Oral Answers to Questions

Jerome Mayhew Excerpts

Wednesday 14th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

I think I am in the slightly novel position of being fresh to the Dispatch Box myself, but also able to welcome both the Attorney General and the Solicitor General to their new places, which I do with gusto.

Last month, the Attorney General published her new “Attorney General’s Legal Guidance”, a direction to all Government lawyers on how to advise Ministers on lawfulness and legal risk, which replaced the advice of Lord Hermer. Across the board, she has removed references to international law. She has removed Lord Hermer’s demand that

“the rule of law requires compliance by the state with its obligations in international law as in national law”;

she has removed Lord Hermer’s direction that the Government

“should not invite Parliament to legislate contrary to international obligations”;

and she has removed the whole paragraph in which Lord Hermer instructed Government lawyers that compliance and respect for international law must be a critical factor in legal advice. She served as Solicitor General under Lord Hermer for a year. What persuaded her that his guidance to Government lawyers was wrong, and that the Conservatives were right all along that his guidance needed to be replaced?

[The Attorney General]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his post, and I am pleased that he has raised the updated legal risk guidance. This is a Government committed to getting things done, and I make it clear in the revised guidance that, where there is a tenable legal argument, we can take action. On international law, my new guidance makes it clear that domestic law and international law should be treated in the same way. It is important that we adhere to both, and that is set out in the guidance.

[Jerome Mayhew]

Having removed Lord Hermer’s focus on the importance of international law, the Attorney General has in fact added a new consideration: whether an international court has jurisdiction. This could have Chagos written all over it. Without express United Kingdom consent, there is no international court with binding jurisdiction over the sovereignty of the Chagos islands. Applying her own legal guidance, does the Attorney General now agree that the decision to cede sovereignty of the Chagos islands has never been a legal imperative forced on the Government, but is instead a political decision, taken by Labour?

[The Attorney General]

The military base at Diego Garcia is critical for our national security, and for keeping people safe here in Britain. Our priority has always been clear: to secure the long-term, effective operation of that base. Since its creation, there have been challenges relating to the base in various international courts and tribunals, threatening its long-term, secure operation. That is why we continue to work closely with the US and with Mauritius to find a way forward that is in the UK’s best interests, and that continues to protect our national security.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Attorney General.

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

Having spent many months arguing for the abolition of most jury trials, can the Attorney General explain to the House how she now thinks that they are indispensable? Does she accept that, while jury trials are indispensable, an Attorney General forced to perform such a spectacular U-turn may not be?

[The Solicitor General]

This will be complete news to the Opposition, but we do occasionally listen to what this House and the professions have said. We are going forward with proposals that will tackle the backlog. The Opposition never want to talk about the backlog because they caused it. We are looking for solutions to that; they are welcome to put forward their suggestions.