Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hermer on 14 July (HL1910), whether they will now answer the question put, namely what is the evidential basis for the assertion that X prioritises misinformation.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Cluny - Advocate General for Scotland
I would refer the Honourable Lord to Lord Hermer’s previous answer on this topic.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Solicitor General on 16 May 2025 (HC50518), what plans they have to review the guidance for assessing legal risk across government.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Cluny - Advocate General for Scotland
The Attorney General’s Guidance on Legal Risk is regularly reviewed upon the appointment of the Attorney General. The Attorney General is reviewing the current version of the guidance. If she chooses to make any changes, they will be published in the usual way.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hermer on 8 July (HL1265), what is the evidential basis for his assertion that X prioritises misinformation.
Answered by Lord Hermer
The criticisms of misinformation on X are numerous and well-documented.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government on what evidential basis staff in the Attorney-General's Office have been instructed to stop using X; and when this decision was taken.
Answered by Lord Hermer
The Attorney General Office’s official account is no longer posting on X. The decision was taken to focus on other communication platforms that I believe are more conducive to public debate, and don’t prioritise misinformation. I understand and respect colleagues who remain on the platform.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government what communications the Attorney General has had with Lord Mandelson since July 2024.
Answered by Lord Hermer
I refer the Hon Member to the Government’s statement and release of information on 1st June, providing an update on the response to the Humble Address. The documents published in the first and second tranches contain the entirety of the documents the Government has available for disclosure, except those being withheld at the request of the Metropolitan police.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hermer on 1 June (HL104), whether the Attorney General has received backdated payments since July 2024 relating to his past legal work as a barrister in Matrix Chambers, including payments relating to clients on no-win-no-fee conditional fee agreements.
Answered by Lord Hermer
As has previously been set out to the house both in January 2025 and in June 2025, there is an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest.
This process also sits alongside the established system in place for declaration Ministerial Interests. I confirm that my relevant interests have been published for the public record, including my previous employment at Matrix Chambers.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government, following the Written Answer by Lord Hermer on 4 February (HL13872), whether the Attorney General has recused himself on matters relating to that International Court of Justice arrest warrant.
Answered by Lord Hermer
The Law Officers’ Convention applies to advice which may or may not have been given by, or requested of, the Law Officers. It can be found at paragraph 21.27 of Erskine May:
“By long-standing convention, observed by successive Governments, the fact of, and substance of advice from, the law officers of the Crown is not disclosed outside government. This convention is referred to in paragraph [5.14] of the Ministerial Code [updated on 6 November 2024]. The purpose of this convention is to enable the Government to obtain frank and full legal advice in confidence.”
Indicating whether or not the Law Officers have recused themselves from a particular matter would itself breach the Law Officers’ Convention.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hermer on 1 June (HL104), whether there are details of financial interests which the Attorney General has declared to his Permanent Secretary or the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards but which have not been published in the List of Ministers' Interests.
Answered by Lord Hermer
As has previously been set out to the house both in January 2025 and in June 2025, there is an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest.
This process also sits alongside the established system in place for declaration Ministerial Interests. I confirm that my relevant interests have been published for the public record, including my previous employment at Matrix Chambers.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to publish (1) any interests that the Attorney-General has declared to his Permanent Secretary and the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests in relation to his work for Gerry Adams when a barrister at Matrix Chambers, and (2) whether the Attorney-General continues to receive payments from his time as a barrister at Matrix Chambers.
Answered by Lord Hermer
As has previously been set out to the house both in January 2025 and in June 2025, there is an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest.
If a Law Officer were to publicly confirm specific matters where they were recused, this would infer that legal advice had been requested by the Government on a specific matter, which would risk a breach of the Law Officers’ Convention.
This process also sits alongside the established system in place for declaration Ministerial Interests. I confirm that my relevant interests have been published for the public record, including my previous employment at Matrix Chambers.
Asked by: Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer from Lord Hermer on 23 February (HL14709), why they do not hold any data which shows the number of defendants prosecuted, referred, acquitted, or convicted of offences created by sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and section 1 of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929.
Answered by Lord Hermer
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) collects data to assist in the effective management of its prosecution functions. This data is derived from structured data fields completed by front line staff on individual case records held in the Case Management Information System (CMS) and reported in the Management Information System (MIS).
Within CMS management information (MI) is recorded at the level of defendants in a set of proceedings rather than against the individual offence or offences a defendant may be charged. This includes defendants charged with offences of s58 and s59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and s1 of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929. To identify the prosecution outcomes of offences would require a manual review of case records which would be at disproportionate cost.
The CPS is replacing its current Case Management System. This replacement provides opportunities to design improved management information capabilities to meet future reporting requirements.