Press briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: World Cup, Prime Minister’s Speech, Home Office Review, Forest Gate and Abortion
World Cup
The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) told journalists that the 350 children who were disappointed at not getting to the World Cup because of ticket problems, would now be going. This had been an incredible effort by the DCMS, in particular Dick Caborn, who had working non-stop on this since Monday night, and who had talked personally to Sepp Blatter, the FIFA President, to whom we were incredibly grateful, and also the Premier League Chairman, Sir Dave Richards, who also worked very hard. The PMOS said that his understanding was that BA had offered to transport most of the children, and appropriate arrangements would be made for the rest. It was very good news indeed.
Asked what game they would watch, the PMOS said that it was still being sorted out, but originally, they were promised to go to a game that was not an England game. The PMOS said people should check with the DCMS for further information.
Asked to confirm that FIFA had just come up with the tickets, the PMOS said that they had. That was why we were very grateful to them.
Asked how much it had cost Lord Levy, the PMOS said that he did not know the financial arrangements, and people should speak to the DCMS. It was, however, the result of direct intervention by Dick Caborn.
Asked if we were paying for the tickets, the PMOS said again that people should talk to the DCMS about how it had been organised.
Asked if there had been any communication between the Prime Minister and Sepp Blatter, the PMOS replied that there had not been. As people knew, the Prime Minister had said on Radio 5 that he thought that DCMS were very aware of the situation, which they were, and they had been working flat-out to help.
Asked if all the children would go to the same game, the PMOS said that it was still being sorted out.
Prime Minister’s Speech
Asked if the Prime Minister’s speech on Friday about the criminal justice system was going to be a philosophical one or a policy making one, the PMOS said that it was more the former rather than the latter. What it would be was an overview of his personal experience since Opposition days across the broad criminal justice system. The Prime Minister had also commissioned specifically for this speech a series of papers from experts inside and outside Government, and he would be drawing on that as well. People would see that it was a fairly substantive speech. As the PMOS had said before, it would be the first of the domestic equivalent of the foreign policy speeches, which people agreed were substantive.
Asked by the BBC if this was then a re-launch to get back onto the agenda, the PMOS replied: no. It was deeper than that, as it was somebody thinking in some depth about the issues of the criminal justice system. The PMOS said that he noticed that the BBC’s Director General Mark Thompson today had rejected the idea, that the BBC was taking a superficial approach to politics, so the PMOS assumed that the BBC would be interested therefore in the Prime Minister’s intellectual analysis.
Home Office Review
Put that with all the various events in the recent months, would the sequences be several statements from John Reid before the summer recess and one after on Megan’s Law, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister’s speech would set the intellectual framework for the approach of the Government. John Reid was looking at how we changed and transformed the Home Office to meet present day needs. There were also issues about sentencing which Dr. Reid and Lord Falconer were looking at, including the issue of how foreign prisoners and deportations were dealt with. The PMOS said that the speech on Friday was not about the detail, but it was about the intellectual overview. The proposals which John Reid would surface before July would be about the detail, but people should wait until then.
Put that the Prime Minister had said in his press conference recently that there would be a series of measures being announced before the summer recess, including measures on organised crime, for example, and was he going to be talking about the Bills that would come in as well, the PMOS replied that the Prime Minister’s starting point would be much more of an intellectual overview of the whole system, within which were the detailed measures.
The journalist said that at the press conference, he had asked the Prime Minister about funding for the Home Office, and the Prime Minister had replied that it was a matter for the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), but the Chancellor had announced the figures in the budget, so did that mean that the Prime Minister supported a review of the figures, the PMOS said: no. What was announced before was there, and that was the position. The overall Government approach to spending was set out in CSR.
Asked if it was still open, the PMOS replied no, the position had not changed.
Put that it had, the PMOS said that it had not changed.
Put that Dr. Reid was looking for more money, the PMOS replied that the journalist asserted that, but the PMOS had not heard Dr Reid say that.
Asked if it was right that any Megan’s/Sarah’s Law announcement would not form part of the July announcement, the PMOS said that it was important that people let Gerry Sutcliffe work on his fact finding mission, and carry out his analysis, and we would decide where to go from there.
Asked if splitting up the Home Office was off the agenda, the PMOS said that we had set out our position on that. We believed that there was a natural synthesis between immigration issues, policing issues, and the criminal justice area issues. Therefore, we had taken other elements out and given them to the DCA etc in the past. However, we believed that the present system made sense.
Forest Gate
Put that Sir Ian Blair had said in his speech today that Forest Gate was justified, and people had only heard the family’s side of the story, therefore, if there was another side of the story, shouldn’t the Government try to bring it out, the PMOS said that ignored the fact that there was an IPC investigation going on. Due process might not fit with media deadlines, but we still should abide by due process. That, inevitably, in these kinds of situations, did mean that there was a one-sided picture. The PMOS said that was partly the price we had to pay for due process.
Asked if we hoped in the fullness of time that the full picture would emerge, the PMOS replied: yes, in the fullness of time. However, the PMOS would not say anything that pre-judged the due process.
Abortion
Asked if the Prime Minister believed that the time was right for a joint committee to reinvestigate and re-examine the abortion issues, the PMOS replied that the Prime Minister’s approach was what almost all Prime Ministers’ approaches had been which was this was a matter for individual conscience and for individual MPs. Therefore, it was a matter that was left to Parliament.
Asked what his own personal view was, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had always said that this was a matter for Parliament, and therefore, he did not express a view, as it would then shape the overall debate.
Asked if there was any information about the Government putting this issue on the agenda, order reports etc, the PMOS said that traditionally, it had been backbenchers who had taken the initiative. That remained the position.
Asked if the Parliamentary timetable was looking tight, or was there some flexibility in it, the PMOS replied that he was not going to get involved in adding to speculation on this issue, as it was a matter for backbenchers.
delicious
digg
facebook
