Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Uzbekistan, Iraq, Minister for Women, Anti-Social Behaviour and Europe/Rebate.
Uzbekistan
Asked if Jack Straw would mention Uzbekistan in his speech tomorrow, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that it was up to him. As he had said yesterday, the Government believed that the situation was very serious, that there had been a clear abuse of human rights, a lack of democracy and a lack of openness. Our Ambassador in Tashkent, having seen the Deputy Foreign minister yesterday, was seeing the currently Foreign minister.
Iraq
Asked if 450 deaths since the election of the new Iraqi Government demonstrated progress, the PMOS said what was progress was that we had for the first time in living memory a democratically elected Government in Iraq. Nobody underestimated the terrible price that terrorists were exacting for that progress, but there was progress. What we must do, as the Prime Minister had said, was see it through to the end and make sure we did everything we could to help the democratically elected government of Iraq agree a new constitution, progress to further elections in December and provide the capability so that they could take responsibility for their own security. Clearly those who were killing people wished to stop that progress, but we were as determined as ever to see it through.
Minister for Women
Asked if it was acceptable to have an unpaid minister for women, the PMOS said that there had in the past been various ministers, who, because of the limits on the size of Government have been unpaid. The important thing was that we had a representative at Cabinet level in Tessa Jowell looking after equality issues and a very energetic and capable minister, Meg Munn.
Anti-Social Behaviour
Asked about the Government’s plans to tackle anti-social behaviour in the light of Hazel Blears comments, the PMOS said that the important thing, as the Prime Minister had said last week, was to have a national debate on the kind of measures and signals that we sent to those who showed disrespect or broke the law. There were various different aspects and factors related to that. We had dealt with some of these already through the use of ASBOs. Some of them we would be dealing with in future legislation, such as through the ability to close down pubs where there were problems. Others required a debate, such as in education, with head teachers about discipline. Another aspect of it was how to send the strongest possible signals to those who had been convicted that the community as a whole disapproved of their behaviour. It was in that spirit of debate that Hazel Blears made her comments.
Put to him that this was all rhetoric, the PMOS pointed out that people had said this about ASBOs and it had turned out to be the reverse. What ASBOs had shown was that an idea which people at the time were sceptical about actually could work, and did work. It was important to see this as part of a continuum of ministerial thinking and Government thinking about how we dealt with this issue. The Prime Minister was deadly serious about this.
Asked how the Prime Minister hoped to start the debate, the PMOS said that there was a national debate going on and therefore it was important that we considered a range of different proposals. Asked whether Hazel Blears had been describing Government policy, the PMOS said that she had been contributing to the national debate in her capacity as a Government minister. Put to him that the Government had a record of making announcements and then not seeing them through, the PMOS said that if you examined the Government’s record on this particular area it was a good one. The number of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders issues between April 1999 and September 2004 were 3826. There was something which went from being an idea, to a proposal, to a being a policy, to being implemented on the ground and highly popular. What we had to do was think through carefully how we as a community dealt with a culture of disrespect. It was important therefore all contributions to that debate, from Government ministers, the public, and those involved on the front line were included. If anyone was suggesting that the government came out with ideas and never followed through, he would suggest that they were wrong as his figures showed.
Questioned further about the thinking behind this, the PMOS said that the important point first of all, was to see this as part and parcel of the Prime Minister’s thinking for a considerable amount of time. Anybody who looked at the Prime Minister’s record would acknowledge that this was an issue he had been thinking about and acting on since even before he became Prime Minister. It was not something that had been parachuted in from nowhere, it had to be placed in that context. Similarly the Government had taken various measures such as ASBOs, licensing legislation, closing crack houses and so forth. These were all elements of the same approach. As the Prime Minister had said last week, the Government would hold a debate to see how to take this agenda forward. We needed to consult head-teachers, community leaders and if other politicians wanted to contribute to the debate then it was open to them to do so.
Europe/Rebate
Asked about the UK’s rebate from the EU, the PMOS said that the position on the rebate had not changed since he last briefed it before the election campaign. Asked to clarify what that position was, the PMOS said that that the important thing was that we had argued and continued to argue that given the balance of resources and payments that countries made, the UK was justified in its rebate and that remained the position. Asked repeatedly to say it was non-negotiable, the PMOS said that the Government had said that we believe the rebate to be justified and we will argue that case in Europe. Put to him that the Chancellor had said it was non-negotiable given the existing Common Agricultural Policy, the PMOS said that he had nothing to add to the Chancellors words, which he fully endorsed.
delicious
digg
facebook
