Press briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Sex Offenders, Education White Paper, Al Jazeera, International Development Bill, National Lottery, War Crimes, Iran and Squirrels
Sex Offenders
Asked if it was right that 150 of the 210 people who were given a partial ban on List 99 had a record of sex offences, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that he did not recognise that figure. The important thing was that since 2000, the partial ban had gone as part of the tightening of the process that the Government had undertaken.
Asked that if the 150 figure was not recognised, what figure was recognised, and was there a figure out of the 210 that were sex offences, rather than fraud or other offences, the PMOS said there was an issue about what happened before the new procedures came in 2000. The whole point of going back through the cases, and the new panel would do this, was precisely to investigate those cases, and to see whether there was any cause for concern. The PMOS said it was better to not try and put an artificial figure, and that the process was allowed to take place. The important thing that Ruth Kelly announced yesterday was that not only did she clarify the position of what had happened since 1997, but also that she had set out where there were concerns which the police were pursuing. Finally, she had set out a procedure to review cases that had happened under previous administrations.
Asked if the Government knew that figure, i.e. was it the case that it was not yet known what proportion of the 210 were sex offences, or was it the case that the figure was not known, but the Government did not want to tell people they did not know, as it might appear inflammatory, the PMOS said that the whole spirit of what the Government did yesterday was that we gave as much information as we reliably could. Investigations were ongoing, and it was better that those investigations were allowed to continue. The PMOS said it was better that we spoke with knowledge, rather than speculation.
Asked again that it was not known at the moment, the PMOS said the journalist should check with the DFES, and we had said yesterday what we knew.
Put that if the 210 cases had not been looked at and if that was correct, what sorts of grounds would people be given a partial ban for, the PMOS replied that in terms of partial cases, Ministers did not now impose a partial ban, as that was a relic of the old system. What we therefore needed to do, and this was something that the review team would be doing, was to go through all those cases to check whether there were any problems. The PMOS said he was not going to get involved in speculation about figures, as it was not helpful.
Asked if was technically correct to say at this point that we still did not know exactly how many sex offenders were working in schools in England and Wales, the PMOS replied that as he had said yesterday, what the panel would do would be to go through cases which were dealt with under previous administrations.
Asked again about the numbers, the PMOS said again that he was not going to get involved with speculation about what the panel would discover. What people could be sure about, however, was that the issue was being dealt with.
Put that was it really the case that it had not been possible over a fortnight to go back and look at the “handful” of cases, the PMOS replied that the journalist was talking about a system that had been in place for decades. Therefore, there was a need to go through that system and methodically check through it. People would be much more impressed by the fact that we were making the efforts to go through those cases and deal with the issues methodically, rather than trying to suggest that this was a matter that could be dealt with quickly. This was a system that had been tightened considerably since 1997, but it was also a system that was not computerised. That took time.
Education White Paper
Asked if it was a good idea for Ruth Kelly on the radio this morning to suggest that opponents of the Education White Paper, such as Lord Kinnock and Estelle Morris, simply “did not know what they were talking about”, the PMOS replied that that was not what Ruth Kelly had said.
Interrupted, the journalist said Ruth Kelly had said there had been a misunderstanding, but how could it be said that people had “misunderstood” it, the PMOS replied that there were concerns about selection. The reality was that the White Paper did not change the position on selection, with one exception. Selection by ability was not allowed, and that would remain the position. The only change that the White Paper would make to the policy of selection was to strengthen the role of the adjudicator by making their guidance applicable for three years, instead of one year. Therefore, if people had concerns that in some way the White Paper changed the position of selection, that concern was misplaced.
Put that when the PMOS had said that the Education Bill would not change the means of selection, what was the point of having it in the present legislation, the PMOS replied that the selection process did not change in the White Paper. The only thing that did change was the adjudicator’s role.
Al Jazeera
Put that the memo at the centre of the court case did not mention bombing Al Jazeera, but did it mention Al Jazeera in any sense, the PMOS said that as he had said at the time, he was not going to get involved in revealing private discussions between the Prime Minister and the President, anymore than he would discuss private conversations between the Prime Minister and any other world leader. There was, however a specific allegation repeatedly put, and that issue was what the PMOS had been trying to deal with.
International Development Bill
Asked if the Prime Minister had anything to say about the International Development Bill that was going through the Commons, the PMOS replied that he was not aware of any comments the Prime Minister wished to make on it.
National Lottery
Asked what the Prime Minister’s response was to allegations that the National Lottery was being used as a “slush fund” to subsidise activities that should have been funded by the Government, the PMOS said that there was a debate in 1998 between those who said that the money should only be used for things such as sports, arts, heritage etc, versus those who believed that the money should be used for other areas such as education or environment, for example. If people looked at opinion polls in this area, what they showed was that the public believed that they were proper areas for lottery money to be used in. They were being used to good effect, so the Government would reject any suggestion that the money was being used in an inappropriate way; public opinion would seem to support that view.
War Crimes
Asked if the Prime Minister had any response to the story today in The Daily Mail that had quoted “senior Whitehall sources” that he could be put on trial for war crimes, the PMOS said that he was not aware of any Whitehall sources who had that view, therefore he did not have a view either. As we had said consistently, the British Government abided by international law.
Iran
Asked if the Prime Minister had been made aware that Iran was repatriating its assets held abroad, including those of Britain, the PMOS replied that as he had said yesterday, he was not aware of anything to do with this story. What we would continue to do was to deal with the matter in hand in terms of Iran, and that was to get it to abide by international obligations.
Squirrels
Put that it was thought that the legislation on grey squirrels was happening on Sunday, but it now was on the Order Paper today for a Written Ministerial Statement, and what was going on, the PMOS said that the problem with squirrels was that they always popped up where people didn’t want them to be! The PMOS said it was another case of squirrels getting out of hand.
delicious
digg
facebook
