Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Bush Phonecall/Middle East, Mobile Phones Bil and Local Elections.
Bush Phonecall/Middle East
The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) advised journalists that the Prime Minister had had a fifteen-minute telephone conversation with President Bush who had called him last night. The conversation had focussed entirely on the Middle East. Both had welcomed the important step forward in Ramallah over the past 48-hours.
They had also discussed the peace conference which had been announced yesterday by US Secretary of State Colin Powell, and both had agreed that it was important to see it as part of a process rather than a one-off-resolve-everything event. It was thought that the first meeting of the conference, most likely to be at Ministerial level, would be held this summer in Europe, although the details were still to be decided.
The President had advised the Prime Minister that Ariel Sharon would be in Washington next week. Both the Prime Minister and President Bush had also expressed their determination to remain fully engaged in efforts to restart the political process, although they acknowledged the real difficulties that lay ahead.
Asked whether the President had talked about the need to continue to push for the UN fact-finding mission to Jenin, the PMOS said that the issue had not been discussed in detail last night. Negotiations were ongoing in the UN Security Council in New York regarding this matter. Our position was that we continued to support the deployment of a fact-finding team. Last night’s phonecall had focussed more on the next steps post Ramallah and the need to restart a political process.
Mobile Phones Bill
The PMOS said that the Mobile Phones Bill was being published today following its introduction in the Lords yesterday. This was one of the measures we were putting in place to tackle mobile phone theft. Its purpose was to help make stolen phones of little use or value. Mobile phones were now involved in 28% of robberies, compared with 8% three years ago. In London, the figure was 50%. It was clearly a major contributory factor to the rise in street crime.
The Bill itself would complement measures being introduced by the phone operators to introduce call-barring for stolen phones across their networks. At the moment, there was nothing to prevent people reprogramming the unique ID of a phone. The Bill would make it an offence to do so and would carry a maximum penalty of five years in prison and unlimited fines. It would also make it an offence to possess the necessary equipment with the intention of using it to reprogramme a mobile phone.
In answer to questions about the Bill, the PMOS said that it was part of a sustained effort on our part to put in place different measures which could act as deterrents for mobile phone theft. We had been in discussion with the industry for some time and they were also introducing their own measures to tackle the problem.
Questioned further, the PMOS said that the Bill should be seen alongside a raft of other issues which had come out of the COBRA crime meetings which the Prime Minister had been chairing over the last few weeks as part of our sustained effort against street crime. Asked if we were hoping to get the Bill through Parliament in this session, the PMOS said it was a relatively short Bill and we hoped it would have passage in this session.
Asked if we were hoping to get it through by the summer, the PMOS pointed out that the session included the overspill after the summer recess. In the end, it was for the Business Managers to decide.
Asked if we would be setting up an inquiry to investigate who had leaked the story to the media given it was in the Times, the PMOS said that he did not know where it had come from. As he understood it, the Home Office had not been briefing on it. Challenged that of course the Home Office had been briefing on it, the PMOS said that as far as he was aware, that was not the case. He pointed out that people in the industry would also have known about it.
Local Elections
Asked for the Prime Minister’s reaction to the BNP’s success in the Local Elections, the PMOS said that reaction to the Elections was being handled by Charles Clarke. The Prime Minister would not be saying anything. Questioned as to whether the Prime Minister had stayed up to watch the results, the PMOS said he had not been up all night.
Asked about the Prime Minister’s views concerning elected mayors and Hartlepool, the PMOS said that it was right for local people to have a say both in deciding whether they wanted to have a mayor and who that should be. The people of Hartlepool had made their decision and had chosen to elect Stuart Drummond who had used a particular garb and packaging to aid his candidacy. Democracy could manifest itself in many different ways.
He remarked that Hartlepool’s elimination from the Third Division play-offs had not affected his prospects. The Prime Minister believed absolutely that mayors were the right way forward. They were an innovative policy and a new form of governance. It was perhaps to be expected that new faces would come to the fore, as well as some of the more experienced political leaders. Clearly that was what had happened in this instance.
Questioned as to whether the Prime Minister continued to support the idea of mayors despite what had happened in Hartlepool, the PMOS said that the test of this was how Mr Drummond would carry out his role. The people of Hartlepool were the ones who had elected him and he now had to serve them.
Put to him that the fact Mr Drummond had been elected showed that mayors had very little power, the PMOS said he would disagree. He pointed out that the Mayor for London had significant powers. He was simply making the point that it was perhaps inevitable that there would be fresh faces when introducing a new form of governance.
In answer to questions about the success of postal voting in the Local Elections, the PMOS pointed out that voter turnout in these elections had actually been better than people had predicted, although it was clearly not as good as all the political parties would like it to be. The pilots we had introduced for these elections had been brought in with the serious purpose of finding out whether they could have an impact on turnout. In terms of postal voting, it was fair to say that the experiment had been a success - in some cases it had more than doubled recent comparable figures.
Asked where we went from here, the PMOS said that the Electoral Commission would evaluate the pilot schemes and compile a report, expected to have been completed by the end of July. Obviously we would need to look carefully at the Commission’s conclusions before making any decision as to how postal voting might be rolled out more widely. We would also need to consult with other political parties. It was too early to say at this stage what the impact on future elections might be beyond acknowledging that at first glance postal voting did appear to have been a positive step towards getting more people to engage in the democratic process.
That was not to rule anything in or out for the next General Election. We would look at the results of the different pilots in slower time and see how, whether and if they could be more widely applied. Asked whether blanket postal voting for General Elections would require legislation, the PMOS said yes.
delicious
digg
facebook
