got to go'.
Revelations about the Attorney General's former clients have made for difficult headlines for the Government.
On Saturday it emerged that he had represented a terrorist who helped to plot 9/11 in a compensation claim.
Earlier in the week Lord Hermer was found to have worked on a similar case in which he acted for an al-Qaeda chief linked to the 7/7 London bombings.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
29 minutes ago
- Daily Record
New calls to scrap proposed PIP reforms after U-turn on Winter Fuel Payments
Nearly 3.7 million people on PIP will see changes to the disability benefit start from November next year. Labour backbenchers have called for a UK Government U-turn on planned disability benefit reforms, after Chancellor Rachel Reeves restored Winter Fuel Payments to the majority of pensioners in England and Wales. Proposed changes to Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) are set to come into force from November next year. Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. The U-turn will see an estimated 9 million people born before September 22, 1959 receive the one-off payment this winter. Shortly after winning the general election in July, the Labour Government announced its decision to remove the universality of Winter Fuel Payments and only issue the money to those on means-tested benefits, such as Pension Credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for PIP. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the UK Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' The Pensions Minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), replied that the numbers of people receiving PIP is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work Green Paper, the UK Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so PIP claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. The Green Paper states: 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the PIP daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future.' Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the Winter Fuel Payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on PIP and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' On Monday, Rachel Reeves said the UK Government would 'crack on' with reforms to PIP. Asked whether there would be more U-turns on PIP or the Child Benefit cap, the Chancellor told Channel 4 News: 'There are 9 million people of working age who are economically inactive. We need to reduce that number. 'We need to provide much better support for people who are sick and disabled to help them back into work. 'These are important reforms that we are going to crack on with, because we need to ensure that as a government we support people to do fulfilling work to help lift families out of poverty and give everybody who can work the dignity of a secure job paying a decent wage.' There are currently 3.7m people across Great Britain in claim for PIP, however, the UK Government expects that figure to rise to 4m by the end of the decade and has proposed a raft of new measures to make the benefit sustainable for future generations. Proposed PIP changes and online consultation Proposed package of reforms to overhaul the welfare system, include: Ending reassessments for disabled people who will never be able to work and people with lifelong conditions to ensure they can live with dignity and security. Scrapping the Work Capability Assessment to end the process that drives people into dependency, delivering on the UK Government's manifesto commitment to reform or replace it. Providing improved employment support backed by £1 billion including new tailored support conversations for people on health and disability benefits to break down barriers and unlock work. Legislating to protect those on health and disability benefits from reassessment or losing their payments if they take a chance on work. To ensure the welfare system is available for those with the greatest needs now and in the future, the UK Government has made decisions to improve its sustainability and protect those who need it most. These include: Reintroducing reassessments for people on incapacity benefits who have the capability to work to ensure they have the right support and are not written off. Targeting PIP for those with higher needs by changing the eligibility requirement to a minimum score of four on at least one of the daily living activities to receive the daily living element of the benefit, in addition to the existing eligibility criteria. Rebalancing payment levels in Universal Credit to improve the Standard Allowance. Consulting on delaying access to the health element of Universal Credit until someone is aged 22 and reinvesting savings into work support and training opportunities through the Youth Guarantee. DWP also launched an online consultation on the new proposals to coincide with the publication of the Green paper. The consultation can be completed by anyone and is open until June 30, 2025 - you can find full details on here. It's important to be aware that the proposed reforms announced by the DWP will not directly affect disability claimants in Scotland currently claiming devolved health-related benefits - unless funding for the Scottish Government is impacted by planned changes by Westminster.
The Herald Scotland
41 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Starmer's time will be up if he fails to address two crucial issues
Labour's by-election win wasn't a shock: it was a lottery. Davy Russell was, of course, elected under the first-past-the-post system, which works perfectly well when there are only two main candidates. But that's no longer the case and hasn't been for a long time. Westminster MPs are elected in the same way and our current Labour government has the benefit of a massive majority from only 34% of the vote on the second lowest turnout in almost 100 years. The Electoral Reform Society calculated that 28.8 million people voted and 27.5 million eligible to vote did not: almost the same amount. That in effect, is a 17% endorsement for Labour and certainly not representative. John Milne ("For many, politics isn't working") hits the nail on the head when he writes that 'politics in our country is not working for a significant element of our population' and warns of 'the inequalities and injustices in our society and economy'. UK politics isn't working, firstly, because the UK electoral system is so unrepresentative and, secondly, because of the widening gap between the wealthy and poor of our society that our politicians seem unable or. more likely, unwilling to correct. I should be a natural Labour supporter but the party led by Sir Keir Starmer and Anas Sarwar bears little resemblance to its founding principles. Evidently, many others feel the same and are turning to Reform UK in protest and, possibly, in the vain hope that its offer of change will work. Keir Starmer could fix the first problem by changing our undemocratic voting system. But if he continues to bury his head in the sand against the wishes of the majority of his party members, he might as well start writing his political obituary now. David Bruce, Troon. Read more letters: Why Labour should focus on the SNP Dr Gerald Edwards (letter, June 7) is mistaken that Reform were 'the real winners' and not Labour. who turned round a huge SNP majority and succeeded despite Reform splitting the vote. The winner is my old friend, Davy Russell, who heads off to Holyrood having fought a highly old-fashioned and much-derided campaign. He faced the public and convinced them that he could be trusted. He also made various so-called expert political commentators look very foolish. It was a disaster for the SNP by any measure, particularly since they marched into the count, chests out and totally confident of victory. It was a humiliation for the First Minister but Dr Edwards is correct to say that it was a very good result for Reform. However one major point is that both Unionist parties jointly polled over double the SNP vote. This was a very significant rejection of the SNP and their failures of the last 18 years. I've had various letters in the Herald forecasting the rise of Reform and the mistake of ridiculing them and disparaging Mr Farage. That won't help, and will only encourage people who are disillusioned to vote for them. Labour needs to focus on defeating SNP in Scotland and let Reform do their worst – best not to give them credibility. On a personal level I've known Davy for many years and can only pray that more genuine local candidates are pushed forward by Labour to ensure we can gain power at the Scottish elections next year. John Gilligan, Ayr. SNP's urgent priorities now The lesson from the Hamilton by-election result for the SNP is to let Labour and the Tories fight it out with Reform UK to represent the dwindling number of myopically indoctrinated supporters of the Union. The SNP must also focus on the critical argument that only independence can bring about a radical 'change in direction' for the UK through the constitutional change necessary to seriously address the fundamental problems confronting "broken Brexit Britain". The lesson for John Swinney is that it is now urgent that he arouse the passion and vigour for independence quietly dormant within him, or step aside, at least from the leadership of the SNP, and support an individual who can inspiringly lead the country to independence before the end of this decade. A majority of MSPs supporting independence in the next Scottish election must represent a mandate for the Scottish Parliament to hold a binding constitutional referendum which, if denied by the UK government, must legitimately underpin making the next General Election a 'de facto referendum' on independence. A majority of votes at the Scottish election must represent a mandate to commence independence negotiations should the UK government fail, over a maximum period of one year, to pass legislation enabling the Scottish Parliament to hold constitutional referenda. Manifestos of the SNP and the other independence parties should state both these commitments and the necessary actions that will follow should a resultant mandate be met with continued undemocratic intransigence by the UK government. Further procrastination by the UK government on implementing the democratically expressed wishes of the people of Scotland must not be accepted. To paraphrase the currently popular words of the Roman general, Vegetius, if you want true democracy, prepare to fight cynical totalitarianism. Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian. No rest for the Hamilton voters I think it was Harold Wilson who said that a week is a long time in politics. He of course was right – and what a week we have seen in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. First, we had the First Minister of Scotland claiming that only the SNP can beat Reform and stating that Labour cannot win here. Then we had Reform and Nigel Farage having to defend a campaign video condemned by rivals as 'blatantly racist', followed by Farage accusing Sarwar of introducing sectarianism into Scottish politics. Meanwhile, the voters who deliver the final verdict get on with their lives, thinking 'what have we done to deserve all of this?' The final verdict was delivered by the people who rejected Farage and Reform, rejected Swinney and the SNP and plumped for the local hero Davy Russell and Scottish Labour. I have to give huge credit to Anas Sarwar for his dignified response to Farage and Reform and his noble response to the SNP, which cosied up to Reform by attempting to give them credibility by describing the election as a two-horse race between them. The residents of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse will be relieved that it is only a week that is a long time in politics as they get back to a bit of normality – forgetting it starts all over again in the first week of May 2026. Willie Young, Aberdeen. Time for Swinney to jack it in In his interview on BBC Scotland's The Sunday Show, John Swinney was still touchingly clinging to the independence panacea, citing polls claiming 54% support. That doesn't stack up with the Hamilton result. On a turnout of 44% the SNP got 30% of the votes – that's only 14% of the total electorate. Applying these numbers to the 4.3m voters of Scotland, their 2014 Indyref total of 1.6m votes plummets by one million to around 600,000. Come on John, you know it's over, so why not publicly announce you've jacked it in? Then Holyrood 2026 can be about which party has the best policies and candidates to halt the nosedive in our health, education, worklessness, Net Zero and public services. Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven. Sarwar was embarrassing Martin Geissler acquitted himself well in his Sunday Show interview with Labour's Anas Sarwar. But that is more than could be said for Sarwar, who was unsatisfactory. He rattled off criticisms of the SNP (not all of them undeserved) but when it came to defending Labour's record in office, its policies and its U-turns he spoke very quickly and without much in the way of conviction. Asked how Labour could put more money into people's pockets, he outlined, in the space of a few seconds, various measures but declined to elaborate and then quickly detoured into the NHS, Swinney and Farage. Geissler tried to pin him down but Sarwar didn't seem to listen to the questions that a hard-pressed electorate deserves serious responses to. Were I a Labour voter I would be embarrassed by Sarwar's painfully thin and cliched answers. S. McArthur, Glasgow.
BreakingNews.ie
44 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Rent Pressure Zones to be extended across the entire country
Rent Pressure Zones are to be extended to cover the entire country. Sweeping new changes will be brought to Cabinet for approval on Tuesday after being signed off by the coalition party leaders and senior ministers on Monday night. Advertisement Large landlords will also now be redefined to cover anyone with four or more rental properties. Landlords will also reportedly only be able to reset rents if a tenant voluntarily leaves their home. As The Irish Times reports, housing advocates had warned the Government that allowing landlords to reset the rent between tenancies would result in many tenancies being terminated by the landlords in order to increase the rents. That avenue now appears to have been shut off, however, according to three sources familiar with the plans. The details of the package circulating on Monday night suggested a significant expansion of tenants' rights, rather than a big win for landlords and investors. Ireland Coolmore plans to demolish Parkville farm building... Read More There is also expected to be measures to strengthen protection for tenants, including strong security of tenure and prohibiting 'no fault' evictions in the case of large landlords. It is expected that there will be different rules for small and large landlords, with smaller landlords described as those who have three or fewer rental properties. There will not be a ban on no-fault evictions for small landlords. But the details circulating on Monday night were less advantageous to landlords than opposition politicians have been warning about.
