Downing Street Says

Asked if the Prime Minister stood by the Home Secretary’s statement yesterday that it had been agreed the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) would become the Public Prosecution Service, the PMOS said that he had dealt with the issue this morning at great length. He had nothing further to add.

Asked to explain the Home Secretary’s constitutional role in getting involved in the CPS, the PMOS said that the issue had first been raised a year ago by the Attorney General. It had then been mentioned by the Home Secretary last summer and by the Director of Public Prosecutions two weeks ago. This was not something that was new. The Government’s position remained as he had outlined this morning. A decision about the renaming of the CPS would be made by the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General. Both they and the Home Secretary saw the merit in renaming the CPS. However, a final decision had not yet been taken.

Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to the Home Secretary about this matter in the last twenty-four hours, the PMOS said that it wasn’t our policy to give a running commentary on every conversation the Prime Minister had. Suffice to say that he was in regular contact with the Home Secretary, as you would expect.

Asked if the rebranding of the CPS could cost around the same as MAFF’s change to DEFRA, the PMOS said it was always a mistake to assume that one change was the same as another. As anyone who was involved in change management would know, it was important to take local factors into account. He advised journalists to speak to the relevant Departments about this matter.

Asked the Prime Minister’s opinion about the proposal to rename the CPS, the PMOS said that the Government saw the merit in having a debate about it. That debate had been going on since last year.

Asked if he would agree with the Evening Standard’s interpretation of this morning’s briefing in suggesting that Downing Street had mounted a u-turn, the PMOS reminded journalists that a correspondent from another paper had asked him directly this morning whether Downing Street had performed a u-turn, to which he had replied ‘no’. A consultation process was taking place to discuss the idea. Obviously people were entitled to express their views. Equally, if Government Ministers believed the proposal had merit, they would make the case for it, as indeed they had been doing. Put to him again that the contrast between the Home Secretary’s words yesterday and the Official Spokesman’s words today showed a ‘swerve’ at the very least, the PMOS said he would disagree. The Home Secretary, the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions had all been consistent in saying that there was merit in the argument to rename the CPS. At the same time, however, it was important to remember that a final decision had not yet been taken.

Asked if the Palace had been informed or consulted about the proposal, the PMOS said that he wasn’t a spokesman for the Palace and referred journalists to the appropriate press office for a response.

7 Comments »

If it is NOT broken, why mend it???????????
Comment by Dennis Hayes — 4 Mar 2004 on 3:47 pm | Link
Don’t rename it! It is entirely right that matters of justice be decided in the name of Her Majesty.
Comment by Chris Melville — 4 Mar 2004 on 4:05 pm | Link
Given the performance of the CPS in recent years I suspect the crown would be only to pleased to be disassociated from it.
Comment by Ian Cooke — 4 Mar 2004 on 5:21 pm | Link
Yet again a bit of our history and culture is consigned to the bin.
Comment by Richard Girdler — 4 Mar 2004 on 6:21 pm | Link
Nothing will change in any other way apart from the name. This would be a MASSIVE waste of money. If they wanted to change a lot of the procedures to somehow make it better, fair play. The post office did this, it doesnt help.
Comment by Stephen — 4 Mar 2004 on 6:33 pm | Link
PMOS clearly did not know if the Palace had been informed or consulted, judging by the comment that he was not a spokesman for the Palace. The proposed renaming smells like a scheme to funnel funds to favoured business organisations.
Comment by Les — 5 Mar 2004 on 11:08 am | Link
Changing names. We had this during the ‘Loony Left’ era and it seems some are having another go at socialist revolution by other means.

It is important that the prisons, police and courts are not subserviant to the politicians but act for the people. It ain’t broke don’t fix.

It might be interesting to note that countries with "Peoples" or "Democratic" in their name (GDR, DRC, PRC etc) tend to consider people as mere clay.
Comment by Tim — 5 Mar 2004 on 12:36 pm | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Wednesday, March 3, 2004

CPS

7 Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries