Press briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Energy-No10 suppliers, Question Time, Party funding, Northern Ireland and Rhodri Morgan
Energy-No10 suppliers
Asked for further information regarding the Prime Minister’s comments about No10’s energy being supplied by foreign companies, the Prime Minister’s Spokesman (PMOS) explained that we firmly were of the view that liberalisation of energy, as indeed with the rest of the single market, was in the interests of consumers because it resulted in lower prices. It was in the interest of industry because it resulted in more competitive industry, which was important for the overall market, and therefore, benefited everyone. It also created jobs, and if people looked at the UK labour market, it could be seen. The Prime Minister mentioned Downing Street because he wanted to illustrate how it worked in the UK. The PMOS said that the electricity in Downing Street was supplied by a French owned company. The water was supplied by a German owned company, and there were choices of four different suppliers of gas, three of which were foreign owned.
Asked how long had there been foreign owned companies supplying electricity, gas etc to No10, the PMOS said that it had been done under the usual bidding process in order to get the best deal for the tax payer.
Asked how important the energy agreement was, and how extensive would it be, i.e. was it just words, or would it turn into firm action, the PMOS replied that as the Prime Minister had said, there was a very firm commitment to action by 2007. At Hampton Court, we had identified energy as a key issue at the Summit, and the countries around the table, including France, agreed that that was a major priority. Everything that had happened since then, including Ukraine, or overall commodity prices, had illustrated the wisdom of seeing the need for greater co-operation through development of the European grid etc. We had to turn that into practical action, but today’s summit had helped to take us further forward in a practical way to implementing the vision that was set out in Hampton Court (paragraph 42). The PMOS said that it was also a subject which we knew that other countries getting the Presidency wanted to take up, and as people were also aware, it was a major subject for the G8 Summit later this year.
Asked if the Prime Minister had argued for a European Energy regulator last night, and was he disappointed that it had not been agreed, the PMOS replied that he was not aware that the Prime Minister had argued for one. Our view was that we reached an agreement on issues such as completing the European grid, pushing further for liberalisation, consensus on the importance of alternative energy sources, and a more coherent external policy quality. Those were our immediate priorities, and we were making progress on them.
Asked was the Prime Minister talking about strengthening the collective power of negotiation, allowing the Commission to negotiate in the same way as Russia on gas purchasing, or was it more letting people know what contracts had been signed internationally, the PMOS said that part of the work that needed to be done between now and 2007 would answer that kind of question. What the Prime Minister was talking about was not nebulous, but was about taking action. The best way to do that was part of the discussion between now and then.
Asked if the Prime Minister had anything to say about President Chirac walking out of the EU Summit, the PMOS replied that it was a fact that President Chirac walked out of the room. It was also a fact that it was up to President Chirac to explain why he did so. We recognised that responding to the pressures of globalisation posed difficulties for countries, but we believed that liberalisation was the way forward. We believed that our experience showed that it worked, both in terms of consumers and industry, but also in terms of jobs. There was a debate going on, and the important thing was, where was the overall consensus in Europe going on that debate, and we were comfortable with that.
Asked if there was any way that what had been agreed would move into the nuclear debate, and could that affect thinking when it came to the nuclear and energy reviews back in the UK, the PMOS said that there was an energy review going on, and we did not in any way want to pre-empt that. As we had said, part of the debate in Britain was what part did nuclear play in it, and it was a debate that was being echoed in many other countries around Europe. All countries were facing the same issues of how was it developed, pushed forward, issues of the research and development which is why we wanted to see progress on it. How were the best prices for Europe obtained? We were all facing the same question. The PMOS said that round the table last night, there was not only support for trying to push forward the Hampton Court agenda, and recognition of how significant Hampton Court was.
Asked for the names of the foreign companies that supplied Downing Street, the PMOS said that it had to be checked that we were not breaching any commercial confidentiality.
Asked if the Prime Minister saw using foreign companies as a model for British householders to "shop around" in Europe for the best prices, the PMOS said that what the Prime Minister was trying to do was to use the example of Downing Street to show that we should not fear liberalisation, because it resulted in better standards in service. That was what liberalisation had done for millions of households across the UK. What it had also done was to force industry to become more competitive, and that was important in a global marketplace where there was competition against rising countries such as China and India. Finally, as the British economy had shown, liberalisation, rather than destroying jobs which was the understandable fear that people had had, was actually creating jobs. Therefore, the point the Prime Minister had simply made was we should not fear liberalisation, rather, we should recognise its benign outcome.
Question Time
Asked why Harriet Harman was pulled off Question Time at the last minute by Downing Street last night, the PMOS said that it was a Party matter, so he could not say.
Party funding
Asked if the Prime Minister had been approached by either of the two Commons committees that were looking into peerages and party funding, and would the Prime Minister be happy to appear in front of them, the PMOS said that he was not aware of any such approaches.
Northern Ireland
Asked for a characterisation of the recent meeting about peace talks in Northern Ireland, the PMOS said that today was important in that it was no secret that we were in the process of finalising proposals. We had not reached the point of final decision, but we were on course, and the aim was clear. The aim was to try and give responsibility to local politicians. The PMOS said he did not want to go into detail now, because as he had said before, the nearer people got to the point of making decisions, the less should be said about it. The important thing was that people kept in mind the end game. That end game was that politicians in Northern Ireland should be encouraged, and should be given the opportunity to take real responsibility for local decisions and matters such as education, water rates, planning and so on. We recognised that direct rule had always been the second best option. We should see where we got to, but today’s meeting had been a very useful stepping stone.
Rhodri Morgan
Asked if the Prime Minister thought that Mr. Morgan’s remarks about the Prime Minister stepping down before the May 2007 elections in Wales and Scotland were helpful, the PMOS replied that the remarks were entirely Party matters. The Prime Minister was getting on with the job, and he was focused on delivering the Government’s priorities and agenda.
delicious
digg
facebook
