Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Iraq, President Bush and Tuition Fees.
Iraq
Asked how long our forces were due to remain in Iraq in the light of the contingency fund announced by the Chancellor today, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that the Prime Minister had stated many times that we would remain in Iraq for however long it took to get the job done. We now had a new political timetable, the details of which had clearly changed in recent weeks, towards which everyone was working. Following the handover of power to the Iraq Governing Council, the nature of the involvement of British forces would change inasmuch as they would be in Iraq by invitation from the Governing Council rather than the Coalition Provisional Authority. But he repeated we would be there for as long as it took.
President Bush
Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to President Bush today, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister spoke to the President on a regular basis. They were in touch most weeks.
Asked if the Prime Minister had discussed the European defence initiative with the President, the PMOS said that there was ongoing consultation with our allies about this matter, including the US. Asked if the proposals that had been drawn up with France and Germany would be published soon, the PMOS said that these were judgements which would have to be taken in discussions with the EU Presidency and partners. This was an issue which was obviously germane to the European Council agenda in Brussels next week. The General Affairs Council would also discuss the issue on Monday. He didn’t think we would see anything this week.
Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to President Bush about US steel tariffs today, the PMOS said that he had heard what President Bush had said in the last hour. Our concerns about the issue were well known and we had been lobbying hard for some time to get the tariffs lifted. We would have to wait and see what the White House said this afternoon.
Tuition Fees
Asked about Cabinet ’splits’ on tuition fees, the PMOS said that he had been surprised by the interpretation that had been put on what his colleague had said about the Cabinet discussion this morning. In his view, it had been a very good, full discussion about the issue and the best way to mount certain arguments. There had been no word of dissent from any member of the Cabinet, as far as he could make out. No doubt some Cabinet Ministers would have left the meeting with a greater understanding of the intricacies of the issue than they might have had at the beginning of it. However, there was a world of difference between people asking questions for explanation, as happened today - and indeed in the vast majority of Cabinet meetings, and people making points out of criticism or because of scepticism. The whole Cabinet was clearly determined to get this Bill on the statute book.
Asked if he would agree that it was a bit odd that Ministers were still asking questions about a White Paper that had been published nearly nine months ago, the PMOS pointed out that Cabinet Ministers had big Departments of their own to run. While they were obviously across a huge amount of detail relating to their own policies, that did not, however, mean that they were familiar with every dot and comma on every single Government issue. To pretend otherwise was silly. Today, Ministers had not been asking why the Government was pursuing the particular policy on tuition fees. Some had simply been asking some questions about the detail of it.
Asked if he was implying that Cabinet had been ‘unanimous’ in its support for the policy, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had not gone round the table asking each Minister if they supported it or not. We did not work like that. It was clear that there was full support for it. And if they were asking whether support was unanimous, then the answer was definitely yes, rather than no. Asked if it would be fair to say that any differences in Cabinet had been purely ‘presentational’, the PMOS said that he wouldn’t characterise it in that way at all. There had been a mature discussion about an important policy area which everyone recognised was complex. There were different elements to it, which meant that it was necessary to explain - given the myths and misconceptions around - why we needed to do it, how it worked, how to help people from poorer backgrounds, variable fees against flat fees, variable fees against a graduate tax and the fact of abolition of upfront fees and the introduction of a retrospective repayment scheme etc etc. The Cabinet had simply gone through the different arguments so that they could be clear and consistent about them when they explained the policy to the public and Parliamentary colleagues in the weeks to come. Nothing more. Asked if he was indicating that the principle of tuition fees had unanimous support in the Cabinet, the PMOS said absolutely. The White Paper had been published and we were now moving on to the legislation. The contours and principles of the policy were settled and fixed. There had been debate about it within Government some months ago when the policy was at the Domestic Affairs Committee. There had been a bit of static around the place then, as was documented at the time, but we had moved on. Virtually everyone who had contributed to the discussion at Cabinet this morning had articulated why it was important to grasp this particular nettle and why it was fair and socially just.
Asked if this was the first time the Cabinet had discussed the issue, the PMOS said no. Asked if they would visit the subject again before the Second Reading of the Bill, the PMOS said he had no doubt the issue would be raised again before then given this was one of the bigger issues facing the Government on the domestic front. Put to him that the dispute within Cabinet had been between flat and variable fees, the PMOS said that the journalists knew that was a complete distortion of what he had just said. Asked if the Prime Minister had explained to Cabinet what he had meant by saying this week that he was putting his authority on the line over this issue, the PMOS said no. He thought his words earlier in the week had been pretty self-explanatory.
delicious
digg
facebook
