Downing Street Says

Asked if Jacqui Smith and the Chief Whip were confident of winning the vote on 42 days, the PMS said that the general position was that there was still more to do in order to ensure the Government won the vote tomorrow.

Asked if there was any discussion about what might happen if the Government didn’t win the vote, the PMS said that that did not come up.

Asked what the Prime Minister thought of the opinion of the Lord Advocate of Scotland, who thought that 42 days was not necessary, the PMS said that there were lots of people engaged in this debate at the moment. Some people were in favour and some were against. The Prime Minister thought it was necessary and there were a number of other significant people, not least senior police officers, who also thought it was necessary and the Government would continue to make its case before Parliament voted on it tomorrow.

Put that the Prime Minister had always said he wanted to reach a national consensus on it and was he disappointed that he hadn’t achieved that, the PMS replied that we had been trying to reach a consensus and as we had said consistently, there was a consensus on the need to detain people for more than 28 days. Most people involved in this debate now accepted that there were circumstances under which it may be necessary to detain people for more than 28 days. The debate had been about what necessary safeguards needed to be in place and we had consulted on this for some time. The Government had put forward what it believed were the right proposals for the country.

Most people participating in this debate believed that there were circumstances in which it may be necessary to detain people for more than 28 days. Some people thought that the way to do that was to enact the Civil Contingencies Act and declare a state of emergency if you wanted to hold an individual for more than 28 days. The Government happened to think as the Prime Minister and Jacqui Smith had been saying, that that would hand over a propaganda coup to Al-Qaeda or any other potential terrorist group.

We did not think that that was necessary, so what we had been doing was to try and find a more measured way of dealing with those circumstances and put in place more sensible and targeted safeguards. Asked if any other Ministers were being brought back from visits abroad apart from the Foreign Secretary, the PMS said he did not know.

Asked if there would be a separate vote of confidence if the vote on 42 days was lost, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had always made clear that this vote tomorrow would be dealt with as a normal piece of parliamentary business, just as the previous vote on pre-charge detention was.

Asked whether the Prime Minister regarded the comments made by Jonathan Evans as helpful, the PMS said that the PMS did not want to comment on that one way or the other. Jonathan Evans’s statement spoke for itself. As he had said, the Security Services are neither a prosecuting authority nor responsible for criminal investigations and therefore they were not and never had been the appropriate body to advise the Government on pre-charge detention limits. It was a matter for the police.

Jonathan Evans did go on to say that they did recognise the challenge posed to the police service by the increasingly complex and international character of some recent terrorist cases.

Put that the Prime Minister thought that the dividing line between those in favour of 42 days and those who were opposing it was quite small as there was a consensus to go beyond 28 days and it was coming down to a narrow issue of technicality, the PMS said that that had always been our position. We had said consistently that there was a consensus in favour of detaining people beyond 28 days. The question was what were the safeguards you put in place in order to protect civil liberties enabling people to do that.

Put that the Conservatives and Liberty had been clear in their opposition to 42 days, the PMS said that he was not a spokesman for them. As he understood it, there was a general consensus in favour of the Civil Contingencies Act as it currently stood and the act as it currently stood, enabled the Government to detain individuals for more than 28 days under specific circumstances. The PMS added that he was not aware of any calls for a repeal or amendments to the Civil Contingencies Act. Asked if there was any discussion in Cabinet on today’s votes, the PMS said that it didn’t really come up.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

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.

» Tuesday, June 10, 2008

42 Days

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries