Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Paul Boateng, Nottinghamshire Police, Gerry Adams’ fish and chips, Terrorists’ release, Alzheimer Drugs/NICE and BMA/A&E.
Paul Boateng
Asked if there was an exchange of letters from Paul Boateng to the Prime Minister regarding his appointment, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said the Foreign Office would be publishing an exchange.
Asked how long the appointment had been under discussion for, the PMOS said that Mr. Boateng had made it clear that he did not want to be reappointed, and that he saw with the Commission for Africa report completion, a role for himself in trying to take forward the goals of the Africa Commission report. Therefore, this was to be the right post to do that.
Asked if it was Mr. Boateng’s suggestion, the PMOS said it was a happy coincidence of interest and opportunity.
Asked if the appointment had been the Prime Minister’s initiative, the PMOS said, as always, it was the Prime Minister’s initiative, but Mr. Boateng was happy that this opportunity had come up, given the interest he had had over the years in Africa. The PMOS said Mr. Boateng had worked with leaders in Africa, and with the completion of the Commission for Africa report, there was a clear agenda now for delivery in Africa, and Mr. Boateng in this role can help deliver those goals.
Asked what the status was for negotiations for Baroness Amos’ UN job, the PMOS said she was a candidate, but discussions were continuing.
Asked if Mr. Boateng’s appointment was standing in the way of a career diplomat, the PMOS said: no. There was a long succession of precedents for such appointments: Sir Christopher Soames in Paris in 1968, Lord Richard in New York in 1974, Peter Jay in Washington in 1977, Sir Nicolas Henderson in Washington in 1979, Sir Oliver Wright in Washington in 1982, Chris Patten in Hong Kong in 1992, Lord Waddington in Bermuda in 1992, Sir Alastair Goodlad in Canberra in 1999. The PMOS said it was a question of getting the right person for the right job at the right time.
Asked why Paul Boateng was the right person, the PMOS replied he had a lot of experience in Africa, and as part of the Africa Commission, he was up to speed in terms of not only the thinking of African leaders, but also the goals that were now set for the international community to deliver. He could help do that in this post.
Asked what Mr. Boateng’s main achievements were, the PMOS said that what he had achieved in his time of Government was: the McPherson Report and the significant reforms to prisons; the Children’s Green Paper, "Every Child Matters", the carers strategy; two spending reviews; a new relationship with the voluntary sector; and also promoting the International Finance Facility and the Commission for Africa Report.
Asked if Paul Boateng had to resign from his current seat without knowing whether he would be going to a new job, or not, the PMOS replied that was the decision Mr. Boateng had taken.
Asked if it was denied that it was "crony-ism and jobs for the boys", the PMOS said that anyone who looked at Paul Boateng’s experience, and the relationships he had developed with African leaders, and his work on the Africa Commission would know that this was a person who not only had an interest, but also the experience and the right track record to fulfil the role.
Asked if it was unusual for a Minister to make such a move on his way up, as opposed to on his way out, the PMOS said that this was a question of someone deciding that this was the job he wanted to do at this stage in his career. It was good that someone with his experience was available for the job.
Nottinghamshire Police
Asked what the Prime Minister’s view was about the Chief Constable of the Nottinghamshire police saying they couldn’t police properly because of Government policy, the PMOS replied that everyone recognised that there were problems in Nottinghamshire, and there were different views about the causes of those problems. The facts were: that the Police Standards Unit had been working with the police force there because of concerns about performance; and overall, crime was turning round in the area. The other facts were that Nottinghamshire had seen an increase of 4.08% in its grant, which was well above the minimum increase granted to all police authorities; that there were particular problems such as drugs or gun crime to be dealt with, extra resources from the Street Crime Initiative and the Gun Crime Initiative had been directed to the police service there; and on police numbers, the total numbers were 200 more police than in 1997, and 267 more support staff than in 1997. In terms of resources, therefore, Nottinghamshire had received significant support.
Put to the PMOS that since the statistics given, the Chief Constable was not performing his job properly, the PMOS said everyone accepted that there were problems there, and that was why the Police Standards Unit needed to work with the force.
Put to him again that although there was extra support given, there were still problems, and whose fault was it therefore, the PMOS replied that what was important was that although some people might want to get into a "blame game", we wanted to resolve the problems that were there. The way to resolve those problems was by not only providing extra resources, but also to work together with the Police Authority and with the Chief Constable to resolve those matters. That was why Hazel Blears would be meeting local MPs this afternoon.
Asked if the Prime Minister thought it was wrong for the Chief Constable to go to the press, the PMOS said it was a matter for the Chief Constable and the Police Authority. The Police Authority had said they would be having discussions about the matter soon.
Asked if the Prime Minister had a view on the matter, the PMOS said it was a matter for those who were the Chief Constable’s employers, the Police Authority.
Put to him that Nottinghamshire was being funded as a rural constabulary, when in fact, it should be considered a metropolitan one, and did the Government disagree with that view, the PMOS said that the existing police formula was carefully designed to reflect the services that were in demand for the areas. It was constantly being looked at and reviewed, but Nottinghamshire was not unique in the demands that it faced.
Gerry Adams’ fish and chips
Asked if the Prime Minister was informed in advance of the White House’s decision to make Gerry Adams pay for his own fish and chips during the St. Patrick’s Day celebrations, the PMOS said we did discuss these matters with the administration. However, the administration reached its own decision, and therefore we had been aware of the decision they had taken, but it was one taken by them.
Terrorists’ release
Asked what the Government thought of the way the terrorists had been released under the control orders had been carried out, the PMOS replied that inevitably, given the lateness of getting the process through, it did cause some problems. However, those problems had been sorted out, and in terms of the reality, the control orders had taken effect. That was the important thing.
Asked where the terror suspects would go before they appeared in court, the PMOS said he would not comment on individual cases.
Alzheimer Drugs/NICE
Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with Stephen Ladyman that the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) should look again at the decision on Alzheimer drugs, the PMOS replied that it was important to get the facts straight. NICE launched a consultation on the guidance two weeks ago, and that consultation period ended later this month. Everyone was entitled to put in views, and as part of that, the Department of Health asked NICE if the wider social implications of not approving the drugs use had been fully taken into account. It was a matter for NICE to reach its own decision, and not Government ministers, and that was what was happening. It was the right thing to do to ask NICE to take into account the benefits to carers, as well as patients of these drugs.
Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with Mr Ladyman about why people were "baffled" by the proposal, the PMOS said it was important that when a decision was reached, that there was a full explanation. It was right that if there were degrees of concern, that they were reflected upon by NICE. The PMOS said again that NICE would make its own decision.
BMA/A&E
Asked for any comment to the BMA criticisms this morning that Government policies were causing problems in A&E, the PMOS said the important thing was to recognise what Sir George Alberti of the National Centre for Emergency Care had said. Sir George Alberti said that for forty to fifty years, there had not been any targets, and there had been no improvement in the A&E services in that time. However, since there had been targets, there had been improvements, and he spoke as someone who was, as he said himself, against targets. The PMOS said that Dr. Jonathan Fielden who was chairman of the BMA’s GP Committee said that there had been "substantial improvement" in A&E services. The PMOS said that was backed up by the National Audit Office, patient surveys conducted by the Health Care Commission and by others, including Martin Shalley who was President of the British Association of Accident and Emergency Medicine. In terms of targets, the PMOS said that of course, in some cases it was not appropriate, and that was why we had lowered the target from 100% of cases to 98% of cases after John Reid became Secretary of State to allow that degree of flexibility. Targets have resulted in real improvements in A&E, but they were a means to an end, and not an end in themselves. We needed to keep that operation under constant review, but in terms of overall targets, the Government would not apologise for their introduction at all, as they had resulted in real improvements.
delicious
digg
facebook
