Press briefing from the Prime Minister’s Spokesman on: Third Terror Speech, Human Rights and Criminal Justice System
Third Terror Speech
Asked when the Prime Minister would make his third speech on terror in the United States, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) replied that as we had said all along, it was dependant on the timing of the formation of the new Iraqi Government, and while that was nearly there, it was not quite. Clearly, that provided a context in which the Prime Minister could then speak about other matters, so that was what we were waiting for.
Human Rights
Asked to clarify what was and was not being said about the Human Rights Act, the PMOS said that the essential point was that we seemed to have problems in this area which other countries did not, even though they were also signatories of the European Convention and had human rights legislation of the kind that we had in Britain.
Put to him that the Prime Minister seemed to be ruling out legislation, the PMOS said: no. What we were doing was asking the question and waiting to see what the answer was. Therefore, it did seem to be a matter for interpretation, and what was important was that the Home Office found out why it came about. If people looked at John Reid’s point in his letter, it said that Dr. Reid would come back in June with an initial analysis of what the problem was. The PMOS said that we should do the exercise first, and then see where we had got to.
Criminal Justice System
Put that in his speech this morning, the Prime Minister was admitting that after nine years, there was still a huge problem with the Criminal Justice System, and what had gone wrong, the PMOS said that he did not want to comment directly on this morning’s speech, as it was a party speech. However, the Prime Minister had been quite open in the past about saying that the Criminal Justice System was part of the public administration, which in his view whenever he came to office, was least fit for purpose. In terms of various measures that had been taken over the years, much had changed in that time. The essential point that the Prime Minister was making was that there did need to be a switch in balance between the rights of the individual and the rights of the community as a whole. That was essentially where the Prime Minister’s analysis was at the moment.
Put that the Prime Minister had been talking about rebalancing the system for years, and why has none of it worked, the PMOS replied that yes, we had rebalanced the system more in favour of the victim, as opposed to the criminal, and we had taken measures to do that. Yes, we had rebalanced in other areas, but the Criminal Justice System had many different facets, and the same principle could be applied across the system. What we did not do in a system as complex as the Criminal Justice System was to pull one lever and suddenly everything fell into place, as life was not like that. It had to be addressed in lots of different ways. The PMOS said that in the same way, with the animal rights area, we had taken action, and we were now taking further action.
Put that he had had nine years, and how much longer would it take, the PMOS said that as he had said, the Criminal Justice System was the area which in the Prime Minister’s view required the biggest amount of work. If people looked at the way in which changes had happened, it was happening, but it was a highly complex area.
Asked when it would be finished, the PMOS replied when it was finished. Reform was one of those issues that went on and on.
Asked if the Prime Minister was thinking that he was going to "take on" vested interests like the legal professions or the police, the PMOS replied that he was not sure that he wanted to use the phrase "take on". Was the Prime Minister determined to bring about change? Yes. Was the Prime Minister bringing about change in the way police had occurred? Yes. There was the introduction of CSOs and the police were operating in a very different way than it was in the past. Equally, we needed to see where the analysis of this particular problem was by June, and then see where it took us. Was the Prime Minister afraid to challenge established procedures? No.
delicious
digg
facebook
