Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: ID Cards, DPM/Europe and Zimbabwe/Asylum.
ID Cards
Asked if the Home Secretary had been serious this morning in suggesting that a special Standing Committee could be set up to discuss the detail of the ID Cards Bill, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) referred journalists to the Home Office for further detail about such a suggestion.
Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with the Home Secretary’s description of the LSE report on ID cards as "partisan" and "fabricated", the PMOS said that, as the Prime Minister had indicated in his monthly press conference yesterday, we recognised that some people had a very definite view of ID cards. However, we were happy to take on the arguments. We believed that the LSE report was based on false assumptions and, at times, appeared to have excessive contingencies built into its findings.
Asked by how much the unit cost of ID cards would increase if discounts were to be granted to pensioners, the PMOS said that precise costings had yet to be calculated. It went without saying, however, that the Home Office would have built such contingencies into the system. As we had made clear, the £93 projection figure had been worked out carefully by the Home Office and had been based on a thorough analysis by their experts. He did not think it would be helpful to get drawn into a speculative discussion at this point since we believed that the issue should be examined properly.
DPM/Europe
Asked if the Deputy Prime Minister was visiting Hungary and Poland today with an offer of future financial assistance, the PMOS said that this was not the time or the place to discuss such an issue. As the Prime Minister had underlined at the end of the Brussels Summit two weeks ago, and as the Deputy Prime Minister would again make clear in his meetings with the Prime Ministers of Hungary and Poland today, we would ensure that the Accession countries would not lose out financially. We already had very good bilateral relations with Poland and Hungary and we shared many common views on issues such as economic reform. We recognised that they had budgetary concerns relating to the EU. We also understood that part of the problem with the current CAP policy was the fact that so much of it was focussed towards the original fifteen members, rather than the new Accession countries. It was therefore important to switch the focus towards helping them raise the standards of their basic infrastructure in line with the rest of the EU. That would be the Deputy Prime Minister’s basic message today.
Zimbabwe/Asylum
Asked to confirm reports that the Government was softening its stance towards failed asylum seekers from Zimbabwe and that the deportation of some individuals was being postponed, the PMOS said that as we had made clear from the outset, individual cases should be judged on an individual basis. Obviously we took threats that were made against people into account. Equally, it was a fact of life that people had abused the system in the past by pretending to be Zimbabweans. That too had to be taken into account. Asked if the deportation of a Zimbabwean had failed to go ahead yesterday as a result of the Government’s new stance, the PMOS declined to comment on individual cases. He underlined that the policy of dealing with people on a case-by-case basis had not changed. Asked when deportations to Zimbabwe were expected to resume, the PMOS said that he had no intention of giving a running commentary on individual cases. Pressed as to whether the Times had been right to report today that immigration officers had been ordered to halt deportations to Zimbabwe, the PMOS underlined that we had not introduced a blanket ban on removals to Zimbabwe and that our policy had not changed, nor would it. Questioned as to whether a policy of temporary suspension of removals could be put in place until the matter was resolved, the PMOS said that it was a question of being able to strike the right balance. On the one hand it was important to ensure that cases were assessed on an individual basis, including taking seriously any threats which had been made. On the other hand, it was important not to send the wrong signal to would-be fraudulent asylum seekers, which would return us to the days when there had been a clear abuse of our asylum system. We would not allow that to happen.
Asked for a reaction to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s comments this morning, the PMOS said that of course it was important to take into account any threats which were made against people. Indeed, in the fifteen months to March 2005, we had granted asylum or discretionary leave at initial decision to 270 Zimbabweans whom we believed belonged to that category. However, we also believed that a blanket ban on removals would be wrong because of the signal it would send to future fraudulent asylum seekers. This approach had been agreed with the MDC when we had had first started forced removals to Zimbabwe.
Asked if the Prime Minister was hoping to garner support at the G8 summit in Gleneagles to put pressure on the African Union to take a more serious stand against Zimbabwe - following his comment yesterday that the UK did not have enough support to do so at the UN, the PMOS said that the UN Secretary General had sent a member of the African Commission to Zimbabwe. She would report in her own time, and no doubt her findings would influence future discussions. In the meantime, however, it would be surprising if the issue of Zimbabwe was not mentioned at the G8 summit next week.
delicious
digg
facebook
