Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Tuition Fees and the Hutton Report.
Tuition Fees
In the light of continuing speculation today, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) told journalists that, in the Government’s view, the vote remained very tight. They would therefore not be surprised to learn that the Prime Minister was continuing to talk to parliamentary colleagues. Individual MPs might have changed sides, but others had not and they appeared to be deciding what to do as individuals, as was their right. We had said last night that there would be no more negotiations on the substance. That remained the case. Consequently, reports of concessions in the last twenty-four hours were wrong. What they appeared to be focussing on were two points which had been on the table before last night - a report next year on the largely technical question of whether the tapers needed to be changed to avoid any impact on recruitment into the professions, and a separate review which would not report until 2009/10. As the Education Secretary had confirmed on the floor of the House today, variability would have already begun by the time the review reported. Therefore, if any legislation was to come into effect following the review, it would follow the implementation of the Bill, not precede it. To summarise: talk of sudden concessions was wrong, as was talk of big concessions on the principle of the Bill.
Asked if the review would actually be set up in 2009 to look back on the three years of variability, the PMOS said yes. Asked to explain the ‘tapers’ issue, the PMOS acknowledged that it was a fairly technical matter. It was about examining whether it was going to act as a disincentive for people going into professions and if so, whether there was any way to ameliorate that. However, it was important to establish the facts in the first instance, which was what the report next year would do. Put to him that the Education Secretary had said that the report would also look at the position of students who did not qualify for the £3,000 a year maintenance grant, the PMOS said that the purpose of the report was to see whether it was likely that there was going to be any disincentive for those students going into the professions. There was no presumption that there was a disincentive. The report’s role was to examine the issue. Asked why the report would not be carried out before the legislation was drafted, the PMOS said that the report would look specifically at concerns over whether the tapers would act as a disincentive for students going into the professions. Some work on this issue was already being done and would be included in next year’s report. Asked if the Government was committed to providing more money if the report found obstacles that needed to be dealt with, the PMOS cautioned journalists against jumping two hurdles at once. The question presumed that problems were going to be found and that they would be financial. People should be patient and allow the report to do its work. Asked who was going to carry out the report, the PMOS said that it would be the job of the DfES.
Asked when the Prime Minister had last spoken to Nick Brown, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had spoken to many MPs in recent days, as you would expect. We had no intention of giving a detailed rundown on whom he had seen and when. Asked how he would square Mr Brown’s comment today that he was satisfied that there was extra money from the Treasury with Downing Street’s insistence that no concessions had been given, the PMOS said that he was not going to comment on individual MPs. However, as he had underlined this morning before he had been aware of Mr Brown’s remarks, there were no changes to the Bill, no changes to the principles contained in the Bill and no extra money other than that which had already been highlighted. It was also a statement of the obvious that if the review in 2009/10 recommended changes, then new legislation would need to be drawn up. Put to him that Mr Brown had said that he had been told that the next CSR would see new money for higher education, the PMOS repeated that there was no extra money. Put to him that Charles Clarke himself had mentioned the CSR at the end of his Opening Statement today, the PMOS reiterated the fact that there was no extra money today that had not been there before last night. Asked if he was indicating that there was going to be new money for higher education in the CSR but that we were not calling it ‘extra’ money, the PMOS repeated that there was no extra money on the table today that hadn’t been there yesterday.
Asked to explain the reason for the ‘conflicting messages’ from different parts of Government, the PMOS said he wasn’t aware that there were any such messages. Asked about the possibility that Mr Brown had been able to ascertain something from the Treasury which Downing Street might not be ‘in sight of’, the PMOS said that he had no intention of commenting in detail on what Mr Brown had said. Suffice to say that that he would disagree with the premise of the question. Asked if Downing Street would rubbish claims by any MPs who asserted that they had ‘wrung out’ concessions from the Government, the PMOS said we disagreed with the suggestion that concessions had suddenly appeared on the table that had not been there prior to yesterday. That idea was clearly wrong. Put to him that the Prime Minister had told Guardian journalists last week that no concessions had been made because everything contained in the Bill was what the Government was going to do anyway, the PMOS said that the Government had obviously listened to people’s concerns and had tried to address them. Put to him that that was the definition of a concession, the PMOS said he would disagree. The Government had listened properly to genuine concerns and had met them whenever it had been possible to do so. Asked to explain why that was not considered a concession, the PMOS said that where there were genuine issues, it was sensible to address them. It had been suggested that we had made concessions in the last twenty-four hours because we were afraid of losing the Bill. That was not the case. Asked if MPs were wrong to think that the issue of variability could be ‘up for grabs’ in a year’s time, the PMOS said that the review would take place in 2009/10 - after variability had come into effect.
Hutton Report
Asked if he had seen the Hutton Report yet, the PMOS said that he had absolutely no intention of commenting on the processology surrounding the Report. Asked what security measures were being taken to ensure that there was no leakage, the PMOS said that there would be no leakage of the Report from our end because no one would be speaking about it. Asked if Alastair Campbell was in Downing Street today to read the Report, the PMOS underlined that he had nothing further to add to what he had already said. What mattered was what Lord Hutton would say tomorrow. Journalists didn’t have too long to wait. Asked if the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition would both have to pretend that they hadn’t read the Report in PMQs tomorrow, the PMOS said that PMQs would take place as normal tomorrow - that is, as normal as possible in the circumstances.
delicious
digg
facebook
