Labour MPs turn on Lord Hermer as ethics watchdog urged to investigate
'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
The Sun
27 minutes ago
- The Sun
Starmer's ‘illegal' proposal to recognise Palestine is yet ANOTHER self-inflicted blunder by PM
Tricky Dicky IT'S funny how the Attorney General has suddenly gone quiet amid claims that Sir Keir Starmer's proposed recognition of Palestine would be illegal. Richard Hermer hasn't previously wasted any time in thwarting plans to protect Northern Ireland veterans or deport foreign criminals as part of his moral crusade to uphold international law. 4 He even insisted we pay billions to give away the Chagos Islands. Indeed, ministers have been complaining for months that every single decision they make must first go through Lord Hermer's office to get his approval. Yet when it comes to the cherished Left-wing cause of Palestine, his Lordship has been seemingly happy to turn a blind eye to illegality. Panicked Cabinet ministers claim recognition of a foreign state is a 'political judgment' — ignoring that it is actually entirely a legal one. It's all pointless anyway as us joining the 147 other countries who already recognise Palestine is a purely performative act that won't do anything to secure peace in Gaza. In trying to appease Labour MPs worried about Muslim votes, the Prime Minister and his human-rights-loving Attorney General are guilty of yet another self-inflicted blunder. Hamas must be delighting in their propaganda coup — and laughing at us. 4 What plan? LABOUR may as well drop the pretence that it can stop the boats. More than 25,000 illegal migrants have now c rossed the Channel this year. While an average of 118 have been arriving every day — one every 12 minutes — the Government has offered only half-baked 'crackdowns'. There's never been even a hint of a deterrent scheme to replace Rwanda. Nor changes to benefit rules or any end in sight to asylum hotels costing £5.7million per week. Crucially, no progress either on quitting the ECHR or teaming up with other European countries to reform it. So what IS the plan? Or do we all just have to keep putting up with this? All blackouts NEW Zealand was left on the brink of blackouts after former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern decided in 2018 that the world had 'moved on' from fossil fuels. Her shift to renewables meant the country no longer had the generating power to keep the lights on during cold spells. 4 Ed Miliband 's blind following of the same eco-madness led him to ban new oil and gas drilling. He will end up taking Britain to the edge of darkness, too.
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
It's time Labour told us: whose side are they on?
There are two ways the Government could have chosen to deal with the mass migration crisis (and it is a crisis). It could have taken voters' concerns seriously. It could have tried to understand and empathise with the concerns of those who are angry at the use of local hotels for housing asylum seekers who should surely have claimed asylum in France when they had the chance. It could even have shared the anger of parents in Southport last summer – not the anger displayed in response to the riots or the demonstrations. Rather, ministers could have echoed the rage felt by residents who had just been told about the murders of three young girls. Instead, ministers adopted a different approach. As revealed by The Telegraph, the focus of government activity was apparently less about addressing the public's concern over immigration and more about targeting social media posts that criticised migrant hotels or complained of 'two-tier policing'. It has been revealed – courtesy of a US congressional committee rather than Whitehall sources – that civil servants working for the technology secretary, Peter Kyle, flagged videos with 'concerning narratives' to social media giants including TikTok, warning that they were 'exacerbating tensions' on the streets. But you know what is even more likely to exacerbate tensions on Britain's streets than a TikTok video? The maintained presence of 'asylum seekers' from developing countries whose cultural values are sometimes at odds with Western liberal values. Which is more damaging to the fabric of our society, the accusation on social media that police officers deal more harshly with some protesters than others, even if their actions are the same, or the Afghan rapist who blamed cultural and language differences between him and his victim? The leaked emails from the Government's National Security and Online Information Team (NSOIT) were centred on last year's protests following the killings in Southport. It's possible the same unit was back on the case during the recent demonstrations at an asylum hotel in Epping, around which police had to erect a ring of steel in order to protect guests from the anger of protesters. But to what extent did ministers seek to understand the rage felt by parents following the revelation that an Ethiopian asylum seeker at the hotel had been reportedly charged with sexually assaulting a schoolgirl just days after arriving in the UK? Were they more concerned about the damaging narrative of the event as portrayed on social media? Ministers still seem not to have got the message. When foreign, undocumented, unvetted young men are placed in any local community, residents' fear and suspicion is an inevitable consequence that must be acknowledged and addressed, not suppressed. Where evidence emerges of sexual assault by one of those young men, public outrage is a natural response. The days of not looking back in anger are far behind us. Silencing critical voices is not only anti-democratic, it is positively harmful and destructive to the social contract. Rather than risk its total destruction, the Government needs to repair it. It could start by reassuring the country whose side it is actually on.
Glasgow Times
2 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Objections expected for Kilpatrick Hills wind farm plans
If successful, the development would be made up of 10 turbines of approximately seven megawatts (MW) each alongside the BESS at the proposed Vale of Leven Windfarm. The plans, created by Vale of Leven Wind Farm Limited, were previously considered by the council's planning committee last August where members agreed to issue a consultation response to the Scottish Government. Scottish Ministers have received an application under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for the construction and operation of a wind farm and BESS, as the Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit processes applications like this. In previously considering the proposal, West Dunbartonshire Council highlighted that wind farms have the potential to impact on a wide range of features. Officials now consider that the development would have a significant and adverse impact on the local landscape as well as the visual amenity of the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park, the Loch Lomond National Scenic Area, and the Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area. Despite West Dunbartonshire Council believing that the potential development would not have a significant detrimental effect on the surrounding area, it does maintain there could be a negative impact on the nearby scheduled monument of Dumbarton Castle/Rock which it has deemed unacceptable. There are also concerns that the proposal has the potential to impact biodiversity matters including the designated sites, habitat, peatland, ecology and protected species, with a variety of habitats impacted including blanket bog and wet modified bog. The committee's findings have now been finalised in a report and will be presented to members of the planning committee next week. If agreed, the updated response to the consultation, where the council maintains its objection, will be submitted to Scottish Ministers.
