You're Fired

Harriet Harman says that the Attorney General should no longer attend Cabinet meetings,
She told the Financial Times the chief legal adviser's role needed to change as part of moves to restore public trust and confidence in the government. She backed a return to the days when the attorney general kept his distance from Cabinet discussions.
Attorney General Lord Goldsmith has previously dismissed claims that his job has become too political. He has argued it is vital for "accountability" that he attends Cabinet meetings and insisted he has always put the law before party loyalties.
So, the idea that the chief law officer attend and give his imprimatur to Cabinet discussions is unpalatable? Granted that the Cabinet contains a number of members of the world's second oldest profession (some have moved up a grade into the world's oldest), they have this idea that any extra knowledge is superfluous. There has been pressure for the AG's opinion on the Iraq War to be made public but this has been strongly resisted. There was strong indication that he was leaned on and the eventual situation regarding our actions could suggest his first opinion. The cash for honours inquiry is hanging over the heads of the Government and doubtless is on the Cabinet agenda. AG will be involved in advising what happens here. By it's very nature, what goes on in Cabinet stays in Cabinet but the idea of removing legal advice is a bit scary where we have a ruling political that is as amoral as the current version. Says something strange when exclusion of legal advice is promoted as being necessary to “ restore public trust and confidence in the government”. Bit like the final scene in The Apprentice when the Boss man decides who is fired.
Going back a bit, I found this which gives a confirmation as to the role of AG. American but back-dated sufficiently (1789) that the Redcoats Way of doing things was still powerful. It clearly sets out why it was considered a good thing to have the AG present.