Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Northern Ireland, Geoff Hoon (Sergeant Roberts, Dr David Kelly), Phillis Report and Tuition Fees.
Northern Ireland
The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman advised journalists that the Northern Ireland Secretary, Paul Murphy and Irish Foreign Minister, Brian Cowen, would announce jointly today that the review of the operation of the Belfast Agreement would begin on Tuesday 3 February. Mr Murphy would be meeting the Northern Ireland parties tomorrow in Belfast to discuss the issue with them. Asked how long the review would last, the PMOS said that a date had not been announced at this stage. However, as the Prime Minister had said when he had last met the Taoiseach, it would be a short, sharp, focussed review. Asked if the Prime Minister would be involved, the PMOS said that the review would be carried out under the auspices of Mr Murphy and Mr Cowen.
Geoff Hoon
Sergeant Roberts
Asked if the Prime Minister had discussed the Sergeant Roberts case with Geoff Hoon over the weekend, the PMOS said not as far as he was aware. He reminded journalists that the Defence Secretary had set out the position at the end of last week. No doubt he would want to take the opportunity to update Mrs Roberts during their meeting today. Asked the Prime Minister’s thoughts on Mrs Roberts’s view that Mr Hoon should resign, the PMOS said that we had answered this question on Friday. As we had said then, the Prime Minister retained full confidence in the Defence Secretary. Mr Hoon had expressed both his sorrow at Sergeant Roberts’s death and his wish to find out what had happened. It was important to allow that investigation to take its course. Asked if the Government believed that the principle of ministerial responsibility should apply in this case, the PMOS repeated that it was important to allow the investigation to take its course. Asked if the investigation would take into account reports at the weekend that Sergeant Albert Thompson’s leg had been amputated as a result of a shortage of surgical equipment in Iraq, the PMOS said that the investigation would cover Sergeant Roberts’s death, in accordance with procedure.
Dr David Kelly
Asked the Prime Minister’s view on the Defence Secretary’s reported assessment of Dr David Kelly as ‘no martyr’, the PMOS said that the MoD, rightly, had refused to engage in a speculative discussion about the issue. There were nine days to go until the publication of the Hutton Report. People should exercise a little patience. Put to him that Mr Hoon had clearly not waited for the Report’s publication and that the MoD was not actually denying the comments which had been sourced to him, the PMOS said that what the MoD was doing was refusing to be drawn into speculation about speculation, as was entirely proper. Asked when Mr Hoon’s remarks had been made, the PMOS said that he had absolutely no intention of commenting on the Sunday Times report because it was based purely on speculation. He repeated that people should calm down and wait for the Hutton Report. Asked why Mr Hoon had not apologised for his remarks quickly as the PMOS, himself, had done over the comments he had made, the PMOS said he understood the MoD’s desire not to be drawn into speculation. People should respect that. Put to him that comments had been reported as fact, not speculation, the PMOS said that the comments might well have been reported as fact, but they were clearly speculative. He said that journalists should draw breath, wait nine days and then see what the Hutton Report had to say.
Put to him that the Hutton Report would not deal with Geoff Hoon’s comments, the PMOS said that Lord Hutton would deal with the matters which had been considered at the Inquiry. Discussion about related matters could wait until then. Asked if he would agree that the Prime Minister would not approve of another attempt to blacken Dr Kelly’s name, the PMOS once again declined to comment on what had clearly been a speculative report in the Sunday Times. Put to him that the MoD’s reluctance to say whether Mr Hoon had made the remarks was an indication that he had tried to smear Dr Kelly, which was something the Prime Minister would surely not condone, the PMOS reiterated the point that he was not going to comment on what was a third-hand account in a Sunday newspaper. He was not going to engage in speculative discussion until Lord Hutton published his Report. Asked to explain why David Blunkett had been quick to own up to his remarks about Harold Shipman while Mr Hoon was refusing to own up to his comments about Dr Kelly, the PMOS said that it was a mistake to lump together two disparate events. This was especially the case when a respected judicial figure was about to publish the conclusions to his Inquiry. Put to him that a judge was investigating the Shipman case as well, the PMOS said that that might be so, but the differences between the two cases were far more numerous than the comparisons.
Asked if Mr Hoon had been asked questions about the report, the PMOS said that the MoD had dealt with the matter and we should leave it at that. Put to him that the MoD had not, in fact, dealt with the matter, the PMOS said that tempting though it was to get drawn into further discussions about these issues, it would not be helpful to do so. There were only another nine days to go. Asked if the Prime Minister continued to believe that both Ministers and officials should not brief in advance of the Report, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had expressed his view very clearly: everyone should wait for the Report.
Asked which subjects journalists were allowed to ask questions about in the light of the fact that so many - including WMD, procurement and Hutton related matters - were out of bounds due to ongoing Inquiries, the PMOS said that it was silly to suggest that the Government should be dictated by the demands of 24-hour news. Inconvenient as it might be, Government policy should be allowed to take its course. If a respected judicial figure was asked to look into certain events, it was only right to let him come to his conclusions in his own time, not according to a timescale imposed by the 24-hours news channels. Similarly, if a group of people had been asked to look for WMD in Iraq, it was surely wise to let them take their time to finish their job, and not act in accordance with the demands of the 24-hour news organisations. Put to him that it wasn’t ‘logical’ to ask journalists to wait for the Hutton Report rather than comment on recent remarks made by Mr Hoon which had nothing to do with the Inquiry in any event, the PMOS said he believed that the report yesterday was part of the ongoing speculation in the run up to the publication of the Hutton Report. He was not going to do anything to encourage that process. He was going to wait for publication and would suggest that others did the same. Challenged that he was hiding behind the Hutton Report, the PMOS said he was not. All he was doing was refusing to get involved in speculation surrounding the Report in the expectation that there would no doubt be much more of this sort of thing over the next few days. Asked to guarantee that all questions would be answered after the Report had been published, the PMOS said that we would let Lord Hutton’s Report speak for itself. After that, we would be in a better position to answer the questions being put to us. Asked if that would include questions which had not been addressed in the Report, the PMOS said he thought that journalists would find it more useful to wait and see what the Report actually said rather than speculate nine days in advance about what it would not say.
Asked if there was going to be another report in the light of the fact that the Prime Minister had said that he wanted Bob Phillis to take into account the conclusions of the Hutton Report, the PMOS said no. The Phillis group had decided that today was the right time to publish the report and it had been their decision to do so.
Asked if a new Permanent Secretary had been appointed as recommended by the interim Phillis report last year, the PMOS said that the post had been advertised and interviews were due to take place in early Spring. From that would flow the changes which had been recommended in the interim report and which the final report built on today. Asked why there was such a long gap between advertising the post and interviews, the PMOS said that the advertising of posts did not conform to online timetables. The timescale was all too typical. Asked when the Government would respond to the report, the PMOS pointed out that Douglas Alexander had responded on behalf of the Government this morning. Clearly, it was a detailed and complex piece of work which would, of course, be considered very carefully.
Tuition Fees
Questioned about the publication today of a DfES paper looking at the pros and cons of using maintenance grants as part of the tuition fees remission process, the PMOS said that both Charles Clarke and the Prime Minister had stated that the Government wanted to look at the issue - hence the paper today. Asked why the paper hadn’t been published last week if it was such a good idea, the PMOS said that we were working through the complex details, listening to valid concerns and responding to them.
delicious
digg
facebook
