Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on the Hutton Report.
Hutton Report
In answer to questions about the Hutton Report, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) reiterated this morning’s point that he had absolutely no intention of getting drawn into speculation about Hutton and Hutton-related matters. The events of the past twenty-four hours had underlined both why we were reluctant to do so and our determination not to do so. He said he hoped that Lord Hutton’s statement this afternoon had addressed the questions being asked at this morning’s briefing. He also hoped journalists would agree with him that it replicated his colleague’s comments yesterday.
Asked to explain the Prime Minister’s use of the word ‘totality’ during PMQs today in answering a question about comments he had made to journalists on board a plane regarding the naming of Dr David Kelly, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had simply been referring to the fact that, in a rolling press conference, the bulk of which had been about Far East matters, he had addressed the issue on a number of occasions. Indeed, looking back at how it had been reported at the time, journalists themselves would be interested to note that they had used a variety of quotes from him on the issue. Asked if he was attempting to draw a distinction between the Prime Minister’s remark that he had not authorised the leaking of Dr Kelly’s name and his comment later in the same press conference that confirming Dr Kelly’s identity once his name had been put to the MoD was a completely different matter, the PMOS said that it was the media’s job to interpret what the Prime Minister had said on the plane. The important point was that the Prime Minister had also said, "In reply to what has been said earlier, did I authorise the leaking of David Kelly’s name, that is completely untrue". Asked why he was being so reluctant to say whether a distinction was being drawn between the two comments, the PMOS pointed out that he had not actually argued with the suggestion that a distinction was being made. He had simply said that he had no intention of getting involved in speculation on Hutton and Hutton-related matters. He had heard people drawing a distinction before. All he was doing was drawing attention to what he believed was an important quote from the Prime Minister during the same press conference, as indeed had been reported at the time.
Asked if it was fair to surmise from Lord Hutton’s statement this afternoon that he had wanted to publish the Government’s additional submission but that the Government had not wanted him to do so, the PMOS said that he was not prepared to comment on an interpretation of Lord Hutton’s position, or indeed the Government’s position. Lord Hutton’s statement stood by itself. Asked if it was up to Lord Hutton or the Government to decide whether the submission should be put into the public domain once the Report had been published, the PMOS said that it would be up to Lord Hutton to decide how to proceed. Questioned as to whether the Government was among the ‘parties’ who had objected to the publication of the additional submissions on the grounds that it would ‘encourage a trial of various individuals…..by the media’, the PMOS said that the statement was self-explanatory. There was no need for him to provide a commentary on it. Put to him that, according to the FT, the Government’s submission had been made in November, a month after the Inquiry’s solicitor had written to all the parties asking for their views regarding the possibility of publishing their submissions - which would mean that that there was a question over whether the Government’s submission was covered by Lord Hutton’s statement this afternoon, the PMOS said that the statement referred to October. People should not look beyond that.
Asked if Downing Street had had any contact with Lord Hutton this week, the PMOS said that it was up to Lord Hutton to decide whether he wanted to make public any contact he had had with the parties.
delicious
digg
facebook
