Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Iraq/Troops, Middle East and Migration/PM’s Speech.
Iraq/Troops
Asked if the Prime Minister had been indicating today that it was unlikely that the UK would be sending any further troops to Iraq, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that as the Prime Minister had underlined in his joint press conference with Prime Minister Berlusconi of Italy this afternoon, it was an issue which we were keeping under constant review. We would consult with our allies about the implications of other countries’ decisions. As he had pointed out, while some countries had said that they would be pulling their troops out, others, notably Japan and South Korea, had made commitments. It was a changing situation which we were keeping under constant review. Pressed further, the PMOS said that if there was any announcement to make, it would be made formally in the usual way. Put to him that the Prime Minister had appeared to be making a formal announcement today, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had simply been outlining the current assessment. As he had said, it was an issue which we were keeping under constant review. Asked if the Prime Minister’s statement that there were enough British troops in Iraq to do the job applied only to today or the foreseeable future, the PMOS said that the statement had been made today. However, the Prime Minister had also said today that the situation was being kept under constant review. Putt him that a report in yesterday’s Times had put in place speculation about several plans being discussed, the PMOS said that he understood why people wanted to engage in speculation about this issue. However, given the fact that discussions were ongoing with our allies, the outcome would be announced formally in the usual way. Asked if he was indicating that it would be wrong for journalists to infer from the Prime Minister’s words this afternoon that he was ruling out the prospect of sending further British troops to Iraq, the PMOS said he was simply making the point that it was important to go through the proper processes of assessment and review. The Prime Minister’s words spoke for themselves. The matter was being kept under constant review. Put to him that the matter needed clarifying because he was inviting the headline "PM Speaks Out-of-Turn", the PMOS said that if journalists were minded to write articles suggesting that "PMOS Slaps Down PM", they would be absolutely wrong in their interpretation of the press conference this afternoon. The Prime Minister had said that, according to current assessments, there were sufficient British troops in Iraq. However, he had also underlined that the matter was kept under constant review. That was the position. Nothing had changed.
Asked if the discussions that were taking place were also focussing on the possibility that British troops might have to operate further north than Basra, the PMOS said that there were all sorts of issues which had to be considered. Once decisions had been taken, they would be announced in the appropriate way and at the appropriate time.
Middle East
Asked if the Prime Minister’s call for balance in expressing opinions about the Middle East was an implicit criticism of the former diplomats’ letter to him, the PMOS said that as he had told journalists at this morning’s press briefing, we were quite happy to have a debate about the Middle East and Iraq. Irrespective of the diplomats’ letter, the Prime Minister’s comments about the Israeli/Palestinian issue always emphasised the need for balance and the need to understand the position of both sides. That was our approach. It was for the diplomats to explain the approach which they were taking. As we knew from experience, without balance, people would not be able to address the full complexity - and pain - of the issue in question. Put to him that the Prime Minister had appeared to be indicating quite strongly today that he did not think the diplomats’ letter was balanced, the PMOS said that our disagreements with the letter had been spelled out at this morning’s briefing. In our view, it was important not to personalise the issue. Rather, people should be addressing the substance of the argument. For the Israeli/Palestinian issue, that meant taking a balanced approach. On Iraq, we believed that the country was capable of democracy and that we should help to bring that about.
Asked if the Prime Minister would regard the unilateral recognition of settlements on the West Bank as a balanced solution to the Israeli/Palestinian issue, the PMOS said that he would regard the premise of the question as an unbalanced presentation of what the Prime Minister had said in his joint press conference with President Bush in the White House Rose Garden on 16 April, when he had stated that he regarded the prospect of Israel withdrawing 7,000 settlers from Gaza and parts of the West Bank as a first step. Indeed, both he and President Bush had underlined several times that it was only a first step which would not in any way pre-empt or pre-judge the outcome of the final status negotiations. Challenged further on this point, the PMOS drew journalists’ attention to the transcript of the joint press conference from which he quoted President Bush as saying: "I am committed to the vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. As I said, all final status issues must still be negotiated between the parties." He had said later, "We’re not going to prejudge the final status discussions." It was there in black and white for all to see.
Asked if the Prime Minister believed that the Israeli Prime Minister recognised that the withdrawal of settlers from Gaza and parts of the West Bank was a first step, the PMOS said that he was not a spokesman for Prime Minister Sharon. The important point was that there were two approaches to take on this issue: either wait for a perfect solution to arrive - whenever that might be, or we could work with the reality on the ground and make progress by seeing the movement of 7,000 settlers out of Gaza and the West Bank. As the Prime Minister had stated on 16 April, we preferred to take the latter approach - but had also made it clear that in doing so, we were not pre-empting final status negotiations.
Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with comments made today by Louise Ellman MP, who had said that the FCO was a base for Arabists, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister worked with many fine diplomats in the FCO whose advice and experience he valued. He had been proud to work with such people through the difficult issues he had faced during his time as Prime Minister, including those issues which had arisen in the last year. Asked if the Prime Minister valued the advice of Andrew Green, a member of MigrationWatch UK, who had signed the letter, the PMOS said that the membership of the group who had signed the letter was a matter for the group themselves, not us. Asked why the Prime Minister valued the experience and advice of diplomats currently employed in the Foreign Office, but not, apparently, those who had left recently, the PMOS said that those who had written the letter were private citizens who were entitled to express their view, just as we were entitled to disagree with it. There were many many former diplomats. Those who had signed the letter were only a small proportion.
Migration/PM’s Speech
Asked about the Prime Minister’s ‘top to bottom’ review of the Government’s policy on asylum and immigration, the PMOS said that it was part of the constant process of looking to see what improvements could be made. Under both Jack Straw and David Blunkett many improvements had been made to the Immigration Service. We had also seen action in France in terms of putting immigration officers on the continent and we had also tightened up the system in the UK. All these were substantial steps. Equally, we recognised that, as and when substantial abuses were discovered, they should be tackled. However, as the Prime Minister had said today, those abuses should not be allowed to cloud the very real advantages to the UK of controlled migration and the way in which it met the needs of our growing economy.
Put to him that the review was ’slightly late in the day’ in the light of the fact that 1 May was this Saturday, the PMOS pointed out that the review had been an ongoing project for many years. It was not starting today. These were not panic measures. They were part of an ongoing process. Asked if the Prime Minister believed that the UN Convention on Refugees should be reviewed, the PMOS said that this was no doubt an issue which would be discussed with other members of the UN, as it was not something on which we could take unilateral action.
Asked if today was the first time the Prime Minister had said that expressing concern about abuse of the asylum and immigration system was not racist, the PMOS said the Prime Minister had always recognised that there were legitimate concerns around migration issues - hence the way in which we had addressed concerns about asylum applications recently, for example, which had resulted in the number being halved over the last eighteen months. Equally, he had always believed that it was an issue which had to be handled with sensitivity, for obvious reasons. Clearly it was important to get that balance right. Put to him that abuse of the asylum and immigration system went wider than this Saturday and the EU accession countries, the PMOS said that the process of addressing the asylum applications issue and abuses within the system obviously went wider than Saturday. It was an ongoing process. However, we also had to bear in mind the real advantages which migration brought to this country and the real disadvantages were that to be stopped.
delicious
digg
facebook
