Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Asylum, Iraq and Defra.
Asylum
Asked if there were likely to be any further concessions on the Asylum and Immigration Bill, the PMOS said that in the Government’s view, we had already listened to the arguments which had been made in both the Lords and the Commons and had amended the Bill to take account of concerns which had been raised. For example, the language on the so-called "Henry VIII Order" had been changed for the avoidance of any doubt. There had also been a change to the language on serious criminals. On accommodation centres, we had agreed to trial one centre with 500 beds. This showed that we had taken account of - and recognised - areas of concern which had been raised by Peers and backbenchers and had sought to address them by building in safeguards and measures which we believed provided people with the necessary reassurance without diluting the fundamental principles of the Bill. We had listened and we had acted. The Bill was currently back before the Lords and we hoped that they would now listen to the will of the Commons. This was important legislation and you could not will the ends without the means.
Asked what steps we would take if the Government was defeated on the issue of the education of asylum seekers, the PMOS said that it was now for the Lords to reach its judgement on the Bill again. We hoped that their Lordships would acknowledge that we had, as part of the democratic process, listened to the concerns which had been raised. That said, the Government remained absolutely committed to the fundamental principles of the Bill. As we had made consistently clear, our policy on the education of asylum seekers still stood. Asked if we would be prepared to see the Bill fall if the Lords refused to support the Government’s policy on education, the PMOS said that we would have to wait and see what happened. He was not aware that anyone was talking about further amendments and this legislation was an important part of our programme.
Iraq
Asked if we were expecting a revised text of a new UN Security Council Resolution this afternoon and whether we saw this as the last chance to achieve what we wanted, the PMOS said that as he understood it, a meeting of the Permanent Five members of the Security Council was due to take place today at 2.45pm (GMT) in New York at which it was not impossible that a revised UK/US text might be circulated. People had to exercise a little patience and wait and see what happened. That said, the signals from New York were hopeful. We believed we might be reaching the end of the endgame and that we were closer now to having a new Resolution than we had been in the past.
Questioned about the need for a new Resolution, the PMOS said that the reason we needed a new Resolution was, firstly, to give the UN Weapons Inspectors a new mandate so that they could return to Iraq and do their job properly. Secondly, given Saddam Hussein was in breach of a number of existing Resolutions, it was important for the UN - as the embodiment of the international community - to show its resolve and determination to deal with the issue of Weapons of Mass Destruction. They were a real threat and clearly could not be ignored. If, as was looking more likely, a new Resolution was passed, it would be for Saddam Hussein to decide how he should be disarmed - but disarmed he would be.
The PMOS said that we had reached this point in the process as a result of some extremely intensive diplomatic negotiations. It was fair to say that the key paragraphs had been negotiated line by line by the Foreign Secretary, Colin Powell and the French Foreign Minister. Over the last few weeks they had been speaking at least every day, often several times a day. The Prime Minister believed that Jack Straw, Sir Jeremy Greenstock and his team had done a fantastic job. We had to be a little patient as we waited to see whether things would move forward, as we hoped they would. Yes, the noises were encouraging, but we had been at this stage before and he did not want to inflate expectations.
Defra
Asked to confirm reports that Lord Haskins would be chairing an inquiry into the work of DEFRA, the PMOS said that this story had been knocking around two Saturdays ago. As he understood it, Lord Haskins had been asked to look at a specific area of DEFRA’s work, namely Rural Development Grants. His work was not a root-and-branch review of DEFRA as some had presented it.
delicious
digg
facebook
