Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Higher Education White Paper/Top-Up Fees, Fire Dispute, 2012 Olympic Games and Future of Europe Convention.
Higher Education White Paper/Top-Up Fees
Asked whether top-up fees remained official Government policy and whether the Government was preparing to row back on it, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that we never pre-empted the Queen’s Speech. If he was being asked whether we were rowing back on our higher education policy, the answer was no. People were perfectly entitled to set out their views on the White Paper. However, our policy on higher education had been drawn up following a significant debate about how best to ensure we had the world class universities which everyone wanted to see, as well as extending opportunity for more young people to go into higher education whatever their background. This country needed to have a highly skilled work force for the future. Asked if there was any prospect of a further public review of the White Paper by a Ron Dearing figure, the PMOS said that he wouldn’t encourage journalists down that route. He pointed out that the White Paper, which had been published only a few months ago, reflected the considered judgement of what was a very complex policy issue. There were no simple solutions to the problems of higher education funding.
Fire Dispute
Asked about contingency plans for troops to assume the role of firefighters if fresh strike dates were announced tomorrow, the PMOS said that we would ask the FBU to reflect very carefully whether strike action was the way to resolve a dispute which had very little public support. It was a dispute over a pay claim which appeared to be creeping back towards the 40% figure that had been demanded at the outset, and which everyone accepted was not the real world. Strikes would also put lives at risk. The employers and the FBU had discussed a deal of 16% over three years with extra money coming through from changes to working practices. We believed that was the way forward. In terms of contingency plans, the Deputy Prime Minister had set out the number of troops available in his last Statement about the fire dispute to the House. It went without saying that the Government took its responsibilities seriously in this area. Asked if he would agree that further strikes would put an extra strain on our forces, the PMOS pointed out that the FBU had yet to announce any further strike action. When and if they did, we would deal with it. The central point was that this was a dispute in which public sympathy for strike action had diminished week by week and which was wrong. The best way to resolve things was through the FBU and the employers negotiating a settlement.
2012 Olympic Games
Asked if an announcement would be made tomorrow regarding a London bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games, the PMOS said that it wasn’t our policy to announce the Cabinet agenda in advance. If we had something to say, we would say it at the appropriate time. Asked if that meant that Cabinet would discuss the issue first before an announcement was made, the PMOS said yes. Put to him that his colleague had said yesterday that he ‘didn’t expect’ the issue to be discussed as far as he was aware and whether he would care to repeat that formulation, the PMOS said that he wasn’t ruling anything in and he wasn’t ruling anything out. Asked again why he couldn’t repeat what had been said yesterday, the PMOS said that today was today, tomorrow was tomorrow. We would keep on truckin’.
Future of Europe Convention
Asked if there were any other reasons, other than historical precedent, as to why a referendum should not be held on the Convention’s constitutional treaty, the PMOS said that despite the desire of some people, the UK’s political and constitutional traditions could not be ignored. In this country, referenda were only for exceptional changes to systems of Government. Joining the EEC had been one such occasion. Similarly, joining the Euro would be a big economic decision. Asked to explain how adopting the single currency could be considered an exceptional change to our system of Government, the PMOS said that we would be adopting a common currency rather than keeping our own sovereign sterling. Asked how such a thing would change the constitutional arrangements of Government, the PMOS said that since it would be a change of such economic consequence, we believed that people should have the final say. No one was arguing that we shouldn’t have a referendum in those circumstances. Questioned as to whether the reason why the Prime Minister did not want to hold a referendum was because he was afraid of what the result might be, the PMOS said no, for the reasons he had already spelled out. The Prime Minister also believed that the benefits to this country of EU enlargement - in terms of our prosperity and increasing the single market, and in terms of our security and Europe enlarging eastwards - were very positive for the British people. This was all about putting in place some of the institutional changes to ensure that a Europe at twenty five could work effectively. It was also about looking at how we could codify what already existed in terms of the different European treaties, such as the Treaties of Nice, Rome and Amsterdam.
Put to him that referenda had been used to find out if people wanted local mayors - which could hardly be considered ‘an exceptional change to systems of Government’, the PMOS pointed out that these were changes on a domestic level. Some people were trying to present the constitutional treaty in rather apocalyptic overtones. That was simply not the case. It would not bring exceptional changes to our system of Government on a scale which we believed would merit a referendum. As the Prime Minister had pointed out, it was for precisely that reason that we hadn’t held a referendum on the Single European Act or the Maastricht Treaty. In answer to further questions, the PMOS said that the product of the IGC would not create a new country called Europe. Each sovereign state would be able to ratify the treaty. It would not amount to huge change in the actual nature of the EU.
delicious
digg
facebook
