Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Spokesman on: Embryology Bill, MPs’ Expenses, Iraq and Misc
Embryology Bill
Asked if it was fair to say that the Prime Minister would accept MP’s voting against the Government on the amendments but not on the bill as a whole, the Prime Minister’s Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that what the Government was doing was following the precedent set in 1990 with the original Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, where the then Government allowed free votes on the relevant controversial clauses.
For some reason there was no second reading, but on the third reading the vote was whipped by the then Government. As the Prime Minister had explained, this was an important piece of Government business; it was in the Queen’s Speech and it was the Prime Minister’s view that it was important that the bill as a whole was passed.
It was a wide-ranging bill that covered many issues in addition to the three particular clauses that raised issues of conscience for individual MP’s. This was why, in relation to those individual clauses, there would be a free vote as the Prime Minister had announced. Following the 1990 precedent for the bill as a whole, a second and third reading stage would be treated as Government business.
Put that a member of the Government could not stay in the Government and vote against the third reading, the PMS replied that it would be treated as Government business in the normal way.
Asked if the Prime Minister regretted not making this decision a little earlier, the PMS said that the outcome was entirely consistent with the position that the Prime Minister had taken throughout. We had always said that this would be treated as Government business but we would find a mechanism by which individual MP’s could express their conscience and that was what we were doing.
It was the Prime Minister’s view that it was important that nothing distracted us from the important substance of the bill. There was a lively debate underway about the bill and we had heard a lot from one side of the argument; no doubt we would hear a lot more from the other side of the argument too. The Prime Minister’s personal view was that he supported the three clauses and he would be voting in favour of those clauses. He would be setting out his reasoning as to why he supported those clauses in a letter to Labour MP’s later today.
Asked if the Prime Minister recognised those Minister’s and MP’s who did have reasons to oppose those three clauses and wouldn’t they be put in a very difficult position when it came to the third reading, the PMS said it was exactly the same situation that was faced in 1990 and we were dealing with it in the same way as the then Government had dealt with it.
Asked if the Prime Minister had made this announcement today knowing that any Cabinet colleagues who had reservations would be satisfied with it, the PMS said he did not want to get into the specifics of individuals, but as he had said this morning, the Prime Minister had been and wanted to consult colleagues before reaching a firm view. That had happened and it was worth bearing in mind we were still several months away from the actual vote-taking place on the bill. So in terms of the whipping arrangements being set out today, it was much earlier than would normally be the case.
Asked if the Prime Minister saw this as a special case or was there potential for setting a precedent, the PMS replied that the precedent had been set and we were following the previous precedent. Put that people felt strongly on the issue of 42 days detention and was there going to be free votes on other bills, the PMS replied that it was a different matter. There were clear precedents that had been set previously in relation to legislation that related to the creation of life and scientific research on embryos. Those precedents had been set previously and we were following those.
Asked if there were any other clauses or amendments in the bill that MP’s would be given a free vote on, the PMS sad that the Prime Minister had set out a comprehensive position today and these were the three particular clauses that had raised most concern.
Asked if MP’s were allowed to absent themselves from the vote in 1990, the PMS said that he was sure the journalist had lots of people at his organisation that could do the research for him.
Asked if the Prime Minister expected precedents set by a Conservative Government to be very convincing for Labour MP’s, the PMS said that these were precedents set in relation to the passing of important issues that raised issues of conscience in the House of Commons.
In general, it was quite different if it was Government legislation. A Government bill was introduced in the Queen’s Speech and that was why it was important that it was whipped at the second and third reading stage.
MPs’ Expenses
Asked why the Prime Minister made so much of transparency when he was opposed to having his own expenses published, the PMS said the Prime Minister was not opposed to having his expenses published. These were matters that were being dealt with by the House authorities.
Iraq
Put that in the light of recent events in Basra, going to overwatch mode and reducing troop numbers had been premature, the PMS said that what we were seeing in Basra today was an operation by the Iraqi security forces and the Iraqi army and they were able to do that because of the training and support they had had from the British army over a number of years.
Put that the Prime Minister had said that troop withdrawals would be guided by conditions on the ground and what was the Prime Minister’s current assessment of those conditions, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister’s view was that it was important that decisions on troop numbers were taken on the basis of the best military advice and by conditions on the ground. As and when we were in a position to make any update, we would make an announcement. Asked for guidance on when the next assessment would be made, the PMS said that we would expect to make announcements in relation to the next roulements fairly shortly.
Misc
Asked if the Prime Minister was meeting with an Indian trade delegation today, the PMS confirmed that he was, but it was not a media event.
delicious
digg
facebook
