The appointment of Lord Hermer KC as Attorney General in July has sparked a controversy surrounding the disclosure of his past earnings. Breaking with established convention, Lord Hermer has chosen not to publicly reveal his financial interests prior to assuming his governmental role. This decision has drawn sharp criticism from various quarters, including former Attorneys General and opposition figures, who argue that such transparency is crucial for maintaining public trust and ensuring accountability. They contend that Lord Hermer’s secrecy constitutes a significant departure from the “normal practice” observed by previous holders of the office, including Sir Keir Starmer himself, who disclosed their financial interests upon appointment. This unprecedented lack of transparency has raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest linked to Lord Hermer’s past legal work.
The controversy surrounding Lord Hermer’s financial disclosures intensifies existing concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest stemming from his previous legal practice. Critics argue that without a clear understanding of his past financial dealings, it is impossible to assess the potential impact of these prior engagements on his current responsibilities as Attorney General. The potential for conflicts of interest in a role as sensitive as Attorney General underscores the importance of transparency and full disclosure. The public has a right to know whether the individual entrusted with upholding the law has any pre-existing financial ties that could potentially compromise their impartiality or influence their decision-making. The absence of this information fuels suspicion and undermines public confidence in the integrity of the office.
The Attorney General’s office has defended Lord Hermer’s position, asserting that he is not obligated to disclose his past earnings. This defense, however, has been met with strong opposition, particularly from former Attorneys General Sir Michael Ellis and Sir Robert Buckland. Both have publicly stated their belief that Lord Hermer’s refusal to disclose his finances is both “irregular” and a clear breach of established protocol. Their assertions lend weight to the argument that Lord Hermer is deviating from a long-standing tradition of transparency within the office of Attorney General, further deepening the controversy surrounding his appointment. This divergence from established practice raises questions about the motivations behind the decision and fuels speculation regarding potential conflicts of interest that the government may be attempting to conceal.
Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick has taken a decisive step by lodging a formal complaint with the Lords’ standards commissioner, demanding a thorough investigation into Lord Hermer’s actions. Mr. Jenrick has accused Lord Hermer of hypocrisy, highlighting the discrepancy between his current stance on financial disclosure and the standards of transparency previously advocated by members of his own party. This accusation adds a layer of political intrigue to the controversy, suggesting a potential double standard within the government’s approach to transparency. Mr. Jenrick’s call for an investigation underscores the seriousness of the allegations and the growing pressure on Lord Hermer to address the concerns surrounding his financial disclosures.
Adding to the complexity of the situation, Lord Hermer has acknowledged recusing himself from certain cases due to potential conflicts of interest. However, he has refused to specify which cases these are, further fueling suspicion and criticism. This lack of specificity only serves to reinforce the perception of secrecy and raises questions about the extent of the potential conflicts. By refusing to disclose the specific cases he has recused himself from, Lord Hermer leaves the public to speculate about the nature and severity of the potential conflicts of interest. This lack of transparency further erodes public trust and underscores the need for a more comprehensive and forthcoming approach to disclosure.
The controversy surrounding Lord Hermer’s financial disclosures is symptomatic of a broader debate about transparency and accountability in government. His refusal to disclose his past earnings raises fundamental questions about the ethical obligations of public officials and the importance of maintaining public trust. The arguments put forward by his critics, including former Attorneys General and opposition figures, underscore the importance of adhering to established norms of transparency and the potential consequences of failing to do so. As the pressure mounts for a full and transparent accounting of his financial interests, Lord Hermer’s actions will be closely scrutinized for their potential impact on the integrity of the office of Attorney General and the public’s confidence in the government.