Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Fox Hunting and PM/Lord Bragg.
Fox Hunting
Asked how the Prime Minister would be voting on the issue of fox hunting later today, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said he thought it was important to put today’s events into context. The Government had been trying for seven years to find a middle way to resolve this issue. However, it was clear that attempts to do so had not succeeded. Nevertheless, two manifesto commitments had been given to let Parliament resolve the issue and the Government was determined to live up to them. As we had underlined from the outset, it was up to individual MPs to exercise their free vote in the House. If the issue was raised during PMQs today, no doubt the Prime Minister, who was an MP just like any other, would take the opportunity to make his voting intentions clear. Asked if he was really suggesting that journalists were not entitled to know how the Prime Minister was planning on voting, the PMOS said he thought it was more appropriate for the House to be informed first. There wasn’t long to wait. He added that the Prime Minister had not changed his view on fox hunting. Put to him that if the Prime Minister was committed to fulfilling his manifesto pledges, a ban on fox hunting would be brought in within three months rather than delayed for two years, the PMOS said the Prime Minister believed that the delay was important both to give those involved time to adjust to the new situation and also to give voters a chance to express their own views, should they want to, at a General Election. The Government had committed itself to resolving the issue of fox hunting within this Parliament. In the Prime Minister’s view that commitment had to be respected, despite the fact that it hadn’t been possible to find a way through. Asked if he was ’seriously suggesting’ that the Prime Minister believed that fox hunting should become the main issue in a General Election, the PMOS pointed out that the purpose of General Elections was to allow voters to express their views on any matter.
Asked to explain his use of the phrase ‘middle way’ in answering an earlier question, the PMOS said that Alan Michael’s initial proposal had tried to bring about a compromise. Unfortunately, it had not won sufficient support - a reality which we had recognised and taken into account.
Asked if the Prime Minister continued to believe that invoking the Parliament Act if necessary was an appropriate way to resolve the issue, the PMOS said he did not think that it would be useful to get drawn into a discussion about hypothetical scenarios. That said, there had been several attempts to try to find a way through. Unfortunately, all had failed. Consequently, as Alun Michael had said this morning, if the Commons expressed its free will, it was important for people to respect it. Asked if there was a guarantee that a ban on fox hunting would be introduced whatever happened or whether he was suggesting that one way to ‘resolve’ the issue was to decide not to introduce a ban at all, the PMOS said that it was a matter for a free vote. Everyone knew how the Commons had voted in the past on this matter. It would be more helpful were people to exercise a little patience and wait and see what happened both in the Commons today and in the House of Lords rather than engage in hypothetical and speculative discussions.
Asked if the Prime Minister had other important business to attend to between 5pm and 7pm and 9pm and 10pm tonight, the PMOS confirmed that there were existing diary commitments. However, as always, the Prime Minister recognised the importance of Parliament and carrying out his duties as an MP.
PM/Lord Bragg
Asked if John Reid had been confirming in an interview this morning that the Prime Minister had been under a great deal of stress earlier this year, the PMOS observed that any Prime Minister experienced tough times while in office. That was a fact of political life. However, as he had made clear yesterday, he did not recognise the stories being reported and had nothing further to say about the matter. Asked why he didn’t say that the stories were ‘not true’ as John Reid had underlined this morning, the PMOS referred journalists to the Prime Minister’s words when asked about this matter in his July press conference. Had he considered moving on? Answer: no. End of story. Put to him that there was a difference between not recognising a story and saying it was untrue, the PMOS said he thought journalists were able to understand what he meant when he used that particular term. Moreover, one would think that the Prime Minister’s words would carry more weight than his own.
Asked for a reaction to suggestions that Lord Bragg’s comments had been sanctioned by Downing Street, the PMOS said that some journalists had phoned him immediately after Lord Bragg’s interview yesterday. As they would be able to verify, he had been genuinely surprised by what had been said. The first we had known about the comments was when they had been broadcast. Asked if the Prime Minister had contacted Lord Bragg to voice his displeasure, the PMOS said that, tempting as it was to answer that question, he thought it would be better to stick to his customary response and point out that it wasn’t our practice to comment on private conversations the Prime Minister might or might not have had. That should be taken as neither confirmation nor denial that the two had spoken. Asked if Downing Street had sought an apology, clarification or explanation from Lord Bragg, the PMOS said that Lord Bragg was a private individual and was therefore entitled to express his views. It was our job to state the reality of the situation, which was precisely what we had been trying to do ever since these stories had first appeared.
delicious
digg
facebook
