Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: President Putin, Smacking, Iraq/Inquiry, Royal Intruder and Wrexham Riots/Asylum.
President Putin
The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) briefed journalists on the itinerary for President Putin’s State visit to the UK. The President would be arriving this afternoon and the Prime Minister would take part in the ceremonial welcome on Horseguards. He would also be attending the State Banquet this evening at Buckingham Palace. He was due to meet the President for talks and lunch in Downing Street on Thursday. This would be followed by a joint press conference at the Durbar Court in the FCO. Both the Prime Minister and President Putin would also take part in a DTI conference on energy at Lancaster House on Thursday morning.
The PMOS said that this was the first State visit by a Russian leader since Tsar Alexander II in 1874. Relations between the UK and Russia were excellent and continued to go from strength to strength. For example, Britain was now the leading investor in Russia. It was a sign of the new confidence in Russia - and the success of the economic reforms that had been put in place - that both BP and Shell had recently announced multi-billion dollar investments there. Unilever, Cadbury and Scottish and Newcastle were just some of the other four hundred British companies and organisations investing and creating jobs in Russia. Trade between the two countries had almost reached £3bn. Other areas where the UK and Russia were closely together included the NATO-Russia Council (NRC), founded following a British initiative. It was already building a new strategic partnership between Russia and NATO member states, such as joint work on the Balkans and counter-terrorism, and also on mechanisms for potential joint peacekeeping operations. There was also a shared approach in respect of the Middle East given the fact that Russia was an active member of the Quartet. Russia was now also a full member of the G8. In terms of European relations, it was worth pointing out that the EU had more meetings with Russia on a wider range of subjects than with any other partner. President Putin’s visit was clearly important and underlined and cemented the excellent relationship which the UK and Russia enjoyed, in addition to the excellent personal relationship the Prime Minister had with the President.
Asked the Government’s position on the issue of Chechnya, the PMOS said that it remained as set out by the Prime Minister in the House last week when he had said that both he and the Foreign Secretary would raise the issue, but would "…do so in a way that recognises the point that, as a result of terrorism emanating from extremists based in Chechnya, the Russian people have also suffered a very great deal". As the Prime Minister had underlined, it was clearly important to raise the issue of human rights - and indeed the issue was raised every time he met President Putin. However, it was also important for us to support Russia in its action against terrorism. As he had said last week, "It’s fair to say that as a result of President Putin’s political initiative, there is now a chance for a proper political solution in Chechnya". Asked if the Prime Minister believed that Russia’s actions in relation to Chechnya had been proportionate, the PMOS said that as the Prime Minister himself had pointed out, there were clearly difficult issues which needed to be addressed. No one was denying the fact that there was a terrorist threat to Russia which emanated from Chechnya - and it went without saying that Russian security was important. However, as we had underlined throughout, human rights issues were also paramount. Our dialogue with the Russians and the President was based on the need to recognise both those factors.
Questioned as to whether the Prime Minister considered the position adopted by Russia in the run-up to the Iraq war as past history, the PMOS said that no one was pretending there hadn’t been a difference of opinion. On the contrary. It was a fact that was well known and had been well documented. However, things had moved on since then. What had been most important for the UK and Russia in terms of Iraq in recent months was the fact that a Security Council Resolution relating to post-conflict reconstruction issues had been agreed. That had been a significant breakthrough. As President Putin had said in an interview he had given on Sunday, this had been achieved in large part through the dialogue which he and the Prime Minister had had during the Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow in April. We were now working together on Iraqi humanitarian assistance and reconstruction issues. It was also fair to say that there was a shared determination to tackle the issue of WMD, accepting that there were differences in respect of our approach to Iraq.
Asked if the Prime Minister accepted President Putin’s declaration that, because of Russia’s historic links and supply patterns, the country had a big role to play ‘by right’ in rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure and whether the question of Russia’s ‘Iraq debt’ would be discussed during the visit, the PMOS said he had no doubt that post-conflict issues relating to Iraq would be discussed. We would brief on the Prime Minister’s talks with the President on Thursday. He took the opportunity to point out that these issues were being conducted chiefly under the auspices of UNSCR 1483.
Asked whether the joint peace-keeping operations with Russia were a long term objective or whether there were specific areas we had in mind, the PMOS said that it was more general than specific at this stage. That said, it was important not to underplay the significance of the dialogue between NATO and Russia and the fact that the NATO-Russia Council existed to address these issues given the historical backdrop.
Smacking
Asked if the Government had any plans to revisit the issue of smacking children in the light of the report published by the Health Select Committee today, the PMOS said no. Our position on smacking had not changed. We continued to believe that it was a matter of individual choice for parents. In the Government’s view, most parents accepted and understood that there was a clear and fundamental difference between discipline and abuse and knew where to draw the line between them. The challenge for the Government and other agencies was how to deal with cases where that line was crossed. It was important to ensure that the necessary safeguards were put in place, which was why we would be publishing a Green Paper on children shortly which would contain our response to the Laming inquiry into the Victoria Climbie case and would include our plans on how to strengthen protection of children further in this area.
Put to him that the whole point was that those who were most likely to abuse their children did not know where to draw the line between reasonable chastisement and abuse, the PMOS said that the Government did not believe that criminalising parents was the right way to deal with the issue. We were better off providing help and support to parents so that they did not have to resort to smacking. In cases where the line was crossed, it was important for the relevant agencies to respond quickly and effectively. These were always difficult judgements to make. We had put in place a number of changes relating to child minders and day-care staff who worked with children. However, we believed that parents had a common sense understanding in this area and required a different approach.
Asked if the Government accepted the statistical evidence suggesting that the mortality of children killed by their parents was greater per capita in countries which allowed reasonable chastisement than in those which did not, the PMOS said that there was clearly a lot of different sociological evidence around. The important thing was to introduce safeguards which could prevent and deal with child abuse. That was why we considered the Laming inquiry, and the forthcoming Green Paper, to be so important. It was also why a Minister of State with particular responsibility for this whole area had been appointed in the last reshuffle. Asked whether Margaret Hodge would have an input into the Green Paper, the PMOS said that of course she would. In fact, it was more than likely the issue was at the very top of her in-tray at the moment. The Green Paper would be published before the summer recess.
Iraq/Inquiry
Asked whether Alastair Campbell’s written evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee would be published, the PMOS said that as he understood it, according to standard procedure, a written memorandum became the property of the Committee. Consequently, whether - and how - they chose to make it public was entirely a matter for them. Asked if the evidence would be submitted by tonight, the PMOS said he would expect that to be the case. Asked whether there had been discussion with the Committee about any areas that were off limits, the PMOS said not as far as he knew. He expected the focus of the evidence session to be on the dossier published last September and the briefing paper which had been published in February. There would, he thought, be a common sense approach to what questions could legitimately be asked. It went without saying that Mr Campbell would answer the questions put to him in as much detail as he possibly could.
Royal Intruder
Asked when the Prime Minister had his next Audience with the Queen, the PMOS said that it would be tomorrow evening. Asked if the Prime Minister would mention the incident at the weekend, the PMOS said that we never discussed Audiences. As we had underlined yesterday, what had happened was clearly a serious cause for concern. No one was pretending that it was anything other than totally unacceptable. Yesterday, the Home Secretary had received a six-page report from the Met Police setting out a chronology of the breach in security. He would brief the House on the report in his Statement today and would outline the lessons to be learned. He would also underline that any improvements to security that were thought to be necessary would be made. Asked when Frank Armstrong was due to finish his report, the PMOS said that he would be writing his report in slower time and would take the opportunity to look at some of the wider issues in the light of the incident.
Wrexham Riots/Asylum
Asked about the riots in Wrexham over the past couple of nights, the PMOS said that the police were still investigating exactly what had happened. It would be unhelpful to comment until the inquiry had concluded. Clearly the Government set a lot of store by the need to build good and effective community relations. It therefore went without saying that neither the Government nor the Police would tolerate anti-social behaviour by asylum seekers or such behaviour directed against them.
Asked if he would agree that the Iraqi Kurds, who were alleged to have been involved in the violence, should return to Iraq now that Saddam had been deposed, the PMOS said it was certainly the case that, in the same way that Afghan refugees had returned home after the fall of the Taliban, the situation inside Iraq post-Saddam would enable people to return over time. It also meant that we were expecting the number of people claiming asylum from Iraq to fall. In relation to those who were already in the UK, however, each case would have to be looked at on its own merit.
delicious
digg
facebook
