Keir Starmer’s mate, the supercilious Attorney General, refuses to give an account of himself. It’s time he did before he ruins the Government and wrecks the country_Nhy
Anyone can see that Sir Keir Starmer is a hopeless politician. It’s hardly surprising, given that until he became PM he hadn’t served a single day as a minister of any sort.
But at least he has been a Labour MP since 2015. In the course of chopping and changing his views he has presumably picked up a thing or two.
The same can’t be said of the Attorney General, Lord Hermer KC, who is landing the Government – and, more importantly, the country – in hot water over two issues: one concerning compensation to suspected former terrorists; the other to do with the Chagos Islands.
His Lordship is the first Attorney General since 1922 to have had no parliamentary experience. Why, then, was he appointed to this important position as the Government’s chief law officer, attending Cabinet meetings?
The answer is that Richard Hermer is an old legal chum of Sir Keir’s, probably even further to the Left, and even more deeply involved in human rights law. When he took silk in 2009 – i.e. became a senior lawyer – Sir Keir gave the speech at his drinks reception.
Hermer’s woke political views may be judged by a recent outburst on a podcast: ‘One can’t begin to understand the British colonial project without appreciation for how racism impacted almost every element of it.’
Sir Keir Starmer during a reception for the Hindu Harvest Festival
Sir Keir’s Attorney General Lord Hermer KC
The Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean
Disastrous
In 2020 Hermer returned the favour by giving Sir Keir £5,000 to boost his campaign funds when he stood for the Labour leadership. Don’t anyone dare ever say our political system isn’t whiter than white!
Ensconced in No 10, the Prime Minister summoned his pal Hermer, gave him a peerage and made him
Attorney General even though, as I say, he had no political experience.
One person who was greatly miffed was Labour MP Emily Thornberry, who had been Shadow Attorney General since 2021. She once made herself notorious by sneering about ‘white van’ men, though she didn’t use those words. She is also known as Lady Nugee as she is married to a senior judge. Socialism no longer courses through her veins as powerfully as once it did.
So Sir Keir had his old friend by his side where he wanted him – two peas in a legal pod. We shouldn’t be surprised that this has turned out to be yet another of the PM’s disastrous decisions.
Not being a politician, Lord Hermer thinks and acts like the Left-wing lawyer that he is, regardless of political considerations. When he is asked to give an account of himself, he declines, giving legal reasons that many think bogus.
Last week it emerged that the Government had amended the so-called Legacy Act with the upshot that Gerry Adams and up to 1,500 former suspected terrorists may receive compensation from the British taxpayer. Adams himself is widely alleged to have been a leading member of the IRA.
Starmer hurriedly protested that he would look at ‘every conceivable way’ to prevent compensation being paid to Adams, but this is wholly unconvincing as the Government has deliberately altered the Legacy Act.
Labour’s shadow Attorney General Emily Thornberry who was not given the ministerial role after the party’s landslide victory in last July’s election
Former President of Sinn Fein Gerry Adams
Who might be mainly responsible for that? Could it be Lord Hermer? In 2023 he acted for Gerry Adams, who was being sued by IRA victims. He was reportedly paid £30,000, though he refused to divulge any figure when questioned by the Commons justice committee last week.
Hermer protested that representing Adams implied no approval of him. This is strictly true since, under the so-called ‘cab rank principle’, lawyers are obliged to act for all sorts. Nonetheless, it is likely that Lord Hermer could have dodged what would seem to many an unsavoury task had he so wished.
Whether as Attorney General he was involved in the decision to amend the Legacy Act – and therefore potentially benefit his former client, Adams – is a perfectly legitimate question. It is nonetheless one that Lord Hermer has refused to answer.
Smokescreen
He won’t say whether he has recused himself, just as he declined to say how much he was paid by Adams. He has taken refuge in the Law Officer’s Convention – a rule that Attorney Generals can’t reveal what legal advice they have given the Government.
According to several distinguished lawyers in a paper published by Policy Exchange, this is a smokescreen. They say that Lord Hermer shouldn’t escape questions as to whether he had a conflict of interest concerning the decision to pay compensation to Gerry Adams and others.
Former Justice Minister Lord Faulks KC writes that ‘Lord Hermer should make clear whether he recused himself (or was recused) from involvement on matters concerning the Legacy Act’. Former Advocate General for Scotland Lord Keen opines that ‘law officers, like other ministers, [should] provide accurate and truthful information to Parliament’.
As a citizen and taxpayer, I want to know whether Lord Hermer influenced a decision that may lead to millions being paid to hundreds of suspected terrorists. Don’t you?
Former Justice Minister Lord Faulks KC (pictured) writes that ‘Lord Hermer should make clear whether he recused himself (or was recused) from involvement on matters concerning the Legacy Act’
Yet he appears to believe he can float above the matter as though he has no connection with the world the rest of us inhabit. Although born in quite humble circumstances, this Leftie lord has acquired the lofty and pompous manner of a legal grandee.
Believe it or not, he is doing exactly the same over the Chagos Islands. It is certain that as the Government’s politically clueless chief law officer he has been involved in the decision to pay Mauritius £9billion for a lease on the main island, Diego Garcia, where there is an Anglo-American military base.
Most people thought that Britain owned the Chagos Islands, having paid Mauritius (which is over 1,300 miles away) for them in 1965. The International Court of Justice took a different view, issuing a non-binding judgment that they belong to Mauritius. The Government, advised by the British Empire-hating Lord Hermer, has supinely gone along with this.
You’d have thought that Sir Keir’s legal chum had done enough damage – but there’s more. Hermer is facing another conflict of interest row after it emerged that, in 2023, he represented five migrants who had pitched up in the Chagos Islands and sought asylum in Britain. Their case was dismissed by the High Court.
Pompous
Sir Keir during a recent visit to Kyiv earlier this month
Yet months after Hermer was appointed Attorney General, the five migrants plus 56 others in the same situation were mysteriously allowed to come to Britain in a one-off agreement. Was his Lordship involved in the decision to help his former clients? Might it have been in any way connected with the disastrous deal with Mauritius?
The Tories are understandably up in arms about Lord Hermer’s apparent conflicts of interest. They have sought a debate in the Commons, which the furtive Attorney General has so far forestalled.
I never thought I’d say this, but I long for Emily Thornberry, who was cruelly displaced by Hermer. She is a bumbling, genial sort, without too many airs and graces. Above all, she doesn’t want to pursue a secret agenda by legal means behind the scenes. She’s a politician.
Keir’s mate is a supercilious lawyer involved in great decisions who refuses to give an account of himself. It’s time he did – before he ruins the Government and wrecks the country.
