Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Northern Ireland, Middle East, Cabinet and Foundation Hospitals.
Northern Ireland
Asked whether the Northern Ireland elections would go ahead on 29 May, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that the election date was that in the diary. The Prime Minister had had a useful discussion with David Trimble this afternoon in which the two had reviewed the situation.
Asked for a reaction to the latest statement from Gerry Adams today, the PMOS said that he would refer journalists to the Prime Minister’s original question: did it mean that punishment beatings, exiling, arms procurement and development, intelligence gathering, targeting and involvement in riots were at an end? The reason why we were continuing to ask this question was because, as the Prime Minister had said in PMQs today, we needed to be absolutely certain that the transition was over and that these kinds of activities which had gone on in the past were at an end. Asked if he was implying that Mr Adams’ statement had again not gone far enough, the PMOS said that we were still asking the same original question. We needed clarity not only because we wanted to be reassured about the future but also because of the legacy of the past in the light of the fact that some people had tried to argue that these activities were outside the terms of the Good Friday Agreement or, when these activities had taken place, had denied responsibility for them. This legacy of distrust was clearly something which needed to be addressed. In answer to further questions, the PMOS took the opportunity to underline that we were asking these questions in our capacity as the British Government, not on behalf of anyone else.
Questioned about the possibility of the elections taking place but that those being elected having nowhere to go, the PMOS said that discussions were continuing in an effort to achieve clarity. 29 May was the date in the diary. Asked whether there was a deadline by which clarity needed to be achieved, the PMOS said everyone recognised that time was short as a result of the election timetable. We continued to hope that it might be possible to go into the elections on a positive note. But to do that, we needed answers to our questions. Questioned as to whether we could theoretically allow electioneering to go ahead right up until the election date itself without any further clarity from Sinn Fein or the IRA, the PMOS said that it wasn’t his policy to answer hypothetical questions. He understood the media’s desire to engage in speculation, but he had no intention of getting drawn into any such discussion. Put to him that the position we had adopted with regard to the Northern Ireland elections was, in effect, ‘putting Mr Trimble out to dry’, the PMOS drew journalists’ attention to Mr Trimble’s comments following his meeting with the Prime Minister this afternoon in which he had said he believed that we had a good understanding of his position and vice versa. Obviously Mr Trimble would like to see an answer to the outstanding questions as much as we would. That said, it was important for people to understand that the questions being asked were being asked on our own behalf, not on behalf of anyone else.
Asked if the question mark over the status of the elections was ‘fair on the good folk of Northern Ireland’, the PMOS said he thought that the good folk of Northern Ireland recognised the priority to get the substance right and reach the position where everyone could see for themselves that the activities he had described were at an end. We were looking for certainty and clarity and it was on precisely that which we were focussing our attention, frustrating as it clearly was for everyone involved. Asked to explain how Sinn Fein and the IRA could clarify their position even further, the PMOS said that he was not in the business of dictating to anyone how the response should be phrased. We were, however, in the business of honestly setting out the issues which needed to be addressed with absolute clarity and definition. From the outset we had tried to avoid any suggestion of ’surrender’ by the IRA. We were not interested in that. We were, however, interested in clarity about the future actions of the organisation.
Asked whether the Prime Minister’s comment today - that there was no question of the Executive being re-constituted ‘fully’ without progress from the IRA - was an indication that he was thinking about re-establishing the Executive without the involvement of Sinn Fein, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had been responding to a question from David Burnside MP who had in effect asked whether we would press ahead with just the SDLP. As the Prime Minister had said in reply, we were focussed primarily on trying to reach a situation where everyone was involved. But, as he had underlined last October, that could not happen unless there was an even playing field. That meant bringing to an end all the activities which had gone on the past. Asked if it was possible to have a playing field without all the players on it, the PMOS said he did not think it would be helpful to answer hypothetical questions. Most people in Northern Ireland recognised that it was better to have a situation where everyone was on the playing field - including Sinn Fein. However, in order for that to happen, people had to be clear that the rules were the same for all involved.
Middle East
The PMOS advised journalists that the Middle East Roadmap had now been handed over to Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The Prime Minister had issued a statement in response to the occasion in which he had said:
"I welcome the fact that the Roadmap for peace has today been presented to the Israeli and Palestinian authorities. I would pay tribute to the Quartet, and to key governments in the region, for their efforts that have led to this.
"The Roadmap provides the route to a permanent two-state solution. It includes clear phases, timelines and benchmarks. It places clear but fair obligations on both sides to achieve a final and comprehensive settlement by 2005.
"There is now a real opportunity for both sides to work, with the strong support of the international community, to achieve a just and lasting settlement.
"I do not underestimate the commitment it will require. But the prize is enormous: peace and security for Israel living side by side with an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state.
"So I hope that both sides will respond positively and start implementing the Roadmap without delay.
"My Government remains ready to do whatever it can to help reach a settlement."
The PMOS took the opportunity to reiterate the fact that the Roadmap was the Quartet’s Road map, not - as the Today Programme had stated for the second day running despite being told otherwise - the US’s. He reminded journalists that the Quartet comprised the EU, UN, Russia and the US.
Asked if the Prime Minister was intending to visit Israel, the PMOS said that he was not aware of any plans for him to do so at this stage. However, his interest in the issue was clearly deep and personal and went back a long way. He recognised that a significant step had been taken today and would obviously want to remain closely involved in the matter.
Asked the Prime Minister’s reaction to cynics who regarded the US’s interest in the issue as cosmetic, the PMOS said that anyone who had heard President Bush say at Hillsborough a few weeks ago that he was prepared to devote as much time and energy as the Prime Minister had devoted to Northern Ireland - after the Prime Minister had described to him just how much time and effort had been put in - would obviously refute the suggestion. Put to him that President Bush would not exactly have been encouraged by events in Northern Ireland since then, the PMOS said that it simply underlined the nature of the President’s commitment to the issue.
Questioned as to whether the tribute paid by the Prime Minister to ‘key governments in the region’ would include Syria, the PMOS said that our position regarding Syria was well known. We believed that the country had a positive contribution to make. At the same time, however, when we had stood shoulder-to-shoulder with President Bashar in both Damascus and London, we had asked him to do everyone he could to stop terrorism.
Cabinet
Asked whether the Euro and the 2012 Olympic Games would be discussed at Cabinet tomorrow, the PMOS said he was not aware of either subject being on the agenda. Questioned as to whether the Convention on the Future of Europe would be discussed, the PMOS said not as far as he was aware. Asked if Cabinet was going to discuss anything tomorrow, the PMOS said that Cabinet would do what it always did - namely review events.
Foundation Hospitals
Asked if Cabinet had ever discussed the issue of foundation hospitals, the PMOS said he had no doubt that the matter had been raised in the past. Asked if the Prime Minister expected every member of the Cabinet to support the policy ‘energetically’ given the possibility of a large Backbench rebellion in the offing, the PMOS said that the doctrine of collective Cabinet responsibly remained. Asked how the Prime Minister might react were a Cabinet Minister to indicate that he supported the rebels, the PMOS repeated that it was his policy never to answer hypothetical questions. Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with the Chancellor’s position on foundation hospitals, the PMOS said that the Government’s policy on foundation hospitals had been set out. Asked to explain why the term ‘foundation hospital’ did not appear in the Red Book, the PMOS said that given he was not completely au fait with the contents of the Red Book, he would refer journalists to the Treasury for an answer to the question.
delicious
digg
facebook
