Press briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: PM’s Speech, Middle East, Ministerial Holidays and Casinos
PM’s Speech
Asked about the Prime Minister’s speech tomorrow, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that the Prime Minister was still working on it, but theme of the speech would be that the government had invested a lot in the National Health Service in terms of investment and reform, as the Prime Minister had talked about before - the flip side of that coin was public health and improving lifestyles, which in turn reduced the demand on the health service. If you took an issue such as obesity, the question was where was the dividing line between the state’s responsibility and the responsibility of the citizen. The Prime Minister would talk about more than obesity, but it was an issue that highlighted that particular dividing line. Asked whether we were suggesting individuals did not take care of themselves, the PMOS said that individuals had to take on their share of responsibility in improving their own health. Informing the individual on choices that could lead to healthier lifestyle was the sort of thing that government could help address.
Put that some doctors refused to help individuals that refused to lose weight so how did that marry with state versus individual, the PMOS said that people would be able to read the Prime Minister’s argument on individual and the state tomorrow, but the example cited was a precise illustration of the point. There were difficult choices as to how far the state could go in enforcing healthy lifestyles and how much should be left to the individual.
Asked whether the Prime Minister would essentially say we have done our bit now you do yours, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister would say that the government needed to be clear with this sort of issue and how it helped the individual make the right choices. Everyone needed to recognise that the debate on lifestyle had moved quite substantially in the last few years. For example the debate on smoking had moved significantly during the period the bill was being considered. There was now a growing momentum on other issues as well where we needed to work out what was the responsibility of the state and what was the responsibility of the individual citizen.
Put that because dentists appointments were so difficult to secure people were no longer getting regular check ups, the PMOS said that on the other hand the conventional view on check ups had changed. The Prime Minister had also acknowledged frequently that there were considerable difficulties in the dentistry area, which he would argue was a result of under investment in the past.
Asked whether this was a precursor to any new policy, the PMOS said that the point of this lecture series, which came under the banner headline of "Our Nations Future", was not to announce new policy but to encourage a debate on issues that the Prime Minister saw as central to the nation’s future. This was why the Prime Minister had already encouraged debates on issues such as migration, immigration, how we dealt with Muslim extremism and the respect agenda. The other part of this was for the Prime Minister to engage with local communities on these issues, as he was in Nottingham today on lifestyle, following which he would put forward his views on where the balance needed to be struck.
Asked whether there should be tax relief for people who took care of their own health as a result of government encouragement, the PMOS said that tax was a matter for the Chancellor and despite encouragement to the contrary he would not comment. It may have been the final lobby briefing before recess, but the normal rules still applied.
Middle East
Asked to comment on an open letter from 14 NGOs expressing concern that the UK had not used its full influence to bring about a ceasefire, the PMOS asked whether that was for an immediate ceasefire on both sides. The Prime Minister had said last Tuesday in the House of Commons that he hoped there would be a stop to the violence on all sides. The real question was how you brought that about and as the Prime Minister had said yesterday you needed a plan. The Prime Minister had been engaged on an almost hourly basis since the St Petersburg Summit in working behind the scenes to bring a ceasefire from all sides about. He wanted that ceasefire to last, not just a day, a week, a month or even a year - he wanted a sustainable solution. If that meant taking heat from people whilst that was brought about so be it. The important thing was to bring about a durable end to violence, which would mean everybody affected by this - civilians in Lebanon and Israel - did not have to go through this again. This would only be possible if people were able to negotiate a durable plan and the Prime Minister was focused on achieving that.
Asked if there were still hopes of achieving progress in Rome tomorrow, the PMOS said that we hoped to see broad agreement in principle on the idea developed by the G8 for a stabilisation force, which the Prime Minister had negotiated in St Petersburg with President Putin. We hoped to get an international consensus behind that in order to allow the detail of that to be worked out. This would in turn help bring about a cessation of hostilities. The emphasis had to be on all sides supporting a cessation including calls for Hezbollah to stop firing rockets into Israel. The reality was that you could not get peace unless those rockets stopped going into Israel.
Asked whether we would contribute to the stabilisation force, the PMOS said that traditionally we had not acted as a force in the region because of historical reasons. We also had commitments elsewhere. The make up of the force was a matter of active discussion and what had helped enormously in those discussions had been that ever since his meeting with the Prime Minister in St Petersburg the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan had backed the idea and had called on nations to contribute.
Asked whether the Prime Minister’s willingness to take the heat meant that he was not worried about opinion polls that said he was too close to the US, the PMOS suggested that there seemed to be a contradiction in people expressing that view. On the one hand they wanted the United States to be more engaged and call for and push Israel into a ceasefire and on the other they wanted to UK to distance itself form the United States. The question then had to be how do you talk to the US if you distanced yourself from it. Of course the Prime Minister shared the horror at the deaths of innocent civilians on both sides of the Israel/Lebanon border, but you had to take a step back and ask what in reality would bring about a durable cessation. The only way that would happen would be if you put together a robust and durable plan. This was why it was worth all the hard work trying to make the stabilisation force a reality. That would provide the assurances necessary on all sides.
Asked whether the Prime Minister was saying that there should not be an emotional reaction but a considered reaction to the bombings, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister shared the same emotions as everybody else when he saw innocent civilians and innocent children die. However, the question had to be how could you actually get the participants to take a step back and then reassure them that more people would not die in the future. The reality for Israel was that it had withdrawn from Gaza and Lebanon and yet that had not ended the attacks coming from those two areas contrary to UN resolutions. We had to create a situation where those attacks stopped and where Israel could be reassured sufficiently enough to stop its operations as well. This meant bringing about a cessation on both sides.
Ministerial Holidays
Asked about the Foreign Secretary going on holiday this weekend, the PMOS said that it was a matter for the Foreign Office to comment on. The PMOS then suggested that it was perhaps worth reminding journalists of the government’s holiday principle. It was right and proper that government ministers took a holiday. Everyone needed to take break at some stage during the year in order to continue to operate effectively. However, the government always ensured that effective cover was arranged at all times. Asked whether this applied to the Deputy Prime Minister, the PMOS said that the arrangments regarding the Deputy Prime Minister had been in place for the past nine years.
Casinos
Put that Tessa Jowell had confirmed in Committee today that she had spoken to the Deputy Prime Minister about casinos and was this in contradiction with what he had stated, the PMOS said that it remained the case that John Prescott had not been involved in either the decision on the planning application, which had been a matter for the local council, or in deciding specific gambling licences, which was a matter for an independent body.
delicious
digg
facebook
