Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: European Constitution, European Commission and Iraq.
European Constitution
Asked when the referendum for the EU Constitution might take place in the light of the Foreign Secretary’s comments today, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that the Foreign Secretary had simply been setting out the realities about the timing. Every country had two years from today in which to make a decision about the Constitution. Moreover, it was necessary to allow the parliamentary process to take its course in order to obtain parliamentary approval. How long that might take would depend on the parliamentary timetable - although it would obviously be a matter of months rather than weeks. In addition, the UK was due to hold the Presidency of the EU in the second half of 2005. Running a referendum at the same time, therefore, would clearly be an "interesting experience" given all the demands that would entail. In the light of all the above, however, it was important to acknowledge that we had not reached any definite decision as to when a referendum might be held. There were various factors to take into account and we would have to wait and see how things panned out.
Asked what the referendum question would be in the Bill, the PMOS said that we would address this issue at the appropriate time. We had yet to go through the parliamentary process. We would make any necessary decisions after that. Asked if the Prime Minister wanted to hold the referendum as soon as possible after relinquishing the EU Presidency post, the PMOS said that we would take things one stage at a time. The first thing to do was to obtain Parliamentary approval. Asked if he was aware of anything which might rule out holding the referendum on the same day as the local elections in 2006, the PMOS said that the timing of the referendum was pure speculation at the moment. It was important for people to respect the parliamentary process in the first instance. We would be in a better position to assess the situation once that had been completed. Questioned as to whether the referendum on the EU Constitution would be held on the same day as the referendum on the Euro, the PMOS said that as the Prime Minister had made clear, the EU Constitution and the Euro were two different issues.
Asked to repeat the Government’s pledge to hold a referendum on the EU Constitution regardless of the position in other countries, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had made his position on this issue very clear on the floor of the House. We would hold a referendum in this country irrespective of what other countries might do. Put to him that the Foreign Secretary had said this morning that "all things are possible’ in answer to a question about whether the referendum in the UK would go ahead if the result of the referendum in France was negative, the PMOS said that Mr Straw had simply been making the point that this was all speculation. The Prime Minister had stated the position on the floor of the House. It had not changed.
Asked when the Bill for the referendum would be presented to Parliament, the PMOS said that he had no intention of pre-empting the Queen’s Speech. In any event, the parliamentary timetable was a matter for the Business Managers. Asked if Denis MacShane had inadvertently revealed the date of the next General Election this morning when talking about the timing of the Bill, the PMOS said that it was up to the Prime Minister to decide when the next General Election would take place.
Asked if there was any sense that the signing of the Constitution today "looked bad" as it was taking place before ordinary people had been able to have a look at it for themselves, the PMOS said he thought that ordinary people knew what was in the Constitution because there had been a lot of publicity about it at the time it had been agreed. Today was an important day. In 1957, the UK had not attended the signing of the Treaty of Rome. As a country, therefore, we had had to play catch up. That was no longer the case. The UK was attending the signing of the new Treaty today, not simply as a member of the EU but as a member who was leading from the front in terms of where Europe was going in relation to economic reform and enlargement, as well as pushing forward (both literally and metaphorically) the boundaries of Europe - and doing so on the basis of nation states co-operating together. It was clearly a Europe in which we felt at home.
European Commission
Asked if the Prime Minister had had any meetings this morning in Rome about the European Commission, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had had an informal discussion with European Commission President-elect Barroso. No doubt he would also have informal discussions with other European leaders. The Prime Minister had told Mr Barroso that we would fully support any decision he made to resolve the issue. However, today was not about reaching a decision on the shape of the new European Commission. It was a ceremonial occasion to mark the signing of the EU Constitution.
Asked how long it might take to "sort out the Commission mess", the PMOS said that he would disagree with the description. We would accept that there were difficulties which would inevitably occur with an EU membership of twenty five. However, we were confident that Mr Barroso would be able to sort the problems out. Given the overall history of the EU, these difficulties would seem small compared to the true significance of today which was seeing the leaders of twenty five European countries coming together and agreeing a Constitution.
Asked why the Prime Minister wasn’t staying for the formal lunch given the significance of today’s event, the PMOS said that the important thing today was the signing of the Constitution which the Prime Minister had attended. He had also taken the opportunity to talk informally to Mr Barroso and other European leaders. The lunch was a formality at which the Foreign Secretary would represent the UK. The PMOS reminded journalists that the European leaders were due to meet again this time next week in Brussels. Put to him that the Prime Minister’s decision not to attend the lunch was a snub to Prime Minister Berlusconi, the PMOS said that he would disagree absolutely - and so would the Italians.
Asked if the Prime Minister had advised Mr Barroso on what he should do to resolve the difficulties in shaping the new European Commission, the PMOS said that we would obviously give Mr Barroso our private advice if he asked us for it - as indeed we had done during the course of the week. However, we had no intention of making that advice public because it was in no one’s interest to do so. The important thing was to resolve the issue as quickly as Mr Barroso judged it possible to do. It went without saying that he would have our full support. The Prime Minister personally believed that Mr Barroso had done a very good job in what were clearly difficult circumstances. Once the new Commission was up and running, we had no doubt that it would be a driving force in changing Europe in the direction we favoured.
Iraq
Asked if the Prime Minister was concerned about a survey published today suggesting that 100,000 Iraqi civilians had died as a result of the war in Iraq, the PMOS said that it was important to treat the figures with caution because there were a number of concerns and doubts about the methodology that had been used. Firstly, the survey appeared to be based on an extrapolation technique rather than a detailed body count. Our worries centred on the fact that the technique in question appeared to treat Iraq as if every area was one and the same. In terms of the level of conflict, that was definitely not the case. Secondly, the survey appeared to assume that bombing had taken place throughout Iraq. Again, that was not true. It had been focussed primarily on areas such as Fallujah. Consequently, we did not believe that extrapolation was an appropriate technique to use.
Asked for a reaction to an e-mail from a Black Watch officer criticising the Government’s current Iraq strategy in moving Black Watch to the north of the country to help the US, the PMOS drew journalists’ attention to General John McColl’s comments earlier this month when he had said that it was a military response to a military problem and was the right thing to do. The Prime Minister’s Spokesman (PMS) pointed out later that the Defence Secretary had also said last week, "I emphasise again that this was a military request and has been considered and accepted on operational grounds after a thorough military evaluation by the Chiefs of Staff". General Sir Michael Walker, the Chief-of-the-Defence Staff, had also described it as an "important and viable military task".
Asked for a reaction to reports that Black Watch troops in the north of Iraq were going to be replaced by the Scots Guards after Christmas, the PMS said that there were no plans to deploy further troops in the area where Black Watch had deployed to, as she understood it. That said, the military had to have contingency plans, as you would expect. Put to her that only the Scots Guards had the capability to replace Black Watch, the PMS said she had seen the speculation about which regiments might take over from Black Watch. However, as she was not an expert in these matters she would refer journalists to the MoD for a more detailed response to the question. Asked the point of pulling Black Watch out before Christmas - only a few weeks before crucial elections were due to be held in Iraq , the PMS said that Black Watch’s current tour of duty in the north of Iraq was a response to a request for assistance to do a specific job.
delicious
digg
facebook
