Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Israel/Palestinian Conference, War on Terror, Iraq, PM’s Speech, Prison Population/Burglary/Gun Crime and Northern Ireland.
Israel/Palestinian Conference
The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) confirmed that the Prime Minister had written to the Israeli Prime Minister about the Palestinian conference. The British Ambassador to Israel, who was currently attending the Heads of Missions conference in London, had been given the letter and would deliver it personally to Prime Minister Sharon as soon as possible. Asked if we would be releasing a copy of the letter, the PMOS said we believed that the person for whom it was intended should be given the chance to read it first.
War on Terror
The PMOS confirmed the details of a joint statement issued this afternoon by Met Police Assistant Commissioner, David Veness, and the Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Dr Pat Troop. It outlined details of an arrest operation in the early hours of 5 January. It confirmed that a joint operation between the Anti-Terrorist Branch, Special Branch and the Security Service had been carried out following receipt of intelligence. As a result, a quantity of material and items of equipment had been found at a residential premises in Wood Green, north London. This material had been analysed at Porton Down and a small amount had tested positive for the presence of Ricin poison. This was a toxic material which, if ingested, inhaled or injected could be fatal. The Department of Health was currently alerting the health service, including primary care, about these developments and intensive police investigations were continuing.
Asked if he had any information about what the arrested men had been planning to use the poison for, the PMOS said that he obviously needed to be careful about what he said in relation to this matter because the six arrested men were still being questioned about the find. However, he did not believe there was any specific intelligence which detailed how the small amount of material would have been used. Asked if there might be further quantities of Ricin which had yet to be discovered, the PMOS repeated that police investigations were continuing. He reminded journalists that while we had always said that we would make the public aware of any specific threat, we had also underlined that we would not get into speculative discussions. Asked if we were confident that the police and intelligence agencies had secured the entire supply of Ricin, the PMOS referred journalists to this afternoon’s statement which had emphasised that we were talking about a small amount of the material recovered from the premises in Wood Green which had tested positive for the toxin. The operation clearly showed the success of the Security Service and Anti-Terrorist Branch in working together to identify and locate the threat. Pressed as to whether there was any reason to suspect that more of the poison existed, the PMOS repeated that it would not be helpful to get into a speculative discussion about the matter. Put to him that it was the Government’s duty to inform the public, the PMOS said we had made it clear that we would alert the public to specific intelligence, as indeed we had been doing. He had nothing further to add to what he had already said on the matter. Asked how safe it was for people to take the Tube home this evening, the PMOS repeated that we had no specific intelligence of any direct threat, including to the Tube.
Asked whether Ricin had been included in our dossier of dangerous substances and weapons which Saddam Hussein had in his possession, the PMOS said yes. However, it was important to recognise that this afternoon’s joint statement did not make any linkage between the find in Wood Green and Iraq. Asked if we were working on the assumption that this was an Al Qaida-related threat, the PMOS advised journalists to treat this matter carefully because people were still being questioned about it. All he would say was that these people had been arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000. Asked whether Ricin had been used in the assassination of Bulgarian dissident, Georgi Markov, in 1978, the PMOS said yes.
Asked when the Prime Minister had first been informed of the arrests and who would have briefed him about it, the PMOS said that it wasn’t our policy to brief on conversations between the Prime Minister and those who advised him on security measures. That said, journalists could assume that he had been kept informed throughout.
Asked how much harm a small quantity of Ricin could do, the PMOS said that according to the joint statement from Mr Veness and Dr Troop, it was a toxic material which, if ingested, inhaled or injected, could be fatal. As he understood it, comparisons with the public release of a nerve gas, for example, were not correct.
Asked whether any Ministers were expected to make a Statement today about the arrests, the PMOS said no. He pointed out that since the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Chief Medical Officer had been on the frontline in dealing with this matter, it was only sensible for them to remain in the lead.
Asked if we were sending a message to the public that there was a present danger and that people should continue to be alert or whether we were congratulating those involved on a successful operation, the PMOS said that it was a bit of both. A successful operation had taken place - but at the same time it underlined that the threat was very real, that people needed to be alert, not alarmed, and that they should report any suspicious activity to the police. It showed that the Security Services and Anti-Terrorism Branch could be successful in countering this kind of threat but that people needed to be eternally vigilant.
Iraq
Asked why the Defence Secretary was being so secretive about the number of British troops being called up for military action against Iraq, the PMOS said that contingency planning for such an operation meant planning for what might happen. As he had underlined again this morning, war was not inevitable but we had to plan for the possibility. It would not be helpful to predict exactly how many troops would be needed at each and every stage. We had to work with our allies and with the circumstances as they developed. In the end it was that which would determine how many troops would be involved - if it was decided to take the path of military action.
Asked why the Defence Secretary was so reluctant to say how many troops were currently engaged in service, the PMOS said that, as Mr Hoon had indicated in his Statement to the House this afternoon, there were good reasons, most notably because we were responding to events as they happened. Asked if he would accept that Mr Hoon was being silent on this matter because the presence of our troops was primarily symbolic and political, the PMOS said he did not think the US would have described the presence of British troops in Afghanistan as ‘primarily symbolic and political’.
PM’s Speech
Asked in what sort of areas we would like the US to continue broadening their agenda, as the Prime Minister had said in his speech to UK Ambassadors this afternoon, the PMOS said that the fact that the US had decided to go down the UN route on Iraq was an example of their multilateral approach. Clearly that was something we welcomed. Their attitude towards debt at the G8, as well as NEPAD, also showed that they had bought into a multilateral agenda. Likewise with their attitude towards famine in southern Africa where the US and UK were the two biggest donors. This was all about working with the US and dispelling the caricature that they were unilateral in their approach to global issues. Equally, it was important to look at the other side of the equation. If we were asking the US to be multilateral in its approach, we should not be reverse unilateralists in asking them to bear the burden of dealing with issues such as international terrorism given it was not a threat limited to the US, as recent arrests in both the UK and France had shown. Pressed as to the sort of areas in which the Prime Minister would like to see the US continuing to broaden their agenda, the PMOS said that there was a range of important issues where we all needed to be involved to a greater or lesser degree. That included issues like debt, the developing world and the Middle East peace process where we would all have to continue to broaden and deepen our involvement. That applied just as much to the UK as anywhere else.
Prison Population/Burglary/Gun Crime
Asked if the Prime Minister was concerned that, on present trends, prisons would be full within six months and why he wasn’t taking more steps to increase capacity so that the courts were not limited in their powers to send people to jail, the PMOS pointed out that the Prison Service had increased capacity by around 1,100 places up to October 2002 and a further 1,200 places would be available by March 2003. We were also planning to build two new prisons in Ashford and Peterborough which would provide a further 1,300 places. In addition, the Prison Service had been allocated a further £60m from the 2002 CSR to fund additional prison places for next year. Evidently the Government was taking very seriously the need to provide more places if that was judged to be necessary.
Asked again whether twice-convicted criminals should be spared a prison sentence, the PMOS said that it would be invidious sit there and judge each case as it came to court because each one would carry with it its own set of circumstances. As he had said this morning, a repeat offender who had turned to burglary should merit a prison sentence. For first-time offenders, however, a community penalty or custody minus might be the most appropriate sentence, firstly because neither were an easy option, and secondly because experience suggested that they resulted in a lower rate of re-offending. It was important to recognise that a variety of options were available to judges. What options applied to which individual depended on the nature of the offence, the person concerned and the circumstances of the time.
Asked what the Government was doing to clarify what appeared to be a very confused picture in the light of remarks made by both the Lord Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor, the PMOS said that if the comments by the Lord Chief Justice seemed to be suggesting that we should take into account prison population pressures, then that was something with which we would disagree. However, we were not clear that that was what he was saying. It was also important for people to look ahead to the Criminal Justice Bill which would set up the Sentencing Guidelines Council which would determine the guidelines to be applied to sentences for particular offences. The Council would have a wide membership and the guidelines would be agreed with Parliament. While judges would continue to operate independently, they would sentence offenders in accordance with the framework established through the consenting will of Parliament. That said, we recognised that there was a debate to be had on this issue and we looked forward to hearing people’s views.
Asked if the Prime Minister believed that the public understood why twice-convicted offenders were being given community sentences, the PMOS said the Prime Minister understood that people wanted to see burglars being punished. A community sentence was one way to do that. They also wanted to see a reduction in re-offending rates. Experience showed that community sentences were able to help achieve that. They also wanted to see a clear message being sent to burglars indicating that if they did re-offend then they would be punished with a prison sentence. That was why a repeat offender who turned to burglary should merit a prison sentence. He acknowledged that it was difficult to set out a policy which did not apply across the board, but the reasons as to why that was the case were clear.
Asked if he would accept that people had been given a misleading impression of the measures the Government was taking to cut down on gun crime given it had now emerged that the five-year mandatory prison sentence wasn’t mandatory, the PMOS said that if someone forgot to renew their firearms licence for example, it would mean that their legally-held weapon would become an illegally-held weapon. In our view, however, that should be considered a genuine oversight. It was therefore common sense for judges to be given the discretion not to impose a five-year prison sentence. This was about common sense exceptions, rather than universal exceptions which the talk of U-turns at this morning’s briefing had suggested. Of course, how this might be codified in law was obviously a matter which the draughtsmen would want to consider as legislation was drawn up.
Northern Ireland
Asked about the Prime Minister’s meeting with David Trimble this morning, the PMOS said that it had been useful. As he had stated this morning, it was the start of a process of talking to the key players in the Northern Ireland peace process about how we could develop the ideas contained in the Prime Minister’s speech in Belfast last October so as to find a way forward in the limited window of opportunity which we had. The Prime Minister was due to meet Sinn Fein tomorrow and the SDLP on Thursday.
delicious
digg
facebook
