<downingstreetsays>
  <downingstreetsaid ID="6606" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2009/03/05/6606" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content=" &lt;p&gt;Asked repeatedly why Ed Balls was answering questions on the economy and not the Chancellor, the Prime Minister s Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that Ed Balls was being interviewed about child protection. The Governor of the Bank of England had been doing media this afternoon on the subject of quantitative easing. Put that Ed Balls did comment on the subject of quantitative easing, the PMS confirmed that he had; he was asked a question and he responded to it.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Asked why the Treasury had not been commenting on this today, the PMS said that interview bids went to the Treasury and they would decide how they wanted to respond to those bids. Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with Ed Balls that there should have been tougher regulation, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had set out his view on regulation on numerous occasions, including when he was in Washington and he acknowledged that there were lessons to be learned from the current global financial downturn and the need to adapt regulatory structures to account for global financial flows.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Put that Ed Balls had said that the issue of regulation should have been addressed in the past, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had acknowledged that we took steps to establish a new regulatory regime when we set up the Financial Services Authority and given the way global finance had developed we needed to adapt those regulatory regimes and build international cooperation between them.&lt;/p&gt; 

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.number10.gov.uk//Page18522&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2009-03-05 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2009-03-05 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2009-03-05 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2009-03-05 15:45:58" post_name="economy-76" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Economy" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4632" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/03/4632" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked in broad terms how the citizens' juries would work, how would the citizens be selected and what would happen to their thoughts, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that the juries would usually consist of around 12 to 20 people chosen to be representative of the communities from which they came. They would deliberate for a day, or several days, and the idea would be that they would address defined questions on the basis of written evidence and hearing from witnesses. On the detail, there was no specific template and it would depend very much on the issue involved and the particular approach that the department responsible wanted to take.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the evidence would be published, the PMS replied that the specifics of each jury would be for the department to work out.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the idea was that the juries' wisdom then feed through into the department, the PMS replied that the juries would deliberate and then their conclusions and feedback would become part of the policy making process.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if a Minister would be present at each jury, the PMS replied that the exact process and specifics would be something for the individual departments to work through.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how this was different from a focus group or a commissioned poll, the PMS replied that the juries would look at specific issues, and do this in a way that was designed to feed directly into the policy making process. They would look at specific recommendations and would be tested for specific ideas. There were other means of taking a snapshot of public opinion, but this was about introducing more deliberative mechanisms directly into the policy making process.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if people could apply to be a part of these citizens' juries, the PMS replied that again, the process by which people would be selected would be something for the individual departments and organisers of the specific event. But the intention was for those involved in the citizens' juries to be representative of the community as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be a general pool of jurors from which the juries would be selected, the PMS replied that this would not necessarily be the case. Individual departments would be taking these decisions. The key point was that the individuals involved were genuinely representative of the communities were from.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for a timeframe for the larger citizens' summit, the PMS replied that obviously we would like to take this forward as quickly as was practical, but no specific dates were yet in mind. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for more detail about the citizens' summit, the PMS replied that in terms of the overall approach to this new form of public consultation and deliberation, the Ministry of Justice had overall responsibly for the programme, in so far as they were responsible for taking forward the constitutional reform agenda and the measures set out in the Prime Minister's statement to the House in July. But this did not mean that they would be responsible for individual events.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had meeting with the leaders of the opposition parties on this, the PMS replied that there were well established mechanisms for the different political parties to discuss issues and parliamentary business.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if any of the deliberations would be made public, the PMS replied that again this was something that would be determined by departments, and would depend on the particular issue. But as a general principal, we were looking to make the policy making process more open and transparent.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was no new product here, and asked that if there was no set template to follow, how did this differ from any previous consultation, the PMS replied that the concept of a citizens' jury was not something that the Prime Minister had come up with this morning. For those who followed these matters closely, it had been used in other countries and there were ways and methods of doing this, in fact the Government had conducted citizens' juries from time to time already and there were lots of examples both internationally and domestically.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked which other countries had used the idea of citizens' juries, the PMS replied that they had been used in the US.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that we had heard these ideas before, the PMS replied that there had been citizens' juries from time to time in the past. The DTI had a citizens' jury in 2004 looking at policies to support people in balancing family and work commitments. So they had been used in this country and oversees, but clearly the Prime Minister was setting out a much more intensive process for using citizens' juries to help inform and develop the policy making process.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that some say the voting system itself disengages people, and was it right to conclude that this would not be looking into electoral reform, the PMS replied that there was a long standing debate on this issue, but the Prime Minister's words spoke for themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any plans for citizens' juries on the EU Amending Treaty and on Iraq, the PMS replied that there would be a very detailed process of parliamentary scrutiny on the EU Amending Treaty. On Iraq obviously the list of issues that we were looking at was under consideration. But today we were setting out proposals for citizens' juries in key areas of public services, education, health, and law and order.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that this idea sounded so ill thought out that it was barely worth announcing, and was done only to humiliate David Cameron by announcing the defections, the PMS replied that we were not centralisers in No10 to the point where we dictated to each individual department exactly how they were confirming the rollout of the citizens' juries. Let's see how the juries evolve before making a judgement on them. The first one would be on Thursday, so journalists would not have to wait too long. There would be opportunities to see how they act in practice. On the second point, what the Prime Minister had set out in his speech and in his Telegraph interview overnight and on the Today Programme this morning was that he wanted to lead a Government that draws on talents of all people in this country, regardless of their individual political persuasion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the idea was behind giving charities greater advocacy, the PMS replied that this was something that was set out in July. Charities clearly had an important contribution to make to public debate in this country, and this was the basis on which these new measures had been taken forward.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-03 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-03 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:58" post_name="citizens-juries" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Citizens' Juries" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4685" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4685" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Guardian story today regarding officials briefing the Government over climate change targets being &amp;quot;completely unreachable&amp;quot;, the PMS replied that the UK was committed to developing renewable energy. In the recent energy White Paper that was published, we had aimed to see renewable energy increase three-fold to 15% by 2015. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we would meet targets set, the PMS said that it was no secret that these were ambitious targets, and it would be a major challenge. However, that was not only for the UK, but was for all EU member states, and people should remember that the UK was one of the few EU states that was on course the meet our Kyoto targets of cutting carbon emissions. It was now for the Commission to propose how the EU-wide target be met by all member states. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:56" post_name="climate-change" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Climate Change" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4686" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4686" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was involved in any talks about the financial markets, and was there a strategy, the PMS replied that John Hutton had responded to this yesterday. As the Prime Minster had said last week, we would not hesitate to act to ensure that the British economy remained stable, and that our prospects for continued growth were good. The view of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that was expressed on Saturday was that the fundamentals of both the world economy and the British economy were sound. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what actions the Government would take, the PMS replied that any actions would be dependent on the situation. At the moment, the IMF were saying that the British and international economies were sound. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would like the Bank of England to follow the Federal Reserve and the Central European Bank in terms of bailing out financial institutions, the PMS replied that the Bank of England's independence was something that was introduced by this Government, but she was not going to comment any further on its role. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:55" post_name="stock-market" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Stock Market" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4687" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4687" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister's view was towards the climate change protestors at Heathrow, the PMS said that it was a matter for the authorities and those who ran Heathrow with regards to disruptions. People did have the right to protest, but the Government felt that any action that disrupted the operation of Heathrow would be unacceptable. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:54" post_name="climate-change-protestors" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Climate Change Protestors" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4688" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4688" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that as Des Browne was now back from Afghanistan and back at the MOD, was there any Government concern at the rising toll in Afghanistan, the PMS replied that as Des Browne had said in his interview, the fatalities were a matter of deep regret. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that when the Defence Secretary had said that the commitment in Afghanistan was for the long term, was there any idea of how long that might be, the PMS replied that as Des Browne had said, there were 42 other countries who were represented there in Afghanistan, 37 being military efforts. The operations would be guided by both the Commanders on the ground, as well as the political security situation. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that as we had taken over the control of Helmand from another nation, was there any sign that another nation might be willing to take over from us, the PMS replied that she was not going to get into speculation about the operations on the ground.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:53" post_name="afghanistan-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Afghanistan" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4689" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/06/4689" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that the Prime Minister had held a meeting this morning with the President and Director General of the National Farmers Union (NFU) to discuss the current outbreak of Foot and Mouth disease and the issues that would arise as we went forward. The Prime Minister thanked the NFU for their close co-operation on this matter, and both parties expressed the desire for that co-operation to continue, both on this outbreak and on other rural issues in the future. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The PMS said that during the Prime Minister's visit to Reigate, which was at the headquarters of the regional disease control centre, he met the regional operational director, as well as participating in their update meeting. The people involved were local authorities, animal health authorities, representatives from the NFU, Trading Standards representatives, Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the Health Protection Agency (HPA), RSPCA, the police and other people from DEFRA. The Prime Minister spent around 20 minutes with them, and following that, at the same place, he had a 40 minute discussion with local farmers and representatives from the south east NFU. Included in that were farmers whose farms were within the protection zone. The Prime Minister again thanked them for their co-operation, patience and understanding, and listened carefully to their concerns. It was a constructive meeting. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the results of the independent HSE report would be released, as Hilary Benn had said that it would be within 48 hours, the PMS said that her understanding was that we were expecting the HSE report sometime tomorrow. The PMS explained that there were two investigations: one was the HSE investigation which had begun on Sunday, and the other was a separate report called the Spratt Review which would look into arrangements for biosecurity around facilities handling the Foot and Mouth virus in the UK. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when Professor Spratt's review would be released, the PMS said that it would come out in August. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Spratt was commissioned, the PMS said that her understanding was that it had been commissioned very recently. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the HSE report's findings tomorrow would be interim or in depth, the PMS said that people would have to wait and see where people had got to with the investigation. &lt;br /&gt;Asked if the HSE report would be made public, the PMS said that people should check with the HSE.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why did Ministers believe that if the virus had come from the Pirbright site, it was likely to be from the commercial side, rather than the institute, the PMS replied that in advance of the HSE report, we were looking into all options and all possibilities of where the source of the outbreak had come from. As the Prime Minister had said today, the focus was on containing and controlling the disease, but at the same time, the HSE report was ongoing to look at the source of the outbreak. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the UK had banned exports from the whole country and not just from the infected areas, the PMS replied that all of this was guided by the contingency plans that were drawn up post-2001. These measures were clearly drawn up as measures that needed to be taken in the event of an outbreak.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if restrictions could be lifted in certain parts of the UK, the PMS said that all such decisions had to be guided by the science, contingency plans and investigations that were ongoing. At the moment, the focus had to be on controlling and containing the infection. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had made a great play about vaccine production on 16th July from the Meril site, and was that still the focus of the HSE report, and if not, why did he feel the need to identify that date, the PMS replied that the HSE report was always going to look into all the options. There had been facts that had come to light regarding production that had been made public, and the Prime Minister was answering questions regarding these facts. but she repeated that all options were being looked at by the HSE. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister's meeting with the NFU today was his first meeting with them, the PMS replied that she understood that it was. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that several reports had highlighted concerns about funding for Pirbright, and their facilities had been described as &amp;quot;shabby&amp;quot;, and was the Prime Minister confident that Pirbright had received enough funding and the facilities were as good as they could have been, the PMS pointed out that with regards to the report, another part of the report had said that biosecurity of the site was taken extremely seriously. The PMS said that people should not get ahead of themselves in advance of the HSE report, as all options were being looked into. With regards to funding, Hilary Benn said this morning that the report had said that the site needed to be upgraded and &amp;quot;that was exactly what we were doing. We were in the process of investing with the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, the Department for Innovation, University and Skills and DEFRA were investing &amp;pound;121 million in new building facilities on that site&amp;quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that flooding had been suggested as a possible reason for the outbreak, and that the virus could have been waterborne from the flooded areas, the PMS replied that they were looking at all options. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be further COBR meetings, the PMS said that there would be others, but we would brief at the appropriate times. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-06 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-06 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:58" post_name="foot-and-mouth-disease-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth Disease" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4681" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4681" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that a Times report from Brussels this morning had reported that a committee had asserted that the reform treaty was much the same as the constitution, the PMS said that our position on the treaty had been well established, the constitutional aspects of the treaty were not in this draft either in form or in content. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:54" post_name="eu-treaty" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="EU Treaty" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4682" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4682" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any further thoughts regarding Richard Dannatt's comments that there should be a class added to the medals given out for Afghanistan to reflect the nature of the fighting, the PMS replied that as the MOD had said yesterday, obviously the Chief of the General Staff had given his opinion on this issue. Overall, medals were a matter for all Chiefs of Staff. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:53" post_name="afghan-medals" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Afghan Medals" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4683" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4683" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) updated journalists on Foot and Mouth. She said that the Prime Minister was being kept informed of any developments today whilst he was up in Scotland. Officials were currently attending a COBR meeting, and there had been no confirmed cases since early last week. The Chief Vet Debby Reynolds had stressed again over the weekend the need for relentless vigilance, and had expressed her gratitude for those in farming communities. In terms of Professor Spratt's review on biosecurity, we believed that this would report towards the end of this week, but that exact timings were a matter for Professor Spratt. The same applied to the timings on the further HSE work. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put to the PMS that the National Farmers Union (NFU) had said they were very optimistic yesterday, and given that the Prime Minister was now in Scotland, was he happy about the current situation, the PMS said that the Prime Minister was being kept informed of any developments. Although there had been no confirmed cases for a few days, we obviously had to be very mindful that this was a highly virulent disease, and that preventing its spread was our absolute priority. As Debby Reynolds had said, whilst there had been no cases recently, it was relentless vigilance that was required. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:58" post_name="foot-and-mouth-disease" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth Disease" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4684" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4684" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was in his constituency whilst in Scotland, the PMS confirmed that he was working from his constituency office. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was now on holiday, the PMS replied that it was the first time that the Prime Minister had visited his constituency since he became Prime Minister. There was therefore a lot of business to do, and traditionally, the Prime Minister had often used his constituency office as an alternative location from where to do Government business from. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would have a meeting with Alex Salmond whilst he was in Scotland, the PMS said that she was not aware of any such plans, but added that the he had attended a Raith Rovers football match at the weekend. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be resuming his holiday, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was up in Scotland for a few days, but that would be dependent on issues on the ground.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked had the Prime Minister arrived in Scotland and when was the last time that he was there, the PMS said that he had arrived on Friday, and this was the first visit to his constituency since he had become Prime Minister. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was intending to have another holiday, the PMS replied that as people knew, he had had a family holiday in Dorset planned, but it was disrupted. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again if the Prime Minister was intending to take another holiday, the PMS replied that at the moment the Prime Minister was working up in Scotland. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought that it was important for people to take holidays with their families, and did he feel that he should lead by example, the PMS replied that he did think that it was important. He had had a holiday planned, but it was disrupted, and he felt that the most important thing for him was to come back and oversee the Foot and Mouth outbreak. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put by a journalist that Scotland was not a holiday, and it was not going to become a holiday, the (Scottish) Lobby Chair interrupted him and said that when people went to Scotland, it was always a holiday! &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 10:00:57" post_name="prime-minister-in-scotland" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Prime Minister in Scotland" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4680" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4680" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had any thought about the reports over the weekend from the US that said that the UK was beaten in Iraq and that we were now facing rising violence and a Saigon situation, the PMS replied that people should look at the response that the Basra military spokesperson Major Michael Shearer gave this morning. Major Shearer had pointed out although that there had been increased violence, that this was not surprising due to the fact that malign forces are attempting to claim responsibility for what was in fact a long established strategy in the Basra province. Therefore, our strategy remained in place, and the Basra province would pass responsibility to the Iraqi forces as had happened in three of the four areas for which the UK had responsibility. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any chance of stepping up the Army presence in the other three provinces in light of the killing of the Provincial Governor, the PMS said that whilst she was aware of the reports, she was not going to comment on them in detail at this stage. There were challenges ahead for all the Iraqi security forces, but our strategy was as set out as before. With regards to a longer-term strategy, as President Bush and the Prime Minister said at Camp David recently, we were awaiting for General Petraeus' report later in September. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:55" post_name="iraq-6" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4679" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4679" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked why the Prime Minister was holding a bilateral with Chancellor Merkel specifically this week, and also, was the Prime Minister back at work now, the PMS said that Chancellor Merkel would be in London on Wednesday. They would discuss a wide range of topics, specifically looking at international development issues, trade, and other issues coming out of the G8. The PMS said that they might also touch on the global economy. With regards to the Prime Minister's holiday, he had been working in his constituency, as we had established last week. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if climate change and targets would be discussed, the PMS replied that there would be a discussion of issues coming out of G8, but she could not be specific on anything else at this point. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:56" post_name="chancellor-merkel-meeting" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Chancellor Merkel Meeting" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4694" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/10/4694" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether British troops should remain in Basra, after suggestions were made in the press by a British officer that troops could have been pulled out over five months ago, the Prime Minister's Spokesman told the assembled press that the Ministry of Defence had made the position very clear. The Government was able to hand over Basra Palace because of progress made and capability demonstrated by Iraqi security forces, particularly the army. The PMS added that Basra Palace was only handed over this month because that was when conditions were right and the Iraqi forces were ready to take over. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Patreus Report would influence the timing of the return of any more British troops, the PMS replied that Patreus had not reported yet and the Government would wait until he did so before commenting on it. The PMS said that in general terms, the Prime Minister had made clear on numerous occasions that the Government had obligations to the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government as well as the United Nations, but that any decisions to be made in relation to British troops, would be made on the basis of an assessment of the situation on the ground by military commanders.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that the Daily Telegraph article was correct and at least some of the deaths of British troops since April may have been purely political ones to maintain the Government's relationship with George Bush, the PMS said that the Ministry of Defence had made it clear that the article was not correct and the decision to hand over Basra Palace to the Iraqi security authorities was only made this month because that was when the Iraqi security forces were ready to take over responsibility. Asked what the PMS thought the Officer quoted in the articles motive was, the PMS said he had no idea.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the officer involved was incorrect in what he said, the PMS replied that it was for the military and the Ministry of Defence to provide commentary on that and they had made their position very clear.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-10 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-10 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:58" post_name="iraq-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4677" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4677" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a No10 reaction on behalf of the Prime Minister to David Cameron's recent comments about the breakdown of families, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled journalists that she was not going to respond directly to the Leader of the Opposition, and recommended that people spoke to the Labour Party.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what had been done by the Government to boost family policies, the PMS said that there was a long proven track record in terms of family policy, including tax credits, and measures lead by both DWP and DCLG. The PMS said again that she would not get into a direct response with the Leader of the Opposition and that people should speak to the Labour Party. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:58" post_name="family-values" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Family Values" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4678" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4678" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister agreed that parts of the country were now inflicted by anarchy, the PMS replied that what both the Prime Minister and the Government as a whole would emphasise was that public protection was the top priority. With reference to knife crime, that was why the Government had introduced a new maximum sentence for carrying knives, doubled from two years to four years. More generally, we of course recognised and appreciated people's concerns about the high profile cases, especially those concerning young people. As John Denham said yesterday, however, it was also important to recognise that there had been an overall fall in the levels in crime and that people were much less likely to be a victim of crime than they were ten years ago. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had plans to look at knife crime issues this week, based on the statistics that were published yesterday, the PMS said that in terms of the statistics, the Home Office's analysis was that those particular statistics were based on an extrapolation of British Crime Survey figures, and were therefore not the most accurate. However, that was not to say that we didn't recognise there was a real issue here, and we appreciated people's concerns. The Prime Minister was kept informed of all developments, and as John Denham had said, there were tough measures that had been brought into place, and it was extremely important that those measures were used and that they were kept under review. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that John Denham had also said yesterday that the Government would look at the discounted alcohol available, and did the Prime Minister have any views on that or on raising the age at which people could buy alcohol, the PMS replied that the Government had already set out its position on changing the age at which people could buy alcohol. In terms of working with supermarkets, there was an ongoing programme through the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy which was looking to tackle that particular problem, and of course, we were fully supportive of it. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government had plans to enlist Army officers to tackle gang culture, especially black gangs, the PMS replied that she wouldn't respond directly to the question, as it referred to a leaked document. If people looked at the report that was published by Hazel Blears recently into the aspirations of young black men, there were a number of measures in there, including mentors. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government accepted that the increase in sentencing from two years to four years was not working and was not deterring young people from carrying knives, the PMS said that we recognised that there were specific issues here. However, overall, we also needed to recognise the fact that violent crime had gone down. With regards to what the Government had done to tackle knife crime, there had been a range of measures introduced in the Violent Crime Act 2006, including the increase of the maximum sentence and raising the age at which someone could purchase a knife from 16 to 18 years old. It also gave school staff powers to search pupils for weapons as well as creating a new offence of minding a weapon for somebody else. Again, if that weapon was a knife, the maximum sentence would also be four years. The PMS said that these were tough new measures that had been introduced, and the important thing was that they were being enforced. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister shared the previous Prime Minister's analysis on knife and gun crime which was that this was a localised problem that needed specific tailored responses and that it was not a blanket problem with a blanket solution, the PMS replied that we would have to be guided by police working in areas with specific problems. However, it was a range of measures that was required, rather than one approach. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any plans to confirm what the Home Office thought about knife crime statistics, the PMS said that the Home Office had said that the British Crime Survey did not show a statistically significant increase in the use of knives in violent incidents. 6 to 7% of all violent crime was knife-related which had remained relatively stable for several years. Until April 2007, knife related offences were not separately identified, but police now collected data on knives which would overall give us a better picture of the situation across the country. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 10:00:57" post_name="crime" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Crime" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4695" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/10/4695" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to comment on a report claiming that the Government was considering criminalising men who paid for prostitutes, the PMS said that the Government had seen the report and it looked highly speculative. There had been no such proposals put to the Prime Minister.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-10 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-10 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:57" post_name="prostitution" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Prostitution" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4696" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/10/4696" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any comment to make on the Madeleine McCann case, the PMS said that it was an ongoing investigation and the Foreign Secretary had made clear that in relation to the support the McCann's needed in Portugal, the usual Consulate access would be provided. The PMS added it would be inappropriate to comment further.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-10 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-10 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:56" post_name="madeleine-mccann-case" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Madeleine McCann Case" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4697" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/10/4697" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister's aim to create more British jobs for British workers was a recognition that perhaps the level of migrant workers into Britain was too high, the PMS replied it was a recognition of the fact that although the country had roughly 8-900,000 people on the claimant count, there were in fact 650,000 vacancies in Britain. The PMS added that more needed to be done to match the current level of vacancies to workers who were currently claiming unemployment benefit, hence the package of measures the Prime Minister would be announcing today. This would be in relation to closer working between Job Centre Plus and the major employers through the local employer partnerships, as well as improving centres for loan parents imparticular, to get back into work. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister recognised the concerns of people who thought there were too many migrant workers, the PMS said that the Prime Minister believed immigration had had a positive effect on the British economy. The Government had moved towards the points-based system in relation to migration, which differentiates between the economic contributions made by different migrant workers. The Prime Minister would be announcing a strengthening of that system today, through the new requirement for fluency in the English language for skilled workers, but the PMS added that it was also necessary to recognise that migration needed to be responsive to the needs of the economy. Therefore the Government was not in favour of imposing a fixed numerical limit on the total number of migrants coming into the economy, because that would depend on decisions made by individuals and by employers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Government had made any progress on hitting it's target of 80% employment and when that figure might be reached, the PMS said that progress was being made and employment was at record levels. The PMS suggested that for the specific figures, people should speak to the Treasury. Asked if hitting the target depended on these jobs being filled by British workers, the PMS said that it would help the Government in reaching that target, but it would depend on a whole host of factors, of which one element was Government policy.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-10 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-10 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-10 10:00:55" post_name="british-jobs" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="British Jobs" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4698" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/11/4698" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) informed journalists that Cabinet this morning included a discussion of the Draft Legislative Programme led by the Leader of the House, a report by the Home Secretary on the interim version of the Flanagan Review due to be published tomorrow, an update on Iraq from the Defence Secretary, and an update from the Chancellor on the economy and the Pre-Budget Report and Spending Review.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;On the Flanagan Review, Sir Ronnie Flanagan former Chief Inspector of Constabulary was leading an independent review of the police service for the Home Secretary. The review was looking at the four key issues of how we reduce bureaucracy in the police, how we make progress on neighbourhood policing, how we ensure that there is sufficient local involvement and local accountability for policing, and finally how the police service can manage its resources effectively. The interim report would be published tomorrow, focusing in particular on recommendations on reducing bureaucracy and sustaining progress on neighbourhood policing. Phase two of the report will look at local involvement and resource management, with the final report to be produced by the end of 2007. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;On Iraq, Des Browne updated the Cabinet on the situation in Iraq and the initial conclusions yesterday of the Petraeus Report. He reiterated, as the Prime Minister had made clear, that our position in relation to Iraq remained unchanged. We had ongoing obligations to the Iraqi Government and the United Nations, and we would fulfil those obligations. Secondly he emphasised that the approach being taken by the UK and the US was entirely consistent. And as General Petraeus made clear yesterday, and as we had been making clear throughout, for the both the UK and the US decisions on troop levels would be taken on the basis of an assessment of security conditions on the ground and the readiness of the Iraqi forces to take over security responsibility. He also reported that the handover of Basra Palace had been smooth and that the security &lt;br /&gt;situation in Basra remained stable, as had been anticipated at the time of the handover. &lt;br /&gt;The Prime Minister endorsed the Defence Secretary's update and made clear that there were three main elements to our strategy on Iraq going forward. First the need to discharge our responsibilities on security, second the need to encourage the Iraqi Government to work towards political reconciliation, and third the need to ensure that the Iraqi people have a stake in their own future, which is why for example our proposals for economic reconstruction in Basra, including a new Basra Development Agency, were so important.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-11 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-11 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:58" post_name="cabinet" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Cabinet" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4699" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/11/4699" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if he was saying that the fact that General Petraeus gave a scenario where US troops could be withdrawn by next summer, had no bearing whatsoever on the level of our troops and the possibility of withdrawing our troops, the PMS replied that the general approach that had been taken by the United States and the United Kingdom was entirely consistent. Obviously conditions in the South were different from elsewhere. We would have to make our future decisions on troop levels based on an assessment by the military of the readiness of the Iraqi security forces to take on overall responsibility for security in Basra.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any kind of assessment being done in the run up to the Prime Minister's statement next month, the PMS replied that these issues were looked at on an ongoing and rolling basis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether General Petraeus' review would feed in to our thinking in any way in terms of the overall picture, the PMS replied that we were working very closely with the Americans, the Prime Minister had a lengthy discussions with President Bush yesterday in one of their regular video conferences, the Defence Secretary spoke to his opposite number yesterday as well, and obviously there was ongoing discussion at all levels. We would work very closely with them, but our decision in relation to the troops in Basra would be based on the assessment of our military of the conditions on the ground in Basra and the readiness of the Iraqi security forces to take on responsibility.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if this was the first time the Prime Minister had spoken to the President since July, the PMS replied that there was a continuous and open channel of communication at all levels between the UK and US Government. Asked again if they had spoken in August, the PMS replied that there was ongoing contact between the UK and US. Asked repeatedly if this was the first time that they had spoken since July, the PMS replied that they had a lengthy discussion at Camp David, and they had a further lengthy discussion yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked who in the British Government had spoken directly with General Petraeus, the PMS replied that he did not want to comment on exactly which discussions had taken place, but there had been discussions across the board both at military and political levels between the UK and US.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if he expected the Prime Minister and President Bush to talk before Thursday when the President would make his statement on Iraq, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister and the President had a lengthy discussion of all of these issues yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any request from the US to stay on or to try and coordinate timings on withdrawals, the PMS replied that we acted in full consultation and full open dialogue with our US colleagues. In relation to Basra Palace for example, the US were fully consulted, there was full discussion, and they were entirely comfortable with that decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would have any bearing on our military commanders if the Americans said that they would like us not to make any changes for now, the PMS replied that the decision in relation to our troops in Basra would be based on an assessment by our military commanders of the situation on the ground in Basra.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister's statement to the House could be expected imminently once MPs returned, the PMS replied that we did not have an exact date for that, but we would anticipate and early statement by the Prime Minister.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to characterise yesterday's video conference between the Prime Minister and the President, the PMS replied that it was very cordial and constructive.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-11 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-11 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:57" post_name="iraq-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4700" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/11/4700" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for any reaction to Wanless' thoughts about productivity in the NHS, the PMS replied that as the Wanless Report made clear, the extra resources that we had invested in health along with the reforms that had been made to the Health Service, had undoubtedly improved patient care over the past five years. Clearly there remained issues, as Wanless identified, with lifestyle diseases like obesity, but these were being looked at and taken very seriously by the Department of Health.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked specifically about Wanless' point on productivity and too much money going on pay awards for no particular comeback, and on the further point that to maintain the quality of service there would need to be significant major cash injections over the next 20 years, the PMS replied that we would have to make decisions on the amount of resources available at the time of the Spending Review next month. Clearly the National Health Service needed to ensure that they were providing the best quality care in the most efficient and cost effective way. There had been improvements in productivity, but clearly this was an ongoing process.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-11 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-11 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:56" post_name="nhs" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="NHS" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4669" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/03/4669" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about John Bercow and Patrick Mercer, the PMS replied that obviously it was not for him to get into the business of talking about party political matters. In terms of the relationships between these individuals and their respective parties, clearly that was something for them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what contact the Prime Minister has had with John Bercow and Patrick Mercer, the PMS replied that he would not get into the specifics of who had spoken to whom. But clearly there had been discussions with Mr Mercer and Mr Bercow involving people in the Government in advance of this announcement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the Prime Minister would consider someone with allegedly racist views suitable for this role, the PMS replied that Mr Mercer had a lot of expertise in the area of security, and could make a contribution to the Government and to the country.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was ashamed by the comments, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister thought that Patrick Mercer was a recognised expert in security issues.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had a view on Patrick Mercer's comments that David Cameron called &amp;quot;totally unacceptable&amp;quot;, the PMS replied that it was not appropriate for him to get into a discussion of what Patrick Mercer may have said in the past. The Prime Minister believed that Patrick Mercer was a recognised expert in security issues, and it was on that basis that he had been appointed.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-03 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-03 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:57" post_name="john-bercow-and-patrick-mercer-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="John Bercow and Patrick Mercer" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4701" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/11/4701" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to flesh out what Alistair Darling said to Cabinet on the Pre-Budget Report, the PMS replied that it was a general discussion, the Chancellor's main point being to emphasise the underlying strength of the British economy, particularly at this time of uncertainty in the financial markets. We were into around our 60th consecutive quarter of economic growth, employment was at record levels, and inflation was back down to 1.9%, slightly below the Government's inflation target. We had seen volatility in financial markets, and we had seen other external shocks in the past, but due to the framework for monitoring political policy put in place in 1997 and the underlying strength of the economy, we remained well placed to deal with these shocks.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Asked if there was a date for the Comprehensive Spending Review, the PMS replied that we did not have a confirmed date yet.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-11 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-11 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:55" post_name="economy-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Economy" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4702" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/11/4702" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was happy with the conduct of the police investigation in Portugal, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister believed that, as the Home Secretary made clear, this was an ongoing police investigation. As and when support and help was requested from the British Police, obviously the British Police would act in a fully cooperative way. But it would be inappropriate to comment further on what was an ongoing police investigation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any sense of regret over the contacts which he had had with the McCann family, the PMS replied that the McCann Family had been provided with support through the Foreign Office in a consular way. Put that the Prime Minister had had personal contact with the family and did he regret that, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister did not regret his contact with the McCann family, but this was an ongoing police investigation and would be unwise to say anything more.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-11 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-11 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:54" post_name="mccann-investigation" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="McCann Investigation" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4703" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/11/4703" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about reports of a Downing Street cat, the PMS replied that Mr and Mrs Darling were living in the flat above No10 in Downing Street, he understood that they did have a cat, and that the cat had recently been brought to Downing Street. He had not seen it himself, but he understood the cat's name was Sybil.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the cat would have the run of Downing Street as Humphrey did, the PMS replied that he was not a cat owner himself, but it was his understanding that it was quite difficult to confine cats to particular areas, so one would expect to see the cat around the place.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had a problem with this, the PMS replied that the Prime Minster did not have a problem with this. Asked if Sarah Brown had a problem with the cat, the PMS replied that Sarah Brown did not have a problem with it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had met the cat before, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had probably met the cat before in Scotland, where the cat previously resided with the Darlings.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-11 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-11 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-11 10:00:53" post_name="downing-street-cat" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Downing Street Cat" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4704" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/12/4704" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman began by telling the assembled press that the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary had visited a local police station in Leicestershire that morning, where they met with local police community stakeholders and local residents to discuss neighbourhood policing and engagement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister and Home Secretary then went on to take part in a citizen's jury on crime at the Walkers Stadium in Leicestershire. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-12 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-12 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-12 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-12 10:00:58" post_name="neighbourhood-policing" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Neighbourhood Policing" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4705" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/12/4705" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The PMS went on to say that the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) had announced that a suspected case of Foot and Mouth disease had been identified in Surrey, near Chertsey. Based on the symptoms, a slaughter on suspicion of Foot and Mouth had been authorised and would take place as soon as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The PMS emphasised that it was not a confirmed case, but a suspected case. Specific tests would be taking place and the Government hoped to have the results of those tests later today.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The PMS said that as DEFRA had announced, because the Government wanted to take all possible precautionary measures, in addition to the order to slaughter the suspected animals on the farm, an immediate 10 km temporary control zone was being set up around the site. The Prime Minister was informed of the suspected outbreak that morning, during the course of his visit. The PMS said the Prime Minister had already spoken by conference call with Hilary Benn, Debby Reynolds, the Chief Veterinary Officer and the head of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had cut short his visit to Leicestershire, the PMS said that he had not. Asked if all animals within the 10km zone would be slaughtered, the PMS said that it would be best if operational information came from DEFRA.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Cabinet Office Briefing Room (COBR) meeting would be looking at the possible banning of all movement of animals, the PMS said that it would depend on the outcome of the test results. However, if the test results were positive, then a national movement ban would be imposed. Asked if this ban would be UK wide, the PMS said that it had been a UK wide ban previously. The PMS added that a decision would be taken once the results had come in.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any way of knowing if it was a fresh leak from the Pirbright laboratory, the PMS replied that it was far too early to say.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In answer to the question of what happened within the 10km temporary control zone and would that mean a ban on movement in the area, the PMS replied that DEFRA had made an announcement and it would be best if people referred to that, as it set out exactly what the conditions were. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for a summary of the announcement the PMS read out the following:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;No person shall move any susceptible animal into or out of the zone, except where the movement is through the zone without stopping or necessary to complete a journey started before the creation of the zone.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if he knew how many animals would be slaughtered at this stage, the PMS said he did not have that information.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how far Chertsey was from Pirbright and would the Government be making any assumptions on the matter, the PMS replied that no assumptions would be made until the test results were known. The PMS added that he did not know the exact distance between Chertsey and Pirbright.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was a 21-day probation period and had this period elapsed since the last outbreak, the PMS replied that it had been more than 21 days.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-12 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-12 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-12 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-12 10:00:57" post_name="foot-and-mouth-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4666" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/05/4666" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the ten problem areas that had been identified and whether these areas were specific towns or cities, or areas within towns, the PMS said that the Home Office would release further details on the subject next week.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-05 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-05 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:54" post_name="gun-crime-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Gun Crime" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4706" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/12/4706" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be any British reaction to Russia detonating a new &amp;quot;super bomb,&amp;quot; the PMS said that there was no specific reaction to the news.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought the financial system should be more cautious on how it lends money, the PMS replied that it was a matter for the Bank of England, the Treasury and the Financial Services Authority to attend to and they were working very closely on the matter.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-12 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-12 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-12 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-12 10:00:56" post_name="misc-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4707" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/13/4707" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister watched the Scotland game last night, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that the Prime Minister spent most of yesterday evening working on issues related to the outbreak of Foot &amp;amp; Mouth Disease. He met with officials and was on the phone to Hilary Benn, the Chief Vet, and others. The television was on in the background, and the Prime Minister was able to see a bit of both games, flicking between channels, but his main preoccupation last night was dealing with the Foot &amp;amp; Mouth outbreak.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to the Scotland manager following the match, the PMS replied that he had left a message of congratulations to the Scottish manager, but again, his main preoccupation has been dealing with the Foot &amp;amp; Mouth outbreak. Asked what the message was, the PMS replied that it was a message of congratulations.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister sent a message to Steve McClaren, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had been focusing very much on the Foot &amp;amp; Mouth outbreak. He understood that a letter would be sent to Steve McClaren during the course of the day.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-13 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-13 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-13 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-13 10:00:58" post_name="scotland-match" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scotland Match" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4708" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/13/4708" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be an investigation into why the all clear was given, the PMS replied that as the Chief Vet had made clear, the decision on the all clear was taken on the basis of her scientific judgement. All surveillance and testing within the previous surveillance zone had been negative. The Chief Vet said last Friday that a large number of samples, over 8,000, had been taken from animals in the surveillance zone by a team over the last 2 weeks. On top of that, the tracing of animals that had left Surrey in the risk period, for other parts of the country, was also complete. All of the animals that had been examined were healthy. All of the samples had been tested and were negative for Foot &amp;amp; Mouth disease. Various independent experts had been discussing this this morning - Professor Brian Spratt of Imperial College said that he thought it was right to lift the restrictions, and Professor Hugh Pennington said that he did not think that the Government had any other choice. So this was a decision that was made on the basis of scientific evidence, it was a decision made by the Chief Vet, and if was a decision that was supported by the academic experts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that people were asking why, when Professor Spratt has also said that the incubation period could last up to 50 hours, the PMS replied that Professor Spratt raised a number of possibilities in his report, but in his comments this morning he said that he thought it was right to lift the restrictions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to respond to David Cameron's suggestion that political pressure was put on the Chief Vet, the PMS replied that Hilary Benn had made the Government's position completely clear this morning, that there was absolutely no truth in that whatsoever.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for further information on the strain of the disease, the PMS replied that there was no further information on the strain. As the Prime Minister had said yesterday, intensive testing was underway, and in advance of that it would certainly be unwise for him to speculate on hypotheses.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;After if the Prime Minister had spoken to any of his European counterparts on this, and whether any had expressed concern, the PMS replied that there had been contact between the Government and the European Commission on this matter, but the Government has no difficulty with any action taken by the European Commission.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked who was present at COBRA and whether there would be any test results out later today, the PMS replied that it was possible that there would be further test results during the course of the day, as the Chief Vet had said yesterday. This morning's meeting was a Ministerial meeting of COBRA, chaired by the Prime Minister, and included Hilary Benn, the Chief Veterinary Officer, and other key experts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any contact between the Prime Minister and the first Minister on this, the PMS replied that at yesterday's COBRA the Scottish and Welsh Executives were involved, down the line.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Foot &amp;amp; Mouth had been ruled out in the Norfolk case yet, the PMS replied that there were tests ongoing, and a temporary control zone has been imposed. At this point we were not able to rule anything out until those tests were in, but it was not unusual, as we saw last time, for reported cases to emerge, and for them subsequently to be proved to be negative. That was the nature of the precautionary approach we were taking. Given that the Chief Vet was encouraging farmers to come forward and report any suspicions, it was not surprising that these things were happening. We would await further test results on that, but it was a pattern we saw last time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be prudent in light of this outbreak to wait longer in the future before lifting moving restrictions, the PMS replied that the key thing for the Prime Minister was that whatever action we take is taken on the best scientific advice, and the best expert advice, and that was the approach he would take.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we would be happy if experts recommended lifting the ban at the same sort of periods, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was not going to second guess expert and scientific opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any discussion over the longer term for perhaps relocating the Pirbright laboratory, the PMS replied that clearly this was a very long term decision. It was best to check what the Spratt report, and the HSE report said about that. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the time had come for the Government to apologise over Pirbright, the PMS replied that the Government had said in relation to the Pirbright outbreak, that just as we had learnt the lessons in 2001, so we would also learn any lessons from this most recent outbreak. Effluent releases from Pirbright were identified as the most likely source of the problem, but as Professor Spratt said in his report &amp;quot;I have to say this is not definitive - there is not absolute evidence that this is what occurred&amp;quot;. But he did say this was the most likely source of the trouble at Pirbright, the leakage of the effluent system and surface contamination of the soil. So there was still an element of uncertainty, as is the nature of these things, and as was acknowledged in the HSE and Spratt report in relation to the initial outbreak.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-13 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-13 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-13 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-13 10:00:57" post_name="foot-and-mouth-outbreak" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth outbreak" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4709" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/13/4709" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for any comment on the Taoiseach defending his position on &amp;quot;cash for favours&amp;quot;, the PMS replied that we did not have any comment to make on this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for a comment on the appointment of a new Prime Minister in Russia, the PMS replied that we had no comment to make on this.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-13 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-13 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-13 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-13 10:00:56" post_name="misc-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4710" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/14/4710" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what involvement the Prime Minister had had in the Northern Rock decision, the Prime Minister's Spokesman told the assembled press that the Prime Minister had been kept up to date with what had been happening by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with the Chancellor that part of the blame for the situation lay with the United States, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had no difficulty with what the Chancellor had said, but he did not think the Chancellor was attributing blame. The Chancellor was simply saying that there was uncertainty in financial markets, which originated in the United States. The PMS added that it was an uncontroversial statement of fact. Asked if the Chancellor's words reflected the Prime Minister's view, the PMS said they did indeed reflect the view of the Prime Minister.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister supported Northern Rock paying interim dividends, while borrowing money, the PMS responded by saying that the Prime Minister thought there was a very well established system for dealing with financial stability issues of this kind. There were tripartite arrangements in place involving the Treasury, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and the Bank of England and that was the correct procedure for dealing with such issues. Pressed on whether the Prime Minister supported Northern Rock paying dividends while borrowing money from taxpayers, the PMS reiterated that the Prime Minister believed there were established procedures for dealing with these issues. These were in place and operating in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Chancellor consulted the Prime Minister before he was given approval by the Bank of England on the issue, or whether the Prime Minister was told after a decision had been made, the PMS said he did not want to get into exactly what meetings took place and at what time, but the Prime Minister had been kept informed throughout the process. Asked if the Prime Minister's approval was sought on the matter, the PMS replied that it was a decision made by the Chancellor.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In answer to the suggestion that other banks may be affected in the same way and how great was the concern that the situation could lead to more widespread problems, the PMS said that as the Chancellor had been making clear that morning, the FSA had judged that Northern Rock was solvent, that it exceeded its regulatory capital requirement and it had a good quality loan book. The PMS added that it was not an issue of insolvency with Northern Rock and there were facilities in place to provide support. As the Chancellor had made clear that morning, Northern Rock was the only institution that had approached the Bank of England and requested support of this kind.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister was glad that he wasn't Chancellor anymore, the PMS replied that when he was Chancellor, the Prime Minister had dealt with a whole series of instances of financial instability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister would say to those people who had mortgages with Northern Rock, the PMS replied that what the Prime Minister would say is what the Chancellor had said that morning. The Government had set up the FSA ten years ago and they had made clear that people could carry on repaying their mortgages, that mortgages would be given in the normal way and depositors could carry on putting money into the bank. The PMS said that the FSA had looked at the books of Northern Rock and made that position clear.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how worried the Prime Minister was that such problems would spread to other mortgage providers, the PMS reiterated that Northern Rock was the only institution that had approached the Bank of England for assistance and it was not a solvency issue for the company. It was an issue relating to Northern Rock's liquidity and the fundamentals of the economy remained sound. The country had seen positive economic growth for 60 consecutive quarters, growth had been slightly above trend recently, inflation was back to target, employment was at a record high and unemployment was falling.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had a concern that although the economy might continue to perform well, this incident might have an effect on financial services, the PMS replied that a system was in place for financial regulation. It was established ten years ago involving the Treasury, the Bank of England and the independent FSA and it was recognised as being a good system. It had been tested before and there were procedures in place to deal with these issues.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the arrangement was at a net cost or net profit to the Government, the PMS said that there was no impact on public finances and it was part of the Bank of England's liquidity support operation. The PMS said that it was provided from the Bank of England's balance sheet, but clearly the terms of the support operation were a matter for the Bank of England.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was relaxed about the amount of money people were borrowing, the PMS replied that there was nothing to add to what the Chancellor had said on the matter. The fundamentals of the economy were sound, inflation was back to target, employment was at a record high, unemployment was falling and the country had had 60 consecutive quarters of growth.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-14 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-14 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:58" post_name="northern-rock" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Northern Rock" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4711" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/14/4711" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that the Prime Minister might be sympathetic to the idea of regionalising the system of restrictions, given that Scotland and Wales were hoping to experience the lifting of restrictions in a limited way, the PMS said the key thing to remember was that everything was guided by the scientific evidence and advice, so such matters were for the Chief Veterinary Officer (CVO) to comment on and the Prime Minister would not want to second guess that. Asked whether it was an issue that the Prime Minister would be seeking advice on, the PMS said that the CVO would no doubt be looking at a whole range of issues and it would be for her to examine such issues on the basis of the scientific facts available and make a recommendation. It was not for the Prime Minister to try and second-guess that in any way.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if this was in fact an issue for the Chief Veterinary officer, the PMS replied that on confirmation of the disease, the UK CVO would establish an immediate Great Britain animal movement ban. It was then for the CVO and her counterparts in the devolved administrations, to make decisions on which movements could be allowed based on an assessment of the veterinary risk.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that it looked like a political decision made by vets from two devolved administrations, the PMS said there was discussion between experts based on their view of the science. It was not for the Prime Minister or anyone else to intervene in the matter.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister would be saying to the Surrey farmers in his meeting with them at the headquarters of the National Farmers Union (NFU), the PMS replied that the Prime Minister would be saying he fully understood the farmers concerns and he would be reassuring them that the government would be doing everything in it's power to control and eradicate this disease. The Prime Minister would be listening to any particular concerns the farmers might have.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for details on that mornings COBRA meeting, the PMS said that it was a general update meeting and if there was anything more to say the Chief Vet would make an announcement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if compensation was on the agenda at the NFU meeting, the PMS said that there was already compensation for those farmers directly affected. There was this discussion previously and compensation was made available in relation to the previous outbreak in August. The PMS added that the priority for everyone at this point was to ensure all necessary steps were taken to control and eradicate the disease.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the Government were not vaccinating animals, the PMS said that vaccination was an option kept under review, but he again stressed that it was an issue where the Government would be guided by the science. The Government had to be open-minded and see how the situation progressed. The PMS emphasised that the Prime Minister would be guided by the best scientific evidence and advice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that there was a need to review the arrangements governing the movement restrictions, as it appeared that movement restrictions had been removed too quickly, the PMS said it was far too early to reach any conclusion of that kind. There was a need to establish the source of the most recent outbreak, but as the Government emphasised yesterday, the decision to lift the restriction zone was one that was made by the CVO on the basis of the best scientific evidence and one that had been subsequently supported by the academic community and the NFU.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-14 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-14 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:57" post_name="foot-and-mouth-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4650" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/07/4650" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a view from No.10 on the matter of the Foot and Mouth outbreak, the PMS replied that Hilary Benn would be speaking on behalf of the Government.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-07 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-07 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:55" post_name="foot-and-mouth" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4651" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/07/4651" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the disagreement between the Prime Minister and Alex Salmond on whether the correct term was Scottish Executive or Scottish Government, the PMS expressed his surprise on reading the story this morning. The PMS reiterated the position that as far as the Government was aware, there was no change in the devolution settlement. In response to the suggestion that this was a tactical creep towards Scottish independence, the PMS again said that the position on devolution had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-07 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-07 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:54" post_name="scottish-executive" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scottish Executive" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4649" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/07/4649" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a response to the comments made by environmental groups, that decisions on nuclear power had already been made, the PMS referred back to what the Prime Minister had said in the House of Commons at Prime Ministers Questions on the 11th July 2007. The Government's preliminary view was that nuclear power had a role in providing the country's homes and businesses with the low-carbon energy it needed. The PMS went on to say that the Government would make their decision in the autumn, after and in light of the consultation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government was disappointed that environmental groups had chosen to pull out of the consultation, the PMS confirmed that the Government was disappointed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government was worried that the timeline would get pushed back if a legal challenge was mounted and the third consultation was put at risk, the PMS said that the whole point of a consultation was to give people an opportunity to put their views and therefore it was better to do that if you were part of the consultation. Obviously there were a lot of different views on the issue. People would put their views; the Government would take them into account and then take a decision.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-07 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-07 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:56" post_name="nuclear-energy" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Nuclear Energy " post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4647" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/07/4647" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to give details on the appointment of Mr Eliasch, the Prime Minister's Spokesman replied that he could confirm that the Prime Minister had appointed Johan Eliasch as a Special Representative to advise the Prime Minister on the development of financial mechanisms, to promote sustainable forestry and clean energy and to tackle climate change. The PMS said that Mr Eliasch would conduct a review, reporting to the Prime Minister, into examining financial mechanisms to promote sustainable forestry and investment in low-carbon energy sources. He would work closely with the Secretaries of State for the Environment and International Development in doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what qualifications Mr Eliasch would be bringing to the position, the PMS said that he had a great deal of expertise in the general area relating to climate change. Mr Eliasch had been concerned about this subject for many years and established the charity &amp;quot;Cool Earth,&amp;quot; to enable people to denote money, which could be combined together to protect the rainforest. Mr Eliasch had also devoted considerable time in recent years into researching and promoting mechanisms for international policy, such as the creation of carbon credits, to incentivise lower carbon emissions and reduce deforestation. The PMS went on to say that as a successful businessman, Mr Eliasch had particular expertise in financial mechanisms and had established expertise in this area.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether there was a party political slant to the appointment, the PMS reiterated that the basis on which Mr Eliasch had been appointed had been because of his expertise in relation to climate change and deforestation. Asked if the Prime Minister was happy with the way his &amp;quot;Government of all the talents&amp;quot; was shaping up, the PMS said that the Prime Minister was very happy with his Government.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to elaborate on the financial mechanisms in terms of forestry, the PMS said that one of the issues Mr Eliasch would no doubt want to look at was the use of carbon credits and whether they could be better used to help protect rainforests. In a sense the purpose of the review would be to examine such issues in detail.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Prime Minister approached Mr Eliasch, the PMS said he would not comment on private conversations between the Prime Minister and Mr Eliasch. Asked whether the position was a paid job, the PMS said that it was an unpaid position.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether he expected Mr Eliasch to become a Labour Party peer, the PMS said that he would not comment on party political matters. Asked when Mr Eliasch was expected to report back to the Prime Minister, the PMS said that the expectation was that he would report back in the course of next year.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked several times whether the Prime Minister had stipulated that Mr Eliasch should leave the Conservative Party in order to take up his post, the PMS said that the relationship between Mr Eliasch and the Conservative Party was a matter for him. The PMS reiterated that the basis on which the Prime Minister had appointed Mr Eliasch was for his expertise in relation to climate change and deforestation. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether Mr Eliasch was approached about the position before or after he had left the Conservative Party, the PMS repeated that he would not comment on private discussions between the Prime Minister and Mr Eliasch.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-07 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-07 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:58" post_name="johan-eliasch" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Johan Eliasch" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4648" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/07/4648" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that there was a difference in opinion between the US and the UK on overall strategy and tactics in Afghanistan, the PMS said that the Government was working very closely with the US and other NATO allies in Afghanistan as part of the international effort. Asked whether the International Security Assistance Force had sufficient ground forces between them, the PMS replied that such matters were considered on an ongoing basis by the military, as people would expect. As and when the position changed, the military would provide advice and a decision would be taken, but that was not where the Government was at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government was considering reinforcements and whether they were happy with troop levels at the present time, the PMS reiterated that the Government kept troop levels under constant review, as people would expect.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-07 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-07 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-07 10:00:57" post_name="afghanistan" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Afghanistan" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4645" comment_count="2" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/06/4645" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a response on calls for a referendum on the subject of the EU Treaty, the PMS said that the Government's position was well known and nothing had changed.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-06 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-06 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:55" post_name="eu-treaty-referendum" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="EU Treaty Referendum" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4646" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/06/4646" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a few words on the death of Pavarotti, the PMS said the Prime Minister thought Pavarotti was the outstanding opera singer of his generation. He had inspired many people from this generation to listen to and enjoy opera. The Prime Minister was sure that people would remember him from the glorious summer of 1990, when Pavarotti's voice became the voice of that summer.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-06 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-06 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:54" post_name="pavarotti" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Pavarotti" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4643" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/06/4643" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the review on violent video games the PMS said that there would be a joint announcement from the Department for Children, Schools and Families and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport later today.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-06 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-06 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:57" post_name="violent-video-games" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Violent Video Games" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4644" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/06/4644" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a reaction on comments made by David Cameron on youth volunteering, the PMS said that it was not for him to respond to the Leader of the Opposition. The Government's general position on the subject was that youth volunteering was something the Prime Minister had been interested in for many years and through pre-budget reports and budgets the Prime Minister, when he was Chancellor had channelled a significant amount of research into this area. In his days as Chancellor, the Prime Minister had set up the Russell Commission, which had recommended the setting up of the youth volunteering charity, &amp;quot;V.&amp;quot; This charity was launched in May 2006 with &amp;pound;60million being made available by the Government. 200,000 volunteering places were created with one million places in total being created over five years.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-06 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-06 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:56" post_name="youth-volunteering" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Youth Volunteering" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4639" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/05/4639" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the PM had been in contact with Alex Salmond about the Scottish Parliament's programme, the PMS said there was an open channel of communication between the Scottish Office and the Scottish Executive and these issues would be discussed. Put that the Scottish Executive were relaxed about calling themselves the Government, the PMS replied that he wasn't aware of any change in the devolution settlement. Asked if the Prime Minister was relaxed about further powers being devolved to the Scottish Executive, the PMS said that this would be subject to debate and there were ongoing discussions. But there were no specific proposals at this point.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-05 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-05 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:55" post_name="scottish-parliament" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scottish Parliament" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4641" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/05/4641" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;sked whether there were any plans to change the way oil revenues were gathered the PMS said that the relevant junior Minister made clear the Government's stance on the issue yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-05 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-05 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:53" post_name="misc-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4642" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/06/4642" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Ministers Spokesman started by telling the assembled press that the Prime Minister and Ed Balls were visiting Bristol today to open a &amp;pound;24million state of the art secondary school. The school is one of 180 newly built or rebuilt projects and 36 academies opening this school year - and comes on top of 1,100 new primary, secondary or academy schools and 27,000 new and improved classrooms built since 1997.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Department for Children, Schools and Families had set up the event, which would be bringing together 40 - 50 people. The discussion was part of a wider programme of consultation for a new Children's Plan. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how the people taking part had been selected, the PMS said that 40-50 people had been brought together. Those invited had been selected by a variety of methods. The school had provided a list of pupils and teaching staff who would participate.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Department for Children, Schools and Families added to this with a door-to-door recruitment programme within a two-mile radius of the school itself and provided a list of community stakeholders to take part in order to make it as representative of the local community as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that the visit was no different from any other visit to a school, the PMS said that it was a very structured event. It would be deliberately representative of the local community and a series of questions would be asked about specific issues. These questions would be discussed with parents, students and community figures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what would be discussed and what would the event feed into the PMS made people aware of the Government's Children's Plan consultation. The event would be on camera enabling people to see for themselves what would be discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;When asked what sort of questions people could expect the PMS suggested several questions including the following; &amp;quot;How would you keep young people out of trouble?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;What is the Government's job when it comes to supporting people and should they be doing anything else?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked who would be facilitating the event, the PMS reiterated that the DCSF were running the event and had consulted with a range of experts. The PMS went on to say that for this particular event, Opinion Leader Research (OLR) had been chosen to organise things and to pre-empt any questions on the issue, Deborah Mattison was no longer an employee of OLR and had no contractual relationship with Downing Street.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether OLR had been chosen through a completely open tendering process the PMS confirmed that they had been.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-06 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-06 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-06 10:00:58" post_name="citizens-juries-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Citizens Juries" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4638" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/05/4638" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether Government computer networks were vulnerable to computer hacking and whether there was any cross government advice on protecting critical infrastructure like computer networks the PMS said that the Government had in place procedures and mechanisms to deal with such issues. Asked whether the Prime Minister had discussed the issue with Chancellor Merkel after the Chancellor had raised the same issue with Chinese authorities, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister and Chancellor Merkel had had a general discussion about relations with China. This was focused more on global, economic and political issues arising from the EU's relationship with China rather than this particular issue. Asked if the Government had raised the issue with China, the PMS said that if there were specific concerns identified then it would be taken up, but it would be best to check with the Home Office on the specifics.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-05 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-05 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:56" post_name="computer-hacking" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Computer Hacking" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4628" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/28/4628" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any plans to meet any Labour MPs who were unhappy with the Constitutional Treaty, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister kept in contact with all of his colleagues in a number of different ways. But he would not get into talking about internal Labour Party matters.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that this was more than an internal Labour Party matter as David Cameron had renewed a call for a referendum, and rightly or wrongly it was a widely held view, the PMS replied that the specific question was about discussion within the Labour Party. On a more general point, the Prime Minister had set out his position on the Constitution many times, and that position had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that this was now a Constitution, the PMS corrected himself replying that the Prime Minister had set out his position on the accusations that it might be a Constitution.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-28 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-28 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:57" post_name="eu" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="EU" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4629" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/28/4629" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister made of the general claim that &amp;quot;widespread social breakdown&amp;quot; was behind the recent spate of killings, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister would not accept the premise of this question, as Jack Straw, Jacqui Smith and other ministers had made clear in recent days. There were clearly particular issues relating to gun crime, and as the Prime Minister said last week any death of an 11 year old is a great tragedy. Where there was the need for new laws, they would be passed, and where there was a need for tougher enforcement, we would make sure that happened. The Prime Minister met last week with the police and relevant agencies, and there would be further discussions in the period ahead.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any plans to contact the family of Rhys Jones, the PMS replied that this was something that we would not normally comment on publicly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to comment on the Scottish Executive's call for more powers in relation to gun licensing, particularly over air guns, the PMS replied that we were aware that these issues had been raised, but there was no specific reaction to give today.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-28 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-28 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:56" post_name="law-and-order" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Law and Order" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4627" comment_count="3" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/28/4627" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with the assessment of the Chief of General Staff that we can expect a &amp;quot;generation of conflict&amp;quot;, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that David Miliband had answered this point clearly on the radio this morning. When it came to dealing with terrorism in particular, this was clearly a long term issue that we had to face.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that David Miliband had also made clear that Britain's decisions on Iraq regarding troop pullouts would be made independent of the US, and that the situation on the ground in Basra would dictate what would happen to British troops, not the situation in Baghdad, and asked if this position had the full support of the Prime Minister, the PMS replied that David Miliband was also saying that our position on Iraq had not changed. We would operate in close consultation with our allies, but we would have to take decisions based on the situation on the ground, and clearly the situation in Basra was different to the situation in other parts of Iraq. This had been our long standing position.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it could work both ways, so if the situation was fine on the ground we could leave before the Americans, but could it work the other way if the Americans started scaling down and we were to stay on, the PMS replied that all of these were hypothetical questions. The key point, which the Prime Minister emphasised in his letter yesterday, was that we would take decisions based on military advice, and that military advice would relate to the capacity of the Iraqi security forces to take over responsibility for security in the Basra area.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the presence of US troops would feed into the military assessment of the situation on the ground, the PMS replied that these were all issue that the military would have to look at. But this was not something for politicians to be intervening on. This was advice that had to be formulated by the military on the ground based on their assessment of what was happening in Southern Iraq.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it had been formally acknowledged that we would be leaving Basra Palace soon, the PMS replied that clearly decisions would have to be taken, but these would be taken on the basis of military advice. Once advice had been received and decisions taken, then we would make an announcement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we would still pull back if that meant American troops going in to replace our troops, the PMS replied that this was entering the realms of the hypothetical. We would not be getting into the business of second guessing what may or may not happen.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how military advice translated into something concrete that led to a political decision, the PMS replied that the Ministry of Defence could give chapter and verse on the exact process by which all of this happens. But clearly there would need to be some considered advice put together by senior commanders.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Prime Minister's last discussion with President Bush was on Iraq, the PMS replied that it would have been at Camp David. Asked if there had been any telephone calls since, the PMS replied that there had been none to his knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any result from the review into the Iraqi interpreters, the PMS replied that it was his understanding that this was still under consideration.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-28 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-28 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:58" post_name="iraq" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4630" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/28/4630" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was a view from Number 10 about the best way to help stabilise the global financial markets, the PMS replied that the view from Number 10 was that the Treasury were in the lead on this. They had set out the Government's position and that was the best way to deal with these issues.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any reaction to the Corporation Tax figures out today, the PMS replied that there was no specific reaction from us. Clearly measures were taken in the last Budget to simplify the Corporation Tax regime. Clearly action had been taken over many years to ensure that individuals and companies who should be paying tax, were paying tax. But on specifics it was better to speak to the Treasury.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that reports this morning show enormous growth in the ratios of earnings within certain industries, particularly hedge fund managers and private equity firms, and asked what the best was to approach this was, the PMS replied that the matter of awarding bonuses was a matter for employers rather than the Government. The City of London was a great strength for the British economy and clearly we would not want to do anything that would put this at risk.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that this was not simply a matter of economics, the PMS replied that lots had been done in terms of the reform of the tax and benefits system to improve the earnings and work incentives for people at the lower end of the income scale. And we would continue to take these forward.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-28 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-28 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:55" post_name="economy" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Economy" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4631" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/28/4631" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked that with no bank holiday until Boxing Day, what was Number 10's view on calls from the TUC and think-tanks for an extra Bank Holiday connected to British values, the PMS replied that clearly this was a proposal that would need to be looked at, and clearly there was bound to be support for that in certain quarters. Obviously this had to be balanced against concerns that employers had about the economic impact of holidays. But this was something that was kept under review.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-28 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-28 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-28 10:00:54" post_name="bank-holidays" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Bank Holidays" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4634" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/03/4634" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what contacts the Prime Minister was having ahead of his statement to the House on Iraq, and asked about the overwatch process, the PMS replied that we stayed in close contact, as you would expect, with all of our key allies on a ongoing basis. The detailed operational basis on which overwatch would operate would be something that was very much for military commanders.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had any progress reports on how the movement of troops from Basra Palace was going, the PMS replied that obviously the Prime Minister was being kept up to date and kept informed on a regular basis. But it was best to leave the public discussion of exactly how the operation was going to the Ministry of Defence and the military commanders on the ground.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to President Bush recently, the PMS replied that Mr Brown speaks to all of his key allies on a regular basis and we kept in very close contact with the United States.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-03 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-03 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:56" post_name="iraq-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4635" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/03/4635" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the trial of the nephew of Colonel Gaddafi, the PMS replied that it was best to speak to the Foreign Office on specifics. But the British Government did not, and would not seek to interfere with any independent judicial process.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about reports of a minimum wage for London, the PMS replied that he did not recognise the reports.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-03 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-03 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-03 10:00:55" post_name="misc" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4636" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/05/4636" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) informed journalists about the Prime Minister launching with Douglas Alexander and others a new International Health Partnership, which would be part of a renewed global push to meet the health development millennium goals, cutting child deaths, improving maternal mortality rates and fighting major diseases. The event would aim to focus on improving health systems as a whole and not just focus on individual diseases or issues, providing better coordination between donors and developing and supporting other countries health plans.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The issue was that first of all global health assistance was quite complex, there being over 40 bilateral donors and ninety global health initiatives; second, more focus would need to be put on strong and sustainable health systems in poor countries as well as focusing on individual diseases; and thirdly poor countries often found it quite costly and time consuming to deal with so many different partners in this area. So for example in Cambodia, there were 22 different donors providing support for health through 109 separate projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Today's event would focus on bringing together some of the main players, such as the World Health Organisation, the World Bank, the UN, the Gates Foundation, EC, African Development Bank as well as some donor governments and commit to working better together and taking this important issue forward.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/output/Page13063.asp&quot;&gt;World's major diseases can be conquered - PM &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-05 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-05 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:58" post_name="international-health-partnership" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="International Health Partnership" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4637" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/05/4637" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had submitted his DNA to the DNA database the PMS replied that he wasn't aware that the Prime Minister had but he would double check if people were interested. Put whether the Prime Minister supported the idea, the PMS said he was very supportive of the DNA database, which had been very successful in tackling crime. The DNA database supplies the police with 3500 matches per month, but there were no plans to introduce a universal, compulsory or voluntary national DNA database. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that there were only two ways to go with the system, those being universality or in a sense, dropping it altogether except for people who had committed offences, the PMS said that the purpose of the DNA database is to fight crime and that would continue to be the main focus of what was trying to be achieved. The PMS went on to say that there were civil liberty concerns that needed to be taken into account as well and reiterated that there were no plans to introduce a universal DNA database. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that those civil liberties concerns were particularly potent on this issue, the PMS said that he would not characterise or weight those concerns as suggested, but confirmed that there were civil liberties concerns in regards to the issue. In response to the suggestion that the phrase &amp;quot;no plans&amp;quot; could be interpreted as the Prime Minister having sympathy for an idea, the PMS said that there would be huge logistical and bureaucratic issues to deal with alongside the civil liberties concerns. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the public might be more supportive in five or ten years the PMS replied that the issue was complex and there was bound to be a lengthy public debate on the subject, but the position was that there were no plans for a universal DNA database. The PMS said that the Prime Minister's position was to look at options that would help the fight against crime. This needed to be the focus of what the Government was doing in relation to the DNA database.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-05 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-05 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-05 10:00:57" post_name="dna-database" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="DNA Database" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4626" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4626" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any further thoughts regarding Richard Dannatt's comments that there should be a class added to the medals given out for Afghanistan to reflect the nature of the fighting, the PMS replied that as the MOD had said yesterday, obviously the Chief of the General Staff had given his opinion on this issue. Overall, medals were a matter for all Chiefs of Staff. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 12:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 12:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:53" post_name="afghan-medals-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Afghan Medals" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4623" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4623" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked why the Prime Minister was holding a bilateral with Chancellor Merkel specifically this week, and also, was the Prime Minister back at work now, the PMS said that Chancellor Merkel would be in London on Wednesday. They would discuss a wide range of topics, specifically looking at international development issues, trade, and other issues coming out of the G8. The PMS said that they might also touch on the global economy. With regards to the Prime Minister's holiday, he had been working in his constituency, as we had established last week. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if climate change and targets would be discussed, the PMS replied that there would be a discussion of issues coming out of G8, but she could not be specific on anything else at this point. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 12:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 12:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:56" post_name="chancellor-merkel-meeting-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Chancellor Merkel Meeting" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4624" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4624" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had any thought about the reports over the weekend from the US that said that the UK was beaten in Iraq and that we were now facing rising violence and a Saigon situation, the PMS replied that people should look at the response that the Basra military spokesperson Major Michael Shearer gave this morning. Major Shearer had pointed out although that there had been increased violence, that this was not surprising due to the fact that malign forces are attempting to claim responsibility for what was in fact a long established strategy in the Basra province. Therefore, our strategy remained in place, and the Basra province would pass responsibility to the Iraqi forces as had happened in three of the four areas for which the UK had responsibility. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any chance of stepping up the Army presence in the other three provinces in light of the killing of the Provincial Governor, the PMS said that whilst she was aware of the reports, she was not going to comment on them in detail at this stage. There were challenges ahead for all the Iraqi security forces, but our strategy was as set out as before. With regards to a longer-term strategy, as President Bush and the Prime Minister said at Camp David recently, we were awaiting for General Petraeus' report later in September. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 12:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 12:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:55" post_name="iraq-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4625" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4625" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that a Times report from Brussels this morning had reported that a committee had asserted that the reform treaty was much the same as the constitution, the PMS said that our position on the treaty had been well established, the constitutional aspects of the treaty were not in this draft either in form or in content. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 12:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 12:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:54" post_name="eu-treaty-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="EU Treaty" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4622" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4622" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister agreed that parts of the country were now inflicted by anarchy, the PMS replied that what both the Prime Minister and the Government as a whole would emphasise was that public protection was the top priority. With reference to knife crime, that was why the Government had introduced a new maximum sentence for carrying knives, doubled from two years to four years. More generally, we of course recognised and appreciated people's concerns about the high profile cases, especially those concerning young people. As John Denham said yesterday, however, it was also important to recognise that there had been an overall fall in the levels in crime and that people were much less likely to be a victim of crime than they were ten years ago. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had plans to look at knife crime issues this week, based on the statistics that were published yesterday, the PMS said that in terms of the statistics, the Home Office's analysis was that those particular statistics were based on an extrapolation of British Crime Survey figures, and were therefore not the most accurate. However, that was not to say that we didn't recognise there was a real issue here, and we appreciated people's concerns. The Prime Minister was kept informed of all developments, and as John Denham had said, there were tough measures that had been brought into place, and it was extremely important that those measures were used and that they were kept under review. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that John Denham had also said yesterday that the Government would look at the discounted alcohol available, and did the Prime Minister have any views on that or on raising the age at which people could buy alcohol, the PMS replied that the Government had already set out its position on changing the age at which people could buy alcohol. In terms of working with supermarkets, there was an ongoing programme through the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy which was looking to tackle that particular problem, and of course, we were fully supportive of it. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government had plans to enlist Army officers to tackle gang culture, especially black gangs, the PMS replied that she wouldn't respond directly to the question, as it referred to a leaked document. If people looked at the report that was published by Hazel Blears recently into the aspirations of young black men, there were a number of measures in there, including mentors. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government accepted that the increase in sentencing from two years to four years was not working and was not deterring young people from carrying knives, the PMS said that we recognised that there were specific issues here. However, overall, we also needed to recognise the fact that violent crime had gone down. With regards to what the Government had done to tackle knife crime, there had been a range of measures introduced in the Violent Crime Act 2006, including the increase of the maximum sentence and raising the age at which someone could purchase a knife from 16 to 18 years old. It also gave school staff powers to search pupils for weapons as well as creating a new offence of minding a weapon for somebody else. Again, if that weapon was a knife, the maximum sentence would also be four years. The PMS said that these were tough new measures that had been introduced, and the important thing was that they were being enforced. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister shared the previous Prime Minister's analysis on knife and gun crime which was that this was a localised problem that needed specific tailored responses and that it was not a blanket problem with a blanket solution, the PMS replied that we would have to be guided by police working in areas with specific problems. However, it was a range of measures that was required, rather than one approach. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any plans to confirm what the Home Office thought about knife crime statistics, the PMS said that the Home Office had said that the British Crime Survey did not show a statistically significant increase in the use of knives in violent incidents. 6 to 7% of all violent crime was knife-related which had remained relatively stable for several years. Until April 2007, knife related offences were not separately identified, but police now collected data on knives which would overall give us a better picture of the situation across the country. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 12:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 12:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:57" post_name="crime-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Crime" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4621" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/20/4621" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a No10 reaction on behalf of the Prime Minister to David Cameron's recent comments about the breakdown of families, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled journalists that she was not going to respond directly to the Leader of the Opposition, and recommended that people spoke to the Labour Party.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what had been done by the Government to boost family policies, the PMS said that there was a long proven track record in terms of family policy, including tax credits, and measures lead by both DWP and DCLG. The PMS said again that she would not get into a direct response with the Leader of the Opposition and that people should speak to the Labour Party. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-20 12:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-20 12:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-20 11:00:58" post_name="family-values-7" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Family Values" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4615" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4615" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) updated journalists on Foot and Mouth. She said that the Prime Minister was being kept informed of any developments today whilst he was up in Scotland. Officials were currently attending a COBR meeting, and there had been no confirmed cases since early last week. The Chief Vet Debby Reynolds had stressed again over the weekend the need for relentless vigilance, and had expressed her gratitude for those in farming communities. In terms of Professor Spratt's review on biosecurity, we believed that this would report towards the end of this week, but that exact timings were a matter for Professor Spratt. The same applied to the timings on the further HSE work. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put to the PMS that the National Farmers Union (NFU) had said they were very optimistic yesterday, and given that the Prime Minister was now in Scotland, was he happy about the current situation, the PMS said that the Prime Minister was being kept informed of any developments. Although there had been no confirmed cases for a few days, we obviously had to be very mindful that this was a highly virulent disease, and that preventing its spread was our absolute priority. As Debby Reynolds had said, whilst there had been no cases recently, it was relentless vigilance that was required. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 12:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 12:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:58" post_name="foot-and-mouth-disease-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth Disease" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4616" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4616" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was in his constituency whilst in Scotland, the PMS confirmed that he was working from his constituency office. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was now on holiday, the PMS replied that it was the first time that the Prime Minister had visited his constituency since he became Prime Minister. There was therefore a lot of business to do, and traditionally, the Prime Minister had often used his constituency office as an alternative location from where to do Government business from. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would have a meeting with Alex Salmond whilst he was in Scotland, the PMS said that she was not aware of any such plans, but added that the he had attended a Raith Rovers football match at the weekend. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be resuming his holiday, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was up in Scotland for a few days, but that would be dependent on issues on the ground.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked had the Prime Minister arrived in Scotland and when was the last time that he was there, the PMS said that he had arrived on Friday, and this was the first visit to his constituency since he had become Prime Minister. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was intending to have another holiday, the PMS replied that as people knew, he had had a family holiday in Dorset planned, but it was disrupted. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again if the Prime Minister was intending to take another holiday, the PMS replied that at the moment the Prime Minister was working up in Scotland. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought that it was important for people to take holidays with their families, and did he feel that he should lead by example, the PMS replied that he did think that it was important. He had had a holiday planned, but it was disrupted, and he felt that the most important thing for him was to come back and oversee the Foot and Mouth outbreak. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put by a journalist that Scotland was not a holiday, and it was not going to become a holiday, the (Scottish) Lobby Chair interrupted him and said that when people went to Scotland, it was always a holiday! &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 12:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 12:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:57" post_name="prime-minister-in-scotland-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Prime Minister in Scotland" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4617" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4617" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Guardian story today regarding officials briefing the Government over climate change targets being &amp;quot;completely unreachable&amp;quot;, the PMS replied that the UK was committed to developing renewable energy. In the recent energy White Paper that was published, we had aimed to see renewable energy increase three-fold to 15% by 2015. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we would meet targets set, the PMS said that it was no secret that these were ambitious targets, and it would be a major challenge. However, that was not only for the UK, but was for all EU member states, and people should remember that the UK was one of the few EU states that was on course the meet our Kyoto targets of cutting carbon emissions. It was now for the Commission to propose how the EU-wide target be met by all member states. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 12:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 12:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:56" post_name="climate-change-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Climate Change" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4618" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4618" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was involved in any talks about the financial markets, and was there a strategy, the PMS replied that John Hutton had responded to this yesterday. As the Prime Minster had said last week, we would not hesitate to act to ensure that the British economy remained stable, and that our prospects for continued growth were good. The view of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that was expressed on Saturday was that the fundamentals of both the world economy and the British economy were sound. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what actions the Government would take, the PMS replied that any actions would be dependent on the situation. At the moment, the IMF were saying that the British and international economies were sound. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would like the Bank of England to follow the Federal Reserve and the Central European Bank in terms of bailing out financial institutions, the PMS replied that the Bank of England's independence was something that was introduced by this Government, but she was not going to comment any further on its role. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 12:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 12:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:55" post_name="stock-market-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Stock Market" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4619" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4619" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister's view was towards the climate change protestors at Heathrow, the PMS said that it was a matter for the authorities and those who ran Heathrow with regards to disruptions. People did have the right to protest, but the Government felt that any action that disrupted the operation of Heathrow would be unacceptable. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 12:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 12:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:54" post_name="climate-change-protestors-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Climate Change Protestors" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4620" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.haggis.disruptiveproactivity.com/briefings/2007/08/13/4620" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that as Des Browne was now back from Afghanistan and back at the MOD, was there any Government concern at the rising toll in Afghanistan, the PMS replied that as Des Browne had said in his interview, the fatalities were a matter of deep regret. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that when the Defence Secretary had said that the commitment in Afghanistan was for the long term, was there any idea of how long that might be, the PMS replied that as Des Browne had said, there were 42 other countries who were represented there in Afghanistan, 37 being military efforts. The operations would be guided by both the Commanders on the ground, as well as the political security situation. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that as we had taken over the control of Helmand from another nation, was there any sign that another nation might be willing to take over from us, the PMS replied that she was not going to get into speculation about the operations on the ground.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-13 12:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-13 12:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-13 11:00:53" post_name="afghanistan-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Afghanistan" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4690" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/06/4690" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was planning to resume his holiday, the PMS said that obviously there had been disruption to his holiday plans. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be keep updated whilst at Chequers, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister would be kept fully updated of all developments. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was hoping to resume his holiday in Dorset, the PMS said that he did hope to be able to have some holiday, but as the Prime Minister said yesterday, the foot and mouth outbreak was the most important thing for him at the moment. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Prime Minister was due in Scotland, the PMS said that we would keep people updated. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-06 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-06 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:57" post_name="prime-ministers-holiday" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Prime Minister's Holiday" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4691" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/06/4691" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any reaction to Mark Malloch-Brown's comments that we should lose our place on the Security Council, the PMS replied that the FCO had issued a response to the matter. There was no question of our giving up our seat on the UN Security Council. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any conversations between the Prime Minister and Mark Malloch-Brown to clarify the situation, the PMS said that the FCO had already clarified it. Mark Malloch-Brown was not speaking in his capacity as Foreign Office Minister. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-06 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-06 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:56" post_name="security-council" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Security Council" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4692" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/06/4692" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if Tony Blair had issued his resignation honours list yet, the PMS said not that she was aware of. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-06 16:45:55" post_date_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-06 16:45:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:55" post_name="resignation-honours-list" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Resignation Honours List" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4693" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/08/06/4693" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked how many grace and favour homes had been allocated, the PMS replied that she was not aware of any updates from the last time the question was asked. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Mark Malloch-Brown received a grace and favour home, the PMS replied that as we had said before, due to the fact that Lord Malloch-Brown had come from overseas, he would have the use of a Government residence. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-08-06 16:45:54" post_date_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-08-06 16:45:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-08-06 15:45:54" post_name="grace-and-favour-homes" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Grace and Favour Homes" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4712" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/14/4712" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that the Prime Minister was just exploiting Margaret Thatcher, the PMS replied that he was unaware that such charges were being made. It was a meeting that was arranged following an exchange of correspondence shortly after the Prime Minister took up the position. There was then a discussion between diary secretaries over a date, a date was fixed and the meeting took place.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Rob Wilson, a Conservative frontbencher, had said, &amp;quot;Gordon Brown is unscrupulous and exploiting a frail old lady,&amp;quot; the PMS said that Lady Thatcher was a distinguished former Prime Minister and it was not unusual for previous Prime Minister's to meet current Prime Minister's but he did not want to comment on that specific allegation as he was not aware of it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any plans to meet Sir John Major, the PMS replied that he was sure the Prime Minister would be happy to meet any former Prime Minister. Asked if the Prime Minister would meet Tony Blair, the PMS assured the press that the Prime Minister did meet Tony Blair. Asked if there was a date set to meet John Major, the PMS said he was sure the Prime Minister met John Major from time to time and would be happy to meet him at any time. Asked if there were any plans to appoint Margaret Thatcher to a task force, the PMS said there were no such plans.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-14 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-14 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:56" post_name="baroness-thatcher" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Baroness Thatcher" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4713" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/14/4713" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if Basra Province had moved back to Iraqi control and had British forces gone on to &amp;quot;overwatch&amp;quot;, the PMS replied that that wasn't the case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In relation to the Prime Minister's statement on Iraq and if the term &amp;quot;the future size and strength of the force would continue to depend on conditions on the ground&amp;quot; meant conditions in the South of Iraq, the PMS replied that it was based on an assessment of the readiness of the Iraqi forces to take on security responsibilities in Basra. Asked if it was politically sustainable for United States forces to return home by Christmas, while British troops stayed in Iraq, the PMS said that the Government's decisions were based on assessments of military conditions in Southern Iraq. The American Government clearly made their decisions based on their assessment of conditions elsewhere in Iraq. The basis on which those decisions were taken would be on the basis of an assessment of the readiness of Iraqi forces to take on security and responsibility. Asked if there had been a reduction in British troop numbers, the PMS replied that there had been a gradual reduction in troop numbers.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-14 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-14 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-14 10:00:55" post_name="iraq-7" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4714" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/17/4714" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister backed the words of the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, the Prime Minister's Spokesman said to the assembled press that the Chancellor, the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority (FSA) were the relevant authorities for dealing with this matter and they had set out the position. The Chancellor spoke on behalf of the Government in such matters.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what Alistair Darling meant when he said, &amp;quot;the Bank of England backs Northern Rock,&amp;quot; the PMS said that the Government's position on the matter was fairly clear and it had been set out by the Bank of England, the Treasury and the FSA. The PMS added that the position had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Bank of England would still lend financial support to Northern Rock if it had no collateral and did the support depend on this issue, the PMS said that the Bank of England had set out the position.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that people had not heeded warnings not to panic and could the situation cause panic in the economy as a whole, the PMS replied that as the Chancellor commented over the weekend and again this morning, the world was experiencing a period of volatility in global financial markets that had originated in the United States' sub-prime mortgage markets. It was an issue that all of the world's major economies had to deal with. The PMS noted that the UK had the right frameworks in place to steer a course of stability through the current uncertainty. The PMS went on to say that in regards to the economy, the UK was on it's 60th consecutive quarter of growth, inflation was on target, employment was at a record high and interest rates were low by historical standards. The fundamentals of the economy were sound and the UK was well placed to withstand the kind of global uncertainty seen in the recent weeks and months. The PMS said that the country had a well established framework for monetary and fiscal policy and financial regulation that had withstood a number of global shocks over the past decade, such as the Russian and Asian crisis in the late 1990's, the dotcom boom and its subsequent fallout, recession in the US and elsewhere earlier on in the current decade and the tripling of oil prices. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Sir Alan Greenspan was still an advisor to the Prime Minister and what did the Prime Minister think of Mr Greenspan's comments in the days Daily Telegraph, the PMS replied that Mr Greenspan was an advisor to the Prime Minister. The PMS added that Mr Greenspan had given his views and had been extremely praising of the British economy and the management of it over the past decade. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Mr Greenspan had said there was a grim future ahead in terms of interest rates and the housing market and did the Prime Minister take a similar view, the PMS replied that Mr Greenspan's position had been caricatured somewhat and he was actually referring in the main to the United States and the global economy. The PMS reiterated that it was inevitable in the global economy that there would be periods of uncertainty, but due to the strength of the economy and the policy framework in place in Britain, the country had been able to withstand these periods.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government had given any thought to guarantee the entire deposits of people who had lodged with Northern Rock, the PMS replied that Alistair Darling had answered the question this morning and he had nothing further to add to that. The Chancellor was making clear that Northern Rock was solvent according to the FSA. Asked why anyone with &amp;pound;100,000 with Northern Rock would leave it there when the Government could only guarantee the first &amp;pound;32,000 that people deposited, the PMS replied that he was not a spokesperson for Northern Rock and all he could say was the FSA had been through the books and had stressed repeatedly that Northern Rock was solvent.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again if any guarantee would be given by the Government regarding customer's deposits, the PMS stated that the Government's position had not changed. The PMS reiterated that throughout, the Government had made clear, as the FSA had done, that Northern Rock was a solvent institution and the money was available.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Bank of England had not communicated the facts as well as they could have done over the last few days, the PMS said that such a matter was not for the Government to comment on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Chancellor had overruled the Governor over the decision of whether the financial facility should be made available, the PMS replied that the decision was one to be made by the Chancellor and it was made in full consultation and following advice from the Bank of England and the FSA. There were well-established procedures and these were now operating.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether there had been a change in policy by the Bank of England, the PMS replied that he didn't think there had been, but he was not a spokesperson for the Bank of England and people should address such questions to them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked repeatedly if the Government knew whether Northern Rock would continue to be solvent if every depositor withdrew their money, the PMS said that this was a question for the FSA. The Chancellor had made clear that the money was available for depositors and Northern Rock was a solvent institution. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Government would urge people not to take their money out of Northern Rock, the PMS replied that that was a matter for individuals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government had received any intonations from any other banks that they might need financial assistance, the PMS again referred to the Chancellors words, that Northern Rock was the only financial institution that had approached the Bank of England for assistance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government favoured any outcome to the situation, the PMS replied that the Government did not have a particular view on the subject. Asked what &amp;quot;solvent&amp;quot; meant, the PMS replied it normally meant an institution had enough assets to cover their liabilities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that David Cameron had said that the Government had been to blame for building up a culture of borrowing and debt, the PMS replied that it was not for him to respond specifically to any accusation made by the Leader of the Opposition. In general terms, what people had seen over the past decade was a significant increase in household assets. Total household assets were worth over &amp;pound;7.5 trillion now and household net wealth had increased by around 72% in real terms since the beginning of 1997. The PMS added that households were paying a smaller portion of their income in interest, total household sector interest payments were now 9.6% of disposable income, compared to a high of over 15% in 1990, the growth seen in total household debt was currently around the lowest seen in five years and the growth in unsecured consumer credit was the lowest in 13 years. The overall fundamentals of the economy were sound.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether people should fix the rate of their mortgage for a longer term, the PMS referred people back to the review conducted by Professor David Miles in 2003 on the subject of the Treasury. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-17 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-17 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-17 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-17 10:00:58" post_name="northern-rock-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Northern Rock" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4715" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/17/4715" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the United States had asked for British troops to increase their presence on the Iraqi border, the PMS said that along with other coalition partners, Britain had been tasked to train, mentor and support the Department for Border Enforcement, as part of the long-term aim to ensure Iraqi self-reliance. Strengthening the borders of Iraq was an enduring task that Britain had been addressing for some time and at the moment, British forces had been deployed in the border region, actively delivering support. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-17 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-17 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-17 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-17 10:00:57" post_name="iraq-8" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4716" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/18/4716" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) stated that the main items discussed were as follows; there was an update from the Chancellor on the situation regarding Northern Rock; an update from Hilary Benn regarding Foot and Mouth and an update from Des Browne on the situation in Iraq and a presentation from Lord Darzi on the reform of the National Health Service &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-18 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-18 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:58" post_name="cabinet-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Cabinet" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4717" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/18/4717" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The PMS stated that the Citizens' Jury event on health in the afternoon was in Birmingham. The PM, Alan Johnson and Lord Darzi were leading the biggest engagement in NHS history to discuss its future. There were nine simultaneous Citizens' Juries with regional Ministers at each venue linked by video, and involved more than one thousand members of the public, patients and staff. Lord Darzi presented to Cabinet that morning on the emerging findings from his review. The interim version of his report would be published in October with the final version expected next year. There would be particular focus at the event on improving accessibility for patients, particularly GP access; one of the issues that Lord Darzi was looking at was how other providers (third/voluntary or private sectors) could be freed up to enter the market. There would be a meeting next month with third sector providers and among those involved were Virgin, Boots, Lloyds Pharmacy, Care UK and Local Care Direct. Alan Johnson had asked Lord Darzi to include in his interim report (to be published in October) some concrete proposals on how to make Primary Care services more accessible to people in their daily lives as well as what more could be done to tackle infections in hospitals. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how the Citizen's juries were picked, the PMS said there were well established procedures for running the citizen's juries and the Department of Health would be happy to give details on how they were established. The intention was to ensure that these citizen's juries were adequately representative and he did not think that in relation to the other citizen's juries that had recently taken place, anyone had suggested that they weren't. There was a process for screening individuals to make sure that the people involved were genuinely cross representative.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-18 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-18 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:57" post_name="citizens-juries-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Citizen's Juries" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4718" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/18/4718" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The PMS stated that the Bank of England had this morning announced measures to inject an extra &amp;pound;4.4 billion of liquidity into the market. Financial authorities had continued to monitor the situation and remained in contact with Northern Rock. The Tri-Partite Committee of the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority (FSA) were meeting again that morning with the Chancellor, for an updated assessment of the situation. After the update to Cabinet this morning the Prime Minister and the Chancellor both reiterated two key points; firstly that the volatility seen in financial markets, which had been the origin of the events of the past few days relating to Northern Rock, was an international phenomenon originating in the United States and it was effecting all of the major economies in different ways; secondly that the question had been for the UK, how well placed was Britain to withstand shocks of this kind, and that because of the underlying strength of the economy and the framework for monetary, fiscal and regulatory policy put in place, the country was well placed to withstand such shocks just as it had withstood similar shocks over the past decade. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how the Bank of England had made the &amp;pound;4.4 billion available, the PMS replied that it was by the normal procedures for issuing liquidity into the money market. The PMS advised to check with them on the technical details. The PMS added that it was part of the Bank of England's ongoing open market operations and there had been an announcement that morning which the PMS offered to read out.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether this was a change of policy from what the Bank of England's Governor had raised in his memo last week, the PMS replied that the Governor had explained in his statement that in exceptional circumstances, where there was short term productivity effecting the functioning of the financial markets, temporary responses such as those were justified, but that it was best to go to the Bank of England as he was not a spokesman for them. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Government thought Alistair Darling's speech had come too late the PMS replied that the action that was taken by the Chancellor yesterday afternoon was a very decisive step that made it absolutely clear to everybody that there should be no ambiguity that the Government stood fully behind the deposits in Northern Rock and that nobody should be in any doubt about what that meant. The PMS continued by saying it was a matter for individuals as to what they chose to do with their own money and it was not for the Government to comment on that; it was clear that the Government stood behind the deposits of Northern Rock as the Chancellor said yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put again that the statement came late the PMS said that obviously this was a fast moving situation; there were continuous discussions between the FSA, the Treasury and the Bank of England on what the appropriate action should be, that a decision was taken during the course of yesterday afternoon, announced immediately, and had clearly had an impact.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister still had confidence in the Governor of the Bank of England, the PMS said the Prime Minister had full confidence in the Governor and had worked closely with him in his former role as Chancellor. The PMS added that the Prime Minister thought the Governor had done a very good job and was a highly regarded figure around the world.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister may be concerned that the public was losing confidence in Government promises, the PMS reiterated that decisive action was taken yesterday. It was up to the public to make their own decisions over what they wanted to do with their own money, but clearly the queues outside Northern Rock branches appeared to be less than what had been seen previously.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what had made the Government change it's mind on the guarantee of deposits, the PMS replied that it was a fast moving situation. The Chancellor, in consultation with the head of the FSA and the Governor of the Bank of England decided that further action was necessary during the course of yesterday afternoon and then took that action.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what prompted the decision, the PMS said that he did not want to ascribe it to any precise causes, but clearly the Chancellor felt it was necessary to make absolutely clear to people that there should be no ambiguity about the strength of the Government's commitment to Northern Rock. Put that it was the Chancellor's decision in consultation with the other bodies, the PMS confirmed that it had been the Chancellor's decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any plans by the Government to look at or review in any way, how deposits are insured in the future, the PMS replied that the Chief Executive of the FSA had been speaking about the subject that morning. The Treasury, the FSA and the Bank of England would want to look at all aspects of the protection system, including the compensation scheme and the range of tools available for dealing with this sort of situation. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In reply to the suggestion that the Government's attitude smacked of complacency, given that the public had been queuing up outside branches of Northern Rock, the PMS replied that it was not complacent at all. The PMS added that the Government was very vigilant to the risks. There was always instability in financial markets and this had been seen over the past decade. In the face of tripling oil prices, the dotcom boom, Asian and Russian crises in the late 1990's that tipped other countries into recession, the same had not occurred in Britain. The country had faced comparable shocks and yet still achieved 60 consecutive quarters of growth. The PMS said there were no grounds for complacency and the Government would always be vigilant to any risks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Tripartite system had worked, the PMS replied that there were particular issues relating to one institution and action was taken in order to deal with that. In general, the fundamentals in the economy remained sound.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked where the money was coming from to pay for the adjustments and any provisions, the PMS said it would be best to talk to the Treasury for the details. The first thing to emphasise was that Northern Rock was a solvent institution, the company did have collateral of it's own and also a large asset book in the form of it's mortgages. There were assets in Northern Rock and that was why the Government was able to make the guarantee it had. Furthermore, an assessment had to be made on the likelihood of the resources being pooled in the first place. The PMS added that in terms of the specifics, it was best to talk to the Treasury.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked repeatedly whether compensation would extend to any other bank in similar circumstances and was there any anxiety on the Government's part about having to do the same in any repeat scenario, the PMS replied that there were clearly particular circumstances relating to Northern Rock and that's why the decision had been taken. The Chancellor had made clear that similar arrangements would be put in place if another institution found itself in similar circumstances. The PMS said there had been no approaches from any other financial institution to the Bank of England to make use of their facilities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Governor of the Bank of England's reappointment was a formality, the PMS said it was a fixed term appointment and when that expired a decision would be taken about what happened subsequently. The PMS reiterated that the Prime Minister thought the Governor had done a very good job and was a very highly regarded figure around the world. Asked when the Governor's term of office was up, the PMS replied that he thought it was in 2008, but the Treasury could give a definitive date.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what advice the Prime Minister would give to someone considering getting on the property ladder for the first time, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister did not give out financial advice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked where the tripartite committee would be meeting that morning and what level of representation would be present from the FSA and the Bank of England, the PMS said the meeting would take place at the Treasury and the Deputy Governor would be attending for the Bank of England.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister thought the management of Northern Rock were entirely free of any blame for the institution's problems, the PMS replied that it would not be appropriate for the Prime Minister to comment on the management of individual companies and such matters were for the board of directors and the shareholders of that institution, as well as the regulatory authorities. Put that Northern Rock was now a company underwritten by the State, the PMS reiterated that it would be inappropriate to comment on the management of any individual company.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the FSA's compensation scheme was suspended, the PMS said that in the case of Northern Rock it was not necessary as there would never be a situation where members of the public would have to apply for compensation, as their deposits were guaranteed separately by the Bank of England. At the moment there was only one institution that was in such a situation and that was Northern Rock.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any consultation between the Prime Minister or the Chancellor and the Chief Executive of Northern Rock, the PMS replied that there had been discussions involving the Treasury, the Bank of England, the FSA and the company, but they had not involved the Prime Minister.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-18 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-18 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:56" post_name="northern-rock-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Northern Rock" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4719" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/18/4719" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any fresh contact with any members of the McCann family, the PMS said it would not be appropriate to comment on a matter that was subject to an ongoing police investigation. Asked about the Gambling Commission's report the following day and whether people should expect the Prime Minister to give his results on his review into super casinos soon, the PMS said the Prime Minister's views on super casino's were well known but said the Government would wait until the findings of the report were known before responding to it.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-18 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-18 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-18 10:00:55" post_name="misc-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4720" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/19/4720" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a reaction to the Gambling Commission's findings that seemed to show an increase in the number of problem addictions and an increase in new forms of gambling, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that DCMS had given the Government's reaction to this early today. Whilst the report showed that problem gambling only affected a small minority of people, it did remain a serious issue, and it was something that had to be addressed. DCMS were announcing today that they have asked the Gambling Commission to review the current voluntary arrangements for industry funding of gambling research, treatment, and public education.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for the Prime Minister's attitude towards super casinos, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister's attitude towards super casinos was well known, and had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for the Prime Minister's attitude towards smaller casinos, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister's view on smaller casinos had not changed either. Asked if the Prime Minister was still in favour of them, the PMS replied that there were no proposals to make any changes in relation to the other casinos.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we were not awaiting the outcome of a review on this, and when would this be due, the PMS replied that as the Prime Minister said in July, the issue in relation to super casinos is whether or not this is the most effective way of meeting our regeneration objectives, one of the original purposes. The Prime Minister was obviously sceptical about that. There was ongoing work in DCLG and DCMS to look at alternative regeneration packages, and that was due to report later in the autumn.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if this was purely a question of regeneration or did the Prime Minister think that gambling was somehow morally undesirable, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister thought that problem gambling was a serious issue and was something that had to be addressed, and that was also part of the consideration in relation to what he said on super casinos in July.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister told the Archbishop of Canterbury that he had a moral issue with this at their recent meeting, the PMS replied that he would not be commenting on private meetings between the Prime Minister and the Archbishop of Canterbury. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the work DCMS was doing was completely separate to today's report, or would today's report feed into it, and would it eventually effect the Prime Minister's decision, the PMS replied that there was a process ongoing in relation to the decision surrounding the super casino. Clearly today's report from the Gambling Commission was an important consideration in relation to the work that was ongoing. But nobody should be left in any doubt of what the Prime Minister's views were, as he expressed them fairly clearly in July.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-19 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-19 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:58" post_name="gambling-commission-report" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Gambling Commission Report" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4721" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/19/4721" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a reaction to the Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire saying that the population statistics were extremely unreliable, the PMS replied that the Home Office had been responding to this, there was a statement from Liam Byrne. Specifically in relation to the issue of flexibility of police funding to changes in population, one of the changes that had been introduced recently to police funding in 2006-07 when multiyear settlements for the police were introduced, was to ensure that they incorporated projection for future population so that we were not just taking historical trends in population in setting the police funding formula, we were also taking into account projections of future trends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Chief Constable sounded like she was saying that the whole underlying way that the statistics were compiled was wrong, and completely off the mark, the PMS replied that these were obviously matters for the Office of National Statistics (ONS) who were responsible for compiling these statistics and projections. They had a lot of expertise in these matters and they could probably give further information into how these are compiled. From the Government's point of view we had to use the best information that was available to us from the ONS, and we had changed the funding system so that it was now forward looking and not simply backward looking.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Chief Constable presented the figures in such a way that people critical of immigration could use them to highlight the link between crime and immigration, and asked if this was a link the Prime Minister agreed existed, and if he had any reaction to the way the figures had been presented, the PMS replied that the Chief Constable had given her views this morning, and he would not be commenting directly on that. It was important that this was kept in context. Total crime in Cambridgeshire was on a clear downward trend - the total recorded crime figures were 85,029 in 2002-03, 79,960 in 2003-04, 73,659 in 2004-05, 66,804 in 2005-06, and 69,146 in 2006-07. This showed there had been a clear downward trend, and this also applied to violent crime and crime such as burglary as well. This was the overall context that had to be kept in mind.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-19 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-19 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:57" post_name="population-statistics" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Population Statistics" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4722" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/19/4722" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the report in the Financial Times that the Prime Minister would make a statement on Iraq troop levels in 3 weeks time, the PMS replied that it was well known that the Prime Minister would give a statement to the House when the House returned in early October.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if he recognised the FT report, the PMS replied that the report looked fairly speculative to him, but the Prime Minister would make a statement on Iraq in early October, which he first announced at Camp David.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what was discussed in the Prime Minister's meeting with General Petraeus yesterday, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister met with General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, and that the meeting also involved the Foreign Secretary and the Chief of Defence Staff. They had a good meeting, and the Prime Minister was pleased to have the opportunity to hear directly from General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker to get their assessment of the security situation on the ground, and the progress being made by the coalition and the Iraqi authorities in Iraq.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to comment on the report that the Prime Minister was close to agreement with the US on the next phase, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister would update Parliament on the position relating to British Forces in Iraq, in early October. There was nothing to say in advance of that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the American Ambassador to Afghanistan was in London, and was this in any way linked to the discussions with Petraeus yesterday, the PMS replied that these were separate meetings. There were no plans for him to meet the Prime Minister.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-19 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-19 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:56" post_name="iraq-9" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4723" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/19/4723" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister would be coming up with an alternative to the African solution on Zimbabwe, and had there been any movement on this, the PMS replied that this was something that was kept under review. The situation in Zimbabwe was very serious. Life expectancy was down to 36, unemployment was at 80%, a quarter of the country was dependent on food aid, inflation was at 7,000% and set to double - this was a very serious situation, and one that that the Prime Minister has taken a close interest in. We would keep everyone informed as to when there was something to say on this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister watched the Newsnight report on Zimbabwe last week, and was he moved by it, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had many channels for finding out what the situation was in Zimbabwe including the BBC.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had been in touch with neighbouring countries such a South Africa, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had regular contact with countries in the Southern part of Africa including South Africa. He did not have to hand the last time the Prime Minister spoke to Mbeki, but they had certainly spoken at least once since he became Prime Minister, maybe more.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-19 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-19 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:55" post_name="zimbabwe" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Zimbabwe" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4724" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/19/4724" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any reaction to Russia suspending the EU Conventional Forces Treaty, the PMS replied that he had no specific reaction at this point.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-19 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-19 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:54" post_name="russia" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Russia" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4725" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/19/4725" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about a letter that Michel Platini had written to all heads of government regarding, among other issues, letting governing bodies in football control the number of foreign players, and did the Prime Minister had a view on this, the PMS replied that he was not sure that the Prime Minister had had a chance to examine the letter with the seriousness which it deserved. No doubt the Government would consider Monsieur Platini's proposals, and then consider its response.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-19 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-19 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-19 10:00:53" post_name="platini-letter" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Platini Letter" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4726" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/21/4726" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Government would consider changing the four laws that the Governor of the Bank of England had said had prevented him from doing his job, the Prime Minister's Spokesman told the assembled press that the Chancellor would be making a statement on the matter to the Houses of Parliament when they reconvened. Asked if the Government was sympathetic to the idea put forward by the Governor, that if he could have arranged a takeover of Northern Rock, or been able to carry out the actions of last resort covertly, a run on the bank could have been prevented, the PMS said that financial markets had become increasingly complex and fast moving and there was constant innovation. The PMS added that all of the Government's legislation was kept under constant review. The Governor had put forward a number of proposals, which were being looked at by the Treasury.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that it sounded like there would be new rules at some point, the PMS urged people to wait and see how the Treasury process progressed, and that this was an issue where, if there were changes made, they would have to be carried out correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether comments made in the press by the European Commissioner, stating that it was untrue that EU directives banned covert action, were true or not, the PMS said the Governor of the Bank of England was pressed on the issue yesterday and had dealt with it, so he would not be adding anything to that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the phrase &amp;quot;everything was kept under review,&amp;quot; included the tripartite system, the PMS said that the Governor was referring to the four specific issues raised yesterday. Asked outright if the tripartite system was under review, the PMS said that the issue for now was to focus on restoring stability in the financial system. When asked who held the responsibility of maintaining stability in the tripartite system, the PMS replied that the Governor of the Bank of England was asked the question yesterday and could give a more in-depth answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether Treasury staff had been fully focussed on the issue of financial stability over the past year, the PMS said that everyone at the Treasury had been fully focussed on their responsibilities.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-21 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-21 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:58" post_name="northern-rock-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Northern Rock" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4727" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/21/4727" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about a new British motto, the PMS said it would be an interesting debate to have, but the proposal that the Government set out at the time of the constitutional reform package in July was more to do with a statement of values, which would then feed into any possible British Bill of Rights. That was the consultation that was published in July. The PMS added that the Prime Minister had no difficulties with a debate on a British motto, but the proposals were more to do with a British statement of values, a process being taken forward by the Ministry of Justice, with a view to informing any potential British Bill of Rights, should a consensus build around that.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-21 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-21 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:57" post_name="national-motto" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="National Motto" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4728" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/21/4728" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for an update on the comments made by the Prime Minister yesterday, the PMS said he had dealt with the issue pretty comprehensively, but added the Prime Minister's position was clear. The Prime Minister did not intend to attend the EU-Africa summit. What the Government was doing, was setting out a number of positive measures to deal with the situation in Zimbabwe, including proposing to extend the sanctions regime, calling for a UN humanitarian envoy, calling for an EU envoy and increasing bilateral humanitarian assistance to Zimbabwe.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would accept another representative from Zimbabwe, as long as it wasn't Mugabe, the PMS confirmed that that was the position of the Government. However, it was a hypothetical position, as that was not the assumption that people seemed to be working on at the moment. The PMS added that the Prime Minister was not dictating to anyone else on the issue of who can and who can't go, he was just making his position clear that on the assumption that things worked out as suggested, he would not go.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to clarify whether this was the personal position of the Prime Minister and that other representatives of the Government could go in his place, the PMS reiterated that these were issues that would have to be considered nearer the time. The Prime Minister had set out his position very clearly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked repeatedly if there had been any diplomatic contact with other countries to persuade them to firstly not invite Mugabe and secondly not to go if he was to be invited, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was not in the business of telling other people whether they should or shouldn't attend meetings. All the Prime Minister was doing was setting out his position. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be a British presence of sorts at the summit, the PMS said again that the summit was several months away and it was an issue that needed to be considered over the weeks and months ahead, depending on what happened.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-21 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-21 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:56" post_name="zimbabwe-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Zimbabwe" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4729" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/21/4729" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Home Office was cooperating with the American investigation into BAE Systems and what exactly was it doing in respect to the specific requests it had had, the PMS replied that the Home Office had made it's position clear, that it was cooperating and it was a complex matter. There were a number of factors that needed to be taken into account and this was not an unprecedented length of time for the consideration of such a request. Put that it had received the request, it was dealing with it but it had yet to respond to it, the PMS replied that the Home Office had said that the request was receiving due consideration.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had given any consideration into reopening the Serious Fraud Office investigation here, the PMS said that the position of the Government on that had been made clear in the past and that position had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-21 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-21 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:55" post_name="bae-investigation" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="BAE Investigation" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4730" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/21/4730" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked why the Government wanted nurses to retire at 60 years of age, when the aim was to raise the retirement age to 68 eventually, the PMS said that there were two separate issues here: the age when people receive the state pension, and when public sector and private sector employees retire. The PMS said that the Government was not saying that people should work until they were 68; they were simply saying that the state pension age would be 68 and that's when people became entitled to it. In terms of when people actually retire, it was a contractual matter between them and their employers. So in relation to the public sector, there were well established contractual arrangements between employees and the Government about when people should retire, as would be the case with people who work for private companies.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-21 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-21 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-21 10:00:54" post_name="age-of-retirement" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Age of Retirement" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4731" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/24/4731" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's comments on Burma, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) referred to the Foreign Secretary's statement on Burma at the end of last week and said that the Government's position was that we deplored the continued repression of ordinary citizens by the Burmese regime and we were deeply concerned by reports of further acts of violence perpetrated this week by security officials against peaceful demonstrators.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-24 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-24 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-24 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-24 10:00:58" post_name="burma" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Burma" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4732" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/24/4732" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was going to be involved in any COBRA meetings about Foot and Mouth/Bluetongue whilst at Party Conference, the PMS replied that was something the Government kept under review; the Prime Minister spoke to Debbie Reynolds this morning for an update on the latest situation in relation to both Foot and Mouth and Bluetongue, so although he was in Bournemouth he was still being kept fully up to date with developments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there had been tests carried out to determine whether the Bluetongue incident was a single case or an outbreak, it was asked if there was any indication as to when we could expect the test results. The PMS replied that DEFRA had made clear they were not anticipating anything further by way of test results during the course of the day.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been some test results back and when it was likely to be clearer in terms of whether it was a single case or an outbreak, the PMS replied that DEFRA expected to have test results over the next few days but they were not anticipating any new results during the course of today.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-24 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-24 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-24 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-24 10:00:57" post_name="foot-and-mouthbluetongue" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foot and Mouth/Bluetongue" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4733" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/24/4733" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any response from the Zimbabwean Government or the African Union (AU) as to the Prime Minister's position, the PMS said that he was not the person to respond but that the Government had set out it's position quite clearly and there was nothing more to add to what the Prime Minister had said last week.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-24 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-24 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-24 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-24 10:00:56" post_name="zimbabwe-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Zimbabwe" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4734" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/01/4734" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman began by telling the assembled press that Professor John Beddington would succeed Sir David King as the Government's Chief Scientific Advisor and Head of the Government Office for Science, with effect from the 1 January 2008. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-01 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-01 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-01 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-01 10:00:58" post_name="government-chief-scientific-adviser" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Government Chief Scientific Adviser " post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4735" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/01/4735" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about a report on high-tech industry mentioned by the Prime Minister in his speech at the Reuters Headquarters, the PMS said that the report would be published on Friday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had any plans to visit the Queen this week, the PMS said that the Government did not normally comment in advance on when the Prime Minister would be meeting the Queen.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was confident that the credit turmoil was over, the PMS responded by saying that the Prime Minister had set out his views on the economy that morning. There was a more detailed speech by Alistair Darling, that set out more fully the Government's position and the PMS did not have anything to add to that.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-01 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-01 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-01 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-01 10:00:57" post_name="misc-6" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4736" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/02/4736" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that it had been repeatedly said that the Prime Minister would make an announcement about troop withdrawals from Iraq to Parliament first, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) said that the Prime Minister will be making a full statement to Parliament at the beginning of next week. What he had set out today followed his meeting with the Iraqi Prime Minister, at which the intention to withdraw troops in the numbers set out had been discussed. However, the statement at the beginning of next week will be a full statement setting out further detail and also looking at the broader picture more generally. The PMS said that understandably following the Prime Minister's meeting with the Iraqi Prime Minister, at which this very issue was discussed, it was appropriate that information should be shared in this way.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there were suggestions of 2000 troops being withdrawn and that General Petraeus was unhappy about this, the PMS referred to what the Prime Minister had said today, and referred people to his statement next week, as well as the reasons set out for the decisions on troop numbers, which followed on from his meetings with the Iraqi Prime Minister and others, including General Petraeus, today.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-02 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-02 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-02 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-02 10:00:58" post_name="iraq-10" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4737" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/02/4737" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the timings for Lord Darzi's NHS review and the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) had been brought forward, the PMS said that she did not believe that an announcement had been made about the timing of the CSR and, as the PMS had said yesterday, the Darzi review will be published on Thursday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when an announcement would be given on the Pre Budget Report (PBR) and CSR, the PMS replied that an announcement would be made shortly. Asked further, the PMS said she could not add anything more specific to her previous highly unspecific answer.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-02 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-02 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-02 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-02 10:00:57" post_name="nhs-reviewcsrpbr" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="NHS Review/CSR/PBR " post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4738" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/03/4738" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the CSR would definitely be on Monday, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that when we were in a position to make an announcement on the timing of the CSR, we would make that announcement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for any specific timings for expected announcements, in particular on Health and Iraq, the PMS replied that the interim Darzi Review would be taking place tomorrow, as he had announced on Monday. When we were in a position to make an announcement on issues relating to next week, we would make an announcement.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-03 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-03 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-03 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-03 10:00:58" post_name="announcements" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Announcements" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4739" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/03/4739" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that part of the constitutional reform package that the Prime Minister had laid out was that MPs would now vote on the dissolution of Parliament, and asked if this would take place ahead of the next election, the PMS replied that clearly there was a consultation on this underway at the moment, but he did not have anything further to add to that at this point&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-03 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-03 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-03 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-03 10:00:57" post_name="constitutional-reform" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Constitutional Reform" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4740" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/03/4740" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister discussed the role of troops after withdrawal with the Iraqi Prime Minister, possibly guarding roads on the borders, the PMS replied that obviously there was a general discussion about the role of British troops in Iraq going forward, not only with the Iraqi leadership but also with the British commanders on the ground. But he would not be getting in the detail of exactly what was discussed. In terms of any specific further announcements, the Prime Minister would be making a statement to Parliament next week.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-03 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-03 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-03 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-03 10:00:56" post_name="iraq-11" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4741" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/04/4741" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Spending Review question could be asked, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that it could be but he would give the same answer he gave yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the thinking was that it would be difficult to do both a statement on Iraq and the Spending Review on the same day, the PMS said that there would be a statement on Iraq early next week when Parliament returns, but that he was not in a position to make any announcement or give any guidance at this point on the timing of the Pre Budget Report (PBR) and Spending Review.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-04 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-04 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-04 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-04 10:00:58" post_name="spending-review" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Spending Review" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4742" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4742" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was the Government's position in principle, that it was right to try and see whether or not a covert rescue operation for Northern Rock could have been launched, after the Governor of the Bank of England had told the Select Committee he had lobbied strongly for such an operation, the PMS said that the evidence session in front of the Select Committee was still ongoing and that he did not want to comment on anything that the Governor was supposed to have said without having seen it directly. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Government's stance was on the principal of a covert operation, the PMS said that the Government's stance was that all these issues were discussed as part of the tripartite Commission; the Governor had expressed his views that morning and that for any further response it was best to go to the Treasury once the Governor's evidence session had concluded.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Alistair Darling had, three days after the failed rescue attempt, been quoted in the Guardian suggesting market intervention was not appropriate, whilst knowing of a secret attempt to launch a rescue operation, the PMS said that it was best to talk to the Treasury about such matters. Such issues were discussed in a proper way as part of the tripartite discussions and they were the right procedures to go through.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister still thought that the tripartite way of doing things was the best way forward, when it looked like different people knew different parts of the problem but were not communicating properly, the PMS said there would be plenty of time to consider the issues, but that the important issue for now was to focus on restoring stability in the financial system and that was why the tripartite authorities had acted in the way they had.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had at any time overruled the Chancellor and the Governor of the Bank of England or if the Prime Minister and the Chancellor had ever overruled the Governor, the PMS replied that the Governor and the Bank of England had answered that question and they had made it clear that there was no political pressure. As the Governor had said, the operation carried out was designed in the Bank.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Governor of the Bank of England said he would be happy to see any exchange of letters between himself and the Chancellor, or the Prime Minister released and asked if they were to be released, the PMS said the Treasury expected the letters to be published, but people would have to check with them exactly when that would be.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any ongoing review of how everything worked, the PMS said that the issue for now was to focus on restored stability in the financial system and that was what the relevant authorities were devoting their time and attention to.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was to be a review in the future, the PMS repeated that the issue for now was focusing on restoring stability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Chairman of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) had said a few days ago that the system of deposits and insurance was going to be looked at, the PMS concurred and said that the Chairman had said that specific scheme would be looked at.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was a tripartite discussion about Northern Rock being in trouble on 14th August 2007 and that the Government were slow in reacting to what was an increasingly menacing situation, the PMS said that the Governor of the Bank of England was being asked those questions as he spoke and since the Bank, along with the Treasury and the FSA, were the key players in this, it was best to let them explain the actions taken and the rationale for them. As soon as it became apparent that action needed to be taken to stop the run on Northern Rock, decisive action was taken on Monday evening, and that quite clearly had the desired effect. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had full confidence in the Governor of the Bank of England when he was against putting a lot of money into the market and whether the Prime Minister still had confidence in the Governor, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had full confidence in the Governor of the Bank of England and had always had full confidence in him.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="northern-rock-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Northern Rock" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4743" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4743" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to clarify whether the Prime Minister had said he would not attend if Robert Mugabe was attending, or whether he would not attend if any representative of Robert Mugabe's regime/government was present, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was saying that the assumption was that Robert Mugabe would be attending and on that basis he would not attend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be different if Robert Mugabe sent a deputy or a Minister for Culture, or any other representative, the PMS said that clearly that would be a different circumstance. The issue in relation to President Mugabe was that the Government did not want to divert attention from the important issues that the EU-Africa Summit needed to address.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was only Robert Mugabe personally who would be seen as a diversion, the PMS said yes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was the Prime Minister's plan to attend the summit, when in similar summits it was only the Presidency and the Commission who were expected to attend, the PMS said that the Prime Minister would have been expected to attend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had consultations with other leaders in the European Union (EU) or African Union (AU) before taking the step on Zimbabwe, the PMS said there had been discussions with other members of the EU.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if any other EU countries such as Germany would follow suit, the PMS said it was a question for them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the thinking had changed on public interventions in Zimbabwe by the UK, the PMS said that what the Prime Minister was setting out in his article in the Independent was all of the positive action that the Government was taking, to deal with the situation in Zimbabwe; the Prime Minister called for an EU envoy to deal with humanitarian issues on Zimbabwe; the Prime Minister said that the UK will raise the issue of Zimbabwe at the UN Security Council meeting next week, with a proposal for a UN envoy on Zimbabwe; he raised the possibility of extending the sanctions that related to senior members of the Zanu PF regime; he stressed that he was very supportive of the efforts of President Mbeki through the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and AU process and that the Government were announcing today &amp;pound;8 million of extra of humanitarian support. The Government set out a whole series of positive steps today in order to deal with the situation in Zimbabwe and to deal with the humanitarian crisis in the country.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was an acceptance that the quiet diplomacy track had not had the desired effect and that it was time to be more public about it, the PMS said that the Prime Minister did not want there to be any lingering uncertainty about the issue of his attendance at the EU-Africa Summit, but he also wanted to set out all the positive steps that the Government were taking.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the current ban on Mugabe would prevent him from attending, the PMS said that in order for Mugabe to attend the EU would have to temporarily grant exemption to the visa ban. Asked if it had been the assumption that that could happen, the PMS said that it appeared to be the assumption; the Prime Minister was clear that the assumption was President Mugabe was attending and on that basis he would not attend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any response from the AU as presumably it was up to them to choose their delegation, the PMS said that the Government had not had any response that he was aware of that morning. The PMS went on to say that the Government wanted the EU-Africa Summit to be a success and work with the AU to deal with the issues in Zimbabwe and elsewhere in Africa.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="eu-africa-summit" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="EU-Africa Summit" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4744" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4744" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister believed that Jose Mourinho's talents could be used to help Raith Rovers, the PMS replied that Raith Rovers were currently top of their division in Scottish football under the management of John McGlynn. The PMS went on to say that the Prime Minister was a football fan and somebody who enjoyed watching Premiership games, so he knew Mourinho had a fantastic record of success, that he had made a significant contribution to British football in a short period of time and that he was also one of the great characters of the game. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the PM would like to see Mourinho stay in the Premiership, the PMS said that it was a matter for Mr Mourinho and the boards of Premiership clubs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if he thought John Reid's appointment at Celtic Football Club was a good thing for Scottish football, the PMS said that he was sure the Prime Minister thought John Reid had a great contribution to make as Chairman of Celtic Football Club. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="football" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Football" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4745" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/20/4745" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was the Government's position in principle, that it was right to try and see whether or not a covert rescue operation for Northern Rock could have been launched, after the Governor of the Bank of England had told the Select Committee he had lobbied strongly for such an operation, the PMS said that the evidence session in front of the Select Committee was still ongoing and that he did not want to comment on anything that the Governor was supposed to have said without having seen it directly. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Government's stance was on the principal of a covert operation, the PMS said that the Government's stance was that all these issues were discussed as part of the tripartite Commission; the Governor had expressed his views that morning and that for any further response it was best to go to the Treasury once the Governor's evidence session had concluded.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Alistair Darling had, three days after the failed rescue attempt, been quoted in the Guardian suggesting market intervention was not appropriate, whilst knowing of a secret attempt to launch a rescue operation, the PMS said that it was best to talk to the Treasury about such matters. Such issues were discussed in a proper way as part of the tripartite discussions and they were the right procedures to go through.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister still thought that the tripartite way of doing things was the best way forward, when it looked like different people knew different parts of the problem but were not communicating properly, the PMS said there would be plenty of time to consider the issues, but that the important issue for now was to focus on restoring stability in the financial system and that was why the tripartite authorities had acted in the way they had.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had at any time overruled the Chancellor and the Governor of the Bank of England or if the Prime Minister and the Chancellor had ever overruled the Governor, the PMS replied that the Governor and the Bank of England had answered that question and they had made it clear that there was no political pressure. As the Governor had said, the operation carried out was designed in the Bank.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Governor of the Bank of England said he would be happy to see any exchange of letters between himself and the Chancellor, or the Prime Minister released and asked if they were to be released, the PMS said the Treasury expected the letters to be published, but people would have to check with them exactly when that would be.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any ongoing review of how everything worked, the PMS said that the issue for now was to focus on restored stability in the financial system and that was what the relevant authorities were devoting their time and attention to.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was to be a review in the future, the PMS repeated that the issue for now was focusing on restoring stability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Chairman of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) had said a few days ago that the system of deposits and insurance was going to be looked at, the PMS concurred and said that the Chairman had said that specific scheme would be looked at.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was a tripartite discussion about Northern Rock being in trouble on 14th August 2007 and that the Government were slow in reacting to what was an increasingly menacing situation, the PMS said that the Governor of the Bank of England was being asked those questions as he spoke and since the Bank, along with the Treasury and the FSA, were the key players in this, it was best to let them explain the actions taken and the rationale for them. As soon as it became apparent that action needed to be taken to stop the run on Northern Rock, decisive action was taken on Monday evening, and that quite clearly had the desired effect. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had full confidence in the Governor of the Bank of England when he was against putting a lot of money into the market and whether the Prime Minister still had confidence in the Governor, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had full confidence in the Governor of the Bank of England and had always had full confidence in him.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-20 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-09-20 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-20 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-20 10:00:58" post_name="northern-rock-6" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Northern Rock" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4746" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/20/4746" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to clarify whether the Prime Minister had said he would not attend if Robert Mugabe was attending, or whether he would not attend if any representative of Robert Mugabe's regime/government was present, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was saying that the assumption was that Robert Mugabe would be attending and on that basis he would not attend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be different if Robert Mugabe sent a deputy or a Minister for Culture, or any other representative, the PMS said that clearly that would be a different circumstance. The issue in relation to President Mugabe was that the Government did not want to divert attention from the important issues that the EU-Africa Summit needed to address.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was only Robert Mugabe personally who would be seen as a diversion, the PMS said yes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was the Prime Minister's plan to attend the summit, when in similar summits it was only the Presidency and the Commission who were expected to attend, the PMS said that the Prime Minister would have been expected to attend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had consultations with other leaders in the European Union (EU) or African Union (AU) before taking the step on Zimbabwe, the PMS said there had been discussions with other members of the EU.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if any other EU countries such as Germany would follow suit, the PMS said it was a question for them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the thinking had changed on public interventions in Zimbabwe by the UK, the PMS said that what the Prime Minister was setting out in his article in the Independent was all of the positive action that the Government was taking, to deal with the situation in Zimbabwe; the Prime Minister called for an EU envoy to deal with humanitarian issues on Zimbabwe; the Prime Minister said that the UK will raise the issue of Zimbabwe at the UN Security Council meeting next week, with a proposal for a UN envoy on Zimbabwe; he raised the possibility of extending the sanctions that related to senior members of the Zanu PF regime; he stressed that he was very supportive of the efforts of President Mbeki through the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and AU process and that the Government were announcing today &amp;pound;8 million of extra of humanitarian support. The Government set out a whole series of positive steps today in order to deal with the situation in Zimbabwe and to deal with the humanitarian crisis in the country.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was an acceptance that the quiet diplomacy track had not had the desired effect and that it was time to be more public about it, the PMS said that the Prime Minister did not want there to be any lingering uncertainty about the issue of his attendance at the EU-Africa Summit, but he also wanted to set out all the positive steps that the Government were taking.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the current ban on Mugabe would prevent him from attending, the PMS said that in order for Mugabe to attend the EU would have to temporarily grant exemption to the visa ban. Asked if it had been the assumption that that could happen, the PMS said that it appeared to be the assumption; the Prime Minister was clear that the assumption was President Mugabe was attending and on that basis he would not attend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any response from the AU as presumably it was up to them to choose their delegation, the PMS said that the Government had not had any response that he was aware of that morning. The PMS went on to say that the Government wanted the EU-Africa Summit to be a success and work with the AU to deal with the issues in Zimbabwe and elsewhere in Africa.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-20 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-09-20 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-20 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-20 10:00:57" post_name="eu-africa-summit-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="EU-Africa Summit" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4747" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/09/20/4747" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister believed that Jose Mourinho's talents could be used to help Raith Rovers, the PMS replied that Raith Rovers were currently top of their division in Scottish football under the management of John McGlynn. The PMS went on to say that the Prime Minister was a football fan and somebody who enjoyed watching Premiership games, so he knew Mourinho had a fantastic record of success, that he had made a significant contribution to British football in a short period of time and that he was also one of the great characters of the game. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the PM would like to see Mourinho stay in the Premiership, the PMS said that it was a matter for Mr Mourinho and the boards of Premiership clubs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if he thought John Reid's appointment at Celtic Football Club was a good thing for Scottish football, the PMS said that he was sure the Prime Minister thought John Reid had a great contribution to make as Chairman of Celtic Football Club. &lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-09-20 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-09-20 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-09-20 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-09-20 10:00:56" post_name="football-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Football" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4748" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/05/4748" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman began by telling the assembled press that the Prime Minister would be making his Statement on Iraq to the House on Monday 8th October at 3:30pm. The Chancellor would be making his CSR/PBR Statement to the House on Tuesday 9th October at the same time.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-05 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-05 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-05 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-05 10:00:58" post_name="statement-on-iraq" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Statement on Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4749" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/05/4749" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister would be prepared to allow an Opposition spokesman to hold pre-election talks with a senior civil servant, the PMS told the assembled press that the Prime Minister was considering that request and would reply at an appropriate time. Asked if that would be today, the PMS said that it would be at a time at which the Prime Minister felt as though it would be appropriate to respond.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-05 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-05 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-05 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-05 10:00:57" post_name="pre-election-talks" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Pre-Election Talks" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4750" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/05/4750" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Pre-Budget Review (PBR) and Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) would be released as one statement the PMS said that it would be. As the Chancellor set out in July this year, the two would be set out at the same time and quoting Former Chief Secretary to the Treasury Stephen Timms, speaking in January 2007, said: &amp;quot;the spending review needs really to be by October in order that department's have the details they need for putting in place their arrangements for the new financial year.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the PBR and the CSR were being delivered against a less than optimistic financial background and therefore people might view with scepticism any increases in public spending, the PMS replied that the Chancellor would be setting out the spending plans in Parliament. A fiscal framework was in place that built in a degree of caution and prudence, in order to ensure the Government could meet their commitments. The PMS said that the Chancellor had made the point that these were testing times in the world economy at the moment, especially given what had been happening in the United States as part of the fallout from the events in the credit markets.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if he would accept the construct that the Chancellor was shading down growth expectation, the PMS said that he did not want to pre-empt the Chancellor's statement to Parliament next week.&lt;/p&gt;" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-05 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-05 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-05 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-05 10:00:56" post_name="pbr-and-csr" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="PBR and CSR" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4751" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/08/4751" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked when troop numbers would reach a figure of 4500, the Prime Minister's Spokesman told the assembled press that this would happen at PIC. The Prime Minister of Iraq had said that he expected that to happen by December and that was consistent with the Government's expectation. Asked when the 500 logistics and support personnel would be deployed, the PMS replied that it was something that would happen over a period of time and there was no exact timetable for it that he was aware of. As was clear from the numbers, this would be a progressive reduction in British troop levels and alongside that, there would be 500 troops moving to a base outside of Iraq.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the 500 were not currently in theatre, the PMS said that details should be checked with the Ministry of Defence (MOD) but his understanding was that since there were troops constantly going in and coming out, it was not as simple as identifying one individual soldier and moving them somewhere else.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that after a further 1500 troops were taken out of Iraq in the spring, the remainder would be policing the Iran-Iraq border and was it at that point that an irreversible decision was made as to whether troops could go back into Basra, the PMS said that in the second stage of overwatch, the main difference was that troops would have less of a capacity to re-intervene. The PMS went on to say that this would have some implications for the number of troops involved in the security of supply routes and the protection of the Iran-Iraq border, but this would be something that would have to be discussed nearer the time. In terms of moving to the second stage, the main difference was the capacity for reintervention. The PMS reiterated that there may be some ongoing responsibilities for security of supply routes, but the detail of that would be specified and agreed nearer the time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to be clear on troop numbers and if by next spring there would be a reduction to around 2500 troops, plus the 500 logistics personnel, the PMS confirmed there would be 2500 troops in Iraq with 3000 overall in the region.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how many troops would be in the region at Christmas, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had made very clear when he had visited Iraq, that the number of troops in Iraq would be 4500.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any prospect long-term, of going below 3000 troops in the region and was the issue being driven at all by the need for more man-power in Afghanistan, the PMS replied that Iraq was clearly separate from any decision in relation to Afghanistan. In terms of what would happen beyond the spring, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had made it clear that there would be a further decision about the next phase made then.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were troops who thought they were going to Iraq but would now not be going, the PMS said that people would have to check with the MOD on this issue.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the figure of 500 for interpreters was roughly right, the PMS said that there had been figures quoted in that sort of region and he did not want to put a precise figure on it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the Government was pre-announcing something that was entirely dependent on the situation on the ground, the PMS replied that the Government had more certainty now of what conditions on the ground might be. The Iraqi Prime Minister had made a statement saying the Iraqi Government would take responsibility for security in Basra by December and this was consistent with the Government's expectation. The UK had been building up and training the numbers of Iraqi security forces, to the extent that an extra 13,000 Iraqi army forces and 15,000 police officers had been trained up in the region. The PMS reiterated that the Government could say with a lot more certainty what the expectations were over the next six months.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the PMS could comment on reports that there was another battle group going out to Afghanistan at almost the same time as troops coming back from Iraq, the PMS said that he did not have any information on the reports and people should check with the MOD.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that a complete draw-down was being pencilled in for the spring, as it was not possible to have less than 2500 troops in Iraq, the PMS said he did not want to pre-empt any decision made in the spring. Asked again if the next phase after 2500 troops in Iraq was complete draw-down, the PMS replied that a decision would be made in the spring and that may or may not have implications for troop numbers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if he thought there would be 2500 British troops in Iraq by Christmas 2008, the PMS said he did not want to get into the business of speculating beyond anything that was in the statement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how the Government could say with any confidence what the troop numbers would be next spring when the conditions were unknown, the PMS said that announcements on troop levels in Iraq had always happened step-by-step. What was being set out was what the Government expected to happen to troop levels over the next six months. In six months time there would be a further assessment, and a further decision would be taken at that point.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Britain could have a viable force below 2500 troops, the PMS replied that the advice from the military was that the number of troops in Iraq would include provisions to protect them. A viable force below 2500 would depend on circumstances, but the Government would be guided by military advice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how many people would be allowed to resettle in the UK, the PMS said he did not know the exact number. Asked how people would be vetted, as presumably there was a possibility of people making fraudulent claims of having worked for the British forces, the PMS replied that there would be a more detailed statement made by the Foreign Office later this week as the Prime Minister had said today. Asked if the figure would include the families of people who had worked for the British forces or not, the PMS said that people would be allowed to make an application on behalf of themselves and their families.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13456.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-08 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-08 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-08 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-08 10:00:58" post_name="iraq-12" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4752" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/08/4752" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister would make an intervention in the postal strike, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was making a general point that the Post Office was an organisation that received a significant financial subsidy from the taxpayer and therefore people would expect to have their post delivered on time. The PMS went on to say that the Prime Minister's comments were made in terms of financial support that the Government provided for the Post Office. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13456.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-08 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-08 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-08 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-08 10:00:57" post_name="postal-strike" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Postal Strike" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4753" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/09/4753" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by relaying what the Chancellor told Cabinet this morning. The Chancellor said that Britain's economy remained strong and well positioned to deal with increased global economic uncertainty. He emphasised that the Government's first priority would always be maintaining economic stability and sound public finances and that the Government would therefore take no risks with the economy or make unfunded spending or tax commitments. The Chancellor went on to say that the tough economic decisions the Government had taken meant that the country was in a strong position to continue to invest in key priorities like health, education, security and transport. He said that the spending plans and reforms set out in today's Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) would help to ensure that all these public services would continue to meet the aspirations of the British people.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked which departments had been told their CSR outcomes already, the PMS said that, from memory, the Department for Children, Schools and Families, the Ministry of Defence, HM Treasury, Department for Work and Pensions, HM Revenue and Customs and the Home Office had all been told their settlement. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to elaborate on what the Chancellor meant when he said the Government had taken 'tough economic decisions', the PMS said that the Government had taken tough economic decisions, most recently on public sector pay, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what discussions there had been at Cabinet that morning about the CSR/PBR, the PMS said there had been a discussion around some of the more detailed proposals on the Pre-Budget Report (PBR), which obviously he was not able to pre-empt ahead of the statement, but it was a good discussion; the mood in Cabinet was business-like and upbeat.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any talk at Cabinet about inheritance tax, the PMS replied that it would be inappropriate for him to go into the detail of what exactly was discussed at Cabinet, as he did not want to pre-empt anything the Chancellor might say in his statement later today.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be any words from the Prime Minister regarding PBR, the PMS said no.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13462.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-09 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-09 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:58" post_name="csrpbr" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="CSR/PBR" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4754" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/09/4754" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any other discussions in Cabinet about recent events i.e. non-election, the PMS said that the discussion at Cabinet was about Government business; having dealt with Parliamentary business they then went on to discuss the PBR.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Europe&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any discussions in Cabinet on forthcoming business re Europe, the PMS said that obviously there had been discussions about Europe at previous Cabinets but that there was no substantive discussion about Europe this morning. He went on to say that with regard to Parliamentary business, what normally would happen was that the Chief Whip would set out what the Parliamentary votes and whipping would be for the week ahead.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the treaty was the same as the constitution and asked if it had come up in discussion at Cabinet, the PMS said that it was not discussed this morning. He went on to say that the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee had made clear on the radio that what the report actually said was &amp;quot;what mattered was whether the new treaty produced an effect which was substantially equivalent to the Constitutional Treaty; the Committee considered that for those countries which had not requested derogations or opt-outs from the full range of agreements in the Treaty, i.e. not including the UK, it does&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee had also said that the red lines could not be guarded, the PMS said the Prime Minister had made very clear yesterday in the press conference, his determination to secure those red lines. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if what the Prime Minister had said yesterday was decided before the Committee had come up with its conclusion, the PMS said what the Prime Minister had said yesterday still applied today; we set out our red lines; we had a number of opt-outs which derived from those red lines that meant that the Treaty as it would apply to the UK was different to the Treaty as it applied to other countries. Therefore, simply comparing one treaty with another treaty was not the right comparison in terms of what that meant for the UK because the treaty that applied to other countries was not the treaty that applied to the UK. The Prime Minister had made very clear that he was determined that we achieve our red lines and he also said yesterday that if we did not achieve them there would either be a British veto or a referendum. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any information regarding non-domicile residents in the CSR, the PMS said that it was best to wait for the statement this afternoon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken in Cabinet on PBR, the PMS said he had but that he would not be briefing on words from the Prime Minister.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13462.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-09 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-09 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:57" post_name="cabinet-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Cabinet" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4755" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/09/4755" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked repeatedly if the Prime Minister had replied to David Cameron's letter about meeting civil servants, the PMS explained, as he had said at the time, that that issue would be dealt with at an appropriate time. No reply had been sent.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13462.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-09 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-09 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:56" post_name="letter-from-david-cameron" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Letter from David Cameron" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4756" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/09/4756" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what the hospital visit that morning had involved, the PMS said that the purpose of visiting the University College London Hospital was to visit the Institute of Nuclear Medicine; the Prime Minister and Chancellor had had a short briefing and were shown the work of that institute including the first PETCT scanner in the UK, which could vastly reduce diagnosis times in cardiac and cancer problems.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13462.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-09 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-09 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:55" post_name="hospital-visit-with-alistair-darling" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Hospital Visit with Alistair Darling" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4757" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/09/4757" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister meant yesterday in regards to the postal strike when he said that the Government would not 'stand idly by', the PMS said that the Prime Minister's words should speak for themselves; this was an organisation that received a significant amount of financial subsidy from the Government/tax payer, and that it was only right that the public should expect to have their post delivered. Therefore, in the Prime Minister's view, this strike was a serious matter and he did not see any reason why this strike should be taking place. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any plans to directly intervene in the talks, the PMS said that at present the Government continued to urge the Post Office and the union side to reach a conclusion as soon as possible in order to minimise public disruption. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In reference to the substantial amount of subsidy, it was asked if this was a veiled threat from the Government that it would get involved, the PMS said that it was not a veiled threat about anything; he was just referring back to what the Prime Minister had said yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Royal Mail still had the monopoly on the delivering of letters up to a certain weight and class, the PMS said that the details of that should be checked with BERR. He went on to say that there had been some liberalisation in the market from 1 January this year.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13462.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-09 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-09 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:54" post_name="postal-strike-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Postal Strike" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4758" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/09/4758" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any words of support from ministers at Cabinet this morning regarding the weekend's events, the PMS said that was a political issue and that there had been PLP yesterday, which was not for him to brief on. However, as he said earlier, the mood at Cabinet this morning was business-like, determined and upbeat; they were focusing on the business of Government and the PBR.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13462.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-09 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-09 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-09 10:00:53" post_name="misc-7" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4759" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/10/4759" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister's meeting with Barroso was a routine meeting, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) said yes; Barroso was coming to see the Prime Minister ahead of the Summit and they would be discussing issues relating to next week's Summit. The Prime Minister will be reiterating the necessity of ensuring the UK secures its red lines and they will also have a wider discussion about other important issues in Europe, such as how we respond to the globalisation agenda; where we are on the trade talks and how we take things forward on climate change.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13471.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-10 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-10 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:58" post_name="barroso-meeting" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Barroso Meeting" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4760" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/10/4760" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the support the Government was prepared to give was detailed and what issues the Prime Minister had to look at re Northern Rock, the PMS said it would be more specific but that people should speak to the Treasury.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13471.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-10 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-10 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:57" post_name="chancellors-statement-re-northern-rock" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Chancellor's Statement RE Northern Rock" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4761" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/10/4761" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be attending the rugby on Saturday, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that the Prime Minister had no plans to go to the rugby.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for more details on the Health and Social Care Statement, the PMS replied that it would be setting out more of the detail of the health settlement that was announced yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister was doing to prepare for PMQs today, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was preparing in the normal way.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13472.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-10 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-10 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:58" post_name="misc-8" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4762" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/10/4762" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what topics would be discussed at the meeting with the Danish Prime Minister, the PMS replied that it would be a general discussion of the main issues relating to European matters at the moment, in particular ahead of next week's meeting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how he saw next week's meeting panning out, and would real work be taking place, or was it merely a &amp;quot;touch base&amp;quot; summit, the PMS replied that we did expect real work to take place at the Summit. He expected there would be other meetings with European leaders in the week ahead in advance of the Summit, but he would keep Lobby posted.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13472.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-10 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-10 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:57" post_name="danish-pm" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Danish PM" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4763" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/10/4763" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister and the Chancellor had given a particularly stingy settlement for Scotland out of spite towards Alex Salmond, the PMS replied that this was not the case.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Asked what they thought of this accusation, the Treasury Spokesman replied that the Scottish settlement was determined under the Barnett Formula which has existed for nearly 30 years now, and had been applied in the normal way.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was a pretty ferocious reaction in the Financial Times today, and asked what would the Government say to the charge that the one group missed was the fat cats, and that just about every other British business had been clobbered, the Treasury Spokesman replied that the main reform had been made to Capital Gains Tax where we were quite clear yesterday that was a simplification. Any simplification involved winners and losers, but we now had a single low rate Capital Gains Tax at 18%, one of the lowest of all our major competitors. We had stripped away all of the complexity that was there before with the number of different rates, and we thought that it was still a very competitive rate for British business, but it also offered us the advantage of greater simplicity and a more stable system going forward.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked on Inheritance Tax if we now had figures of how many people currently used nil rate discretionary trusts to gain the benefit of the equivalent to what had now been established, the Treasury Spokesman replied that we did not have any published figures on this, and that these would not necessarily be know because the nature of tax planning is that the Tax Authorities do not always know about it in advance. But we were confident of the costing. If we had not made changes to the Inheritance Tax we would have updated our forecast, and that forecast always reflected as it did for every tax, the actual instance of payments. The costing for the &amp;pound;1.4billion reflected the additional tax that we were not expecting to get because there would be universal access to the double allowance. The Treasury spokesman also pointed out that this kind of tax planning did you no good if you were already a widow or widower. The PBR inheritance tax measure was retrospective and would apply to the 3 million widows and widowers who were currently alive.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that over the last couple of years the Treasury had had many representations made on Inheritance Tax, and the response had always been that there was only a very small number of people affected by it, and asked why had we suddenly decided to do something about it, the Treasury Spokesman replied that the Government had always been clear that it had wanted action on Inheritance Tax. That was why, for example, the previous Chancellor, now Prime Minister, announced in the last Budget over-indexation of the threshold taking it up to &amp;pound;350,000. So there was nothing new about us wanting to act, at this PBR we were in a position to take action of this scale.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Opposition were claiming that there had been a &amp;pound;2billion raid on the pensions system as the capping of the second state pension had been brought forward to 2009, and there was no indication that the link to earnings would happen before 2014, and asked if this was a fair assessment, the Treasury Spokesman replied that these were essentially technical changes in the state second pension that we set out fully what we were intending to do with the Pensions White Paper last year. This implemented Turner's package of reforms, and a key part of these reforms was the recommendation that the state second pension needed to move to just a flat rate rather than earnings related. That would happen in 2013 as a result of these proposals.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13472.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-10 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-10 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-10 10:00:56" post_name="pre-budget-report" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Pre-Budget Report" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4764" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/11/4764" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what had happened to the letter David Miliband had promised about the red lines, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) referred the journalist to the Foreign Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Prime Minister's position on a referendum, and whether it was always going to be approved or vetoed, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister's position had been entirely consistent. On Monday he was simply making the point that we would veto a treaty that did not meet our red lines, as he made very clear today. In principal, in the Prime Minister's view, there would be a case for a referendum if the red lines were not met. But it was his intention to veto any treaty that did not secure our red lines.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that this meant that the referendum was a technical, almost symbolic threat, the PMS replied that as the Prime Minister had said this morning, if we accepted the Amending Treaty, in other words if we met all our red lines, then we would not need to put forward to the British people the idea that there should be a referendum because we had achieved the British national interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that what the Prime Minister did not say was that if we did not meet the red lines then we wouldn't sign it anyway, so no need for a referendum, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was very explicit about this too.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was ever the option of a referendum on an unsatisfactory result, the PMS replied that the position on this had been made very clear by the Prime Minister earlier today.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the European Scrutiny Committee had written to the Foreign Secretary to say that now they had had a chance to look at the redrafted documents, they were now even less happy than before, the PMS replied that he had not seen the letter the journalist was referring to.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be a formal signing at the Summit next week, the PMS replied that there would not be.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what processes would be gone through next week, the PMS replied that his understanding of the process, and the Foreign Office could give chapter and verse on this, was that once the Treaty was agreed it then had to be translated into all of the different languages, and that would obviously take a period of time. The Treaty would then subsequently be signed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how much of the Summit would be taken up by this issue, the PMS replied that this would be very difficult to predict, best to wait until next week. As the Prime Minister and President Barroso made clear this morning, it was certainly their intention to ensure that we were able to discuss a much wider set of issues than just institutional reform, that were of crucial importance to the future of Europe. Like how we responded to globalization, like taking forward the climate change agenda, and like how we could reinvigorate the trade talks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was right to interpret President Barroso's comments this morning that he was relatively relaxed, that we would get our red lines, and that it was already a done deal, the PMS replied that he wouldn't want to interpret President Barroso's words.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister meant to suggest that there would be no British representation at all at this December's EU-Africa Summit, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister answered this question on Monday and said that there would be no senior Minister attending - that position had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we would be sending a Minister of State, the PMS replied that the journalist should wait and see.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13479.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-11 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-11 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-11 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-11 15:45:58" post_name="european-union" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="European Union" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4765" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/11/4765" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what would happen in the second phase of Overwatch and whether or not this was something the Prime Minister and Robert Gates would discuss, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) said, without going into specifics, that the Government's approach to Iraq had been characterised by a process of full consultation with the US Administration and that was something which would continue.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was right to assume that British decisions had been taken with the full consent of the US and the Coalition, the PMS said that there had been full consultation with the US and other key allies and this was the position the Prime Minister had set out to the House of Commons on Monday.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13477.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-11 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-11 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:58" post_name="pm-meeting-with-us-defence-secretary" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="PM Meeting with US Defence Secretary" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4766" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/11/4766" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that if the Prime Minister did not like what was concluded in the talks at Lisbon, or later Brussels, presumably that would mean that there was no need for a referendum, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had made his position clear at the press conference on Monday and that there was nothing more to add.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put repeatedly that it was inconceivable that the Prime Minister would have a referendum on a treaty he had not signed and that there was no scenario in which the Prime Minister would hold a referendum, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had made clear that the Government would either veto the Treaty (in which the Prime Minister would not sign it), or there would be a referendum.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked repeatedly to confirm the Prime Minister's actions and clear up any misunderstanding, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had set out his very firm position at the press conference on Monday; it was his intention to secure the British red lines at the meeting in Lisbon next week; if the red lines were not secured then the Prime Minister would veto the Treaty or there would have to be a referendum.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13477.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-11 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-11 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:57" post_name="reform-treaty" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Reform Treaty" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4767" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/11/4767" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that something had happened over the weekend which meant that the &amp;pound;8 million funding for Scottish farming was withdrawn, it was asked whether the Government would review its protocol of information sharing with the Scottish Government (as it was the Scottish National Party who highlighted the leaked document to the press), the PMS said that nothing had changed over the weekend; this was a compensation package that Hilary Benn announced for English farmers which was met out of Defra's existing budget and therefore the issue of Barnett consequentials did not arise in this case. If there had been, or were to be, a reserve claim and the money would come from the Treasury then there would be Barnett consequentials.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the draft for the Commons statement on Friday clearly set out separate funding for Scotland and Wales and that by Monday that had been removed, the PMS said that the position which was set out by Hilary Benn on Monday made it clear that this was a compensation package for England and came out of Defra's existing budget; obviously if we were in a position where there was a reserve claim from the Treasury then there would be Barnett consequentials and the money would go to the devolved administration.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was concerned that the draft document had got into the hands of the press because civil servants in Scotland and England obviously still share information, the PMS said he did not want to comment on the specifics because he did not have any information as to how the document made it into the public domain. In general terms, obviously we would not condone any leaking of Government documents.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13477.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-11 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-11 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:56" post_name="scottish-funding" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scottish Funding" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4768" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/11/4768" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that an obsession with meeting Government targets contributed to the death of 90 people, the PMS said that Alan Johnson had made the case for the Government very clear this morning when he rejected that assertion. What has been seen is that some trusts have been successful in reducing their rates of infection significantly, so if this was a general problem, as has been suggested, then that would not explain why some trusts have been able to deal with this relatively successfully. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that this particular trust (Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust) had been obsessed with Government targets, the PMS said that Alan Johnson had dealt with these questions this morning; there were clearly specific issues relating to this specific trust that needed to be addressed. As far as lessons for the rest of the National Health Service, those would clearly be learnt as Alan Johnson said this morning.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13477.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-11 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-11 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-11 10:00:55" post_name="health-care-commission-report-on-c-difficile" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Health Care Commission Report on C Difficile" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4769" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/12/4769" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by reading out a statement to the assembled press on Burma by the Prime Minister, following the UN Security Council statement:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I applaud the leadership and responsibility shown by all members of the UN Security Council in issuing their first ever formal statement on Burma. The statement sends a powerful signal of the collective determination of the international community to stand together with the Burmese people. It is essential that we continue to work to bring an end to this crisis. The regime in Burma must now take the opportunity to begin the process of reconciliation, overseen by the UN.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any practical measures being taken, the PMS replied that the next step would be the meeting of the EU Foreign Minister's on Monday, where there would a discussion on Burma and the Foreign Secretary would be pushing for a toughening of the EU sanctions regime.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for any clues on which direction the Government would wish to toughen them, the PMS said general trade and overseas investment. Asked if this referred to France, the PMS replied that the Government did have support for this in Europe but there would be a discussion on this on Monday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Foreign Secretary would be attending the meeting, the PMS confirmed that the Foreign Secretary would be there.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13485.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-12 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-12 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:58" post_name="burma-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Burma" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4770" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/12/4770" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Put that the changes made to capital gains tax would harm small businesses and was any thought being given to rethinking the changes, the PMS replied that Andy Burnham had dealt with the issue that morning and as the Chancellor and the Chief Secretary had this morning made clear, the changes were a simplification of the regime, which left the UK with one of the lowest rates of capital gains tax in the world. Put that small businesses would still be worse off than before, the PMS replied that as with any reform, it affected different parts of the economy in different ways, but in overall terms this measure massively simplified the tax system, following calls from business for a less complex capital gains tax system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was known that it would impact badly on small businesses, the PMS said that it was known that it would be a simplification of the tax system following calls from business for a less complex capital gains tax system. Asked if it was not unintended consequences, the PMS replied that the Treasury always examined the implications of measures before decisions were taken.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13485.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-12 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-12 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:57" post_name="capital-gains-tax" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Capital Gains Tax" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4771" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/12/4771" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was worried by suggestions that children of primary school age were under too much stress, the PMS replied that there had been a statement released by the Minister for Children, Beverley Hughes overnight that set out the Government's position on the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;He went on to say that the report's author himself says that every generation has its stresses and schools themselves are safe havens and a beacon of light. The vast majority of children go to better schools, enjoy better health, live in better housing and live in more affluent households than they did ten years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The PMS said it was true that childhood had changed and the Government was undertaking a massive nationwide consultation on the Children's Plan, talking to young people and their families about what makes for a happy, healthy and safe childhood.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government accepted that it could and should have done more in the last ten years to look at children's wellbeing instead of encouraging league tables, the PMS reiterated that the vast majority of children went to better schools, enjoyed better health, lived in better housing and lived in more affluent households than they did ten years ago, so the matter had to be looked at in the round.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that children would be worse off if the Government had not improved schools and the level of affluence, the PMS replied that when looking in totality at the experience faced by children, they were in many respects in a better situation than they were ten years ago.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13485.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-12 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-12 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:56" post_name="kids-under-stress" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Kids Under Stress" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4772" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/12/4772" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to characterise how the Prime Minister viewed the current relationship between the UK Government and the Scottish Government, the PMS replied that it was businesslike.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would reply to Alex Salmond on the Foot and Mouth farming debate, the PMS replied that it was a matter for the Secretary of State.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was a significant amount of taxes paid particularly from the South of England, being invested in Scotland and was there anything being done to solve the problem, the PMS replied that there were no plans to reform the Barnett Formula.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any rethinking on the sharing of information and the way in which civil servants from the British and Scottish Government's work, the PMS replied that it was something that may need to be considered, but these were matters for the Cabinet Office.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13485.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-12 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-12 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:55" post_name="scotland" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scotland" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4773" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/12/4773" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for words of congratulation for Doris Lessing and Al Gore, the PMS said that a statement regarding Doris Lessing had been issued last night. The PMS had also congratulated Martin Evans who had won the Nobel Prize for Medicine, earlier that week.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The PMS then read out a statement from the Prime Minister, congratulating Al Gore:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I am very pleased that the Nobel Foundation has recognised the work that both Al Gore and the UN have done on climate change.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Al Gore has been inspirational in focusing attention across the globe on this key issue.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;The IPCC's work on the science of climate change has been vital, and they are now leading a process by which all countries will work together to tackle the effects of climate change.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13485.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-12 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-12 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:54" post_name="doris-lessing-and-al-gore" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Doris Lessing and Al Gore" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4774" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/12/4774" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Culture Secretary's visit to Battersea Arts Centre to publicise the DCMS CSR Arts settlement and whether there was any frustration that the focus had been on tax this week and not the spending being brought in by the CSR, the PMS replied that it was not particularly unusual for Secretaries of State to have meetings with stakeholders following spending review settlements. The more that people understood the settlements that were given, the better. The PMS went on to say that the PBR did a number of things. It dealt with a number of specific tax issues in an affordable way, it demonstrated how the Government could maintain its commitment to economic stability, but it also provided significant extra resources to key Government priorities.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13485.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-12 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-12 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:53" post_name="comprehensive-spending-review" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Comprehensive Spending Review" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4775" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/12/4775" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was taking any interest in the settlement given to former Chief Executive of Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, Rose Gibbs, the PMS said the Prime Minister was being kept informed, but it was really a matter for the Department of Health.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to characterise the Prime Minister's mood at the end of this week, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was determined and focussed on the business of Government. Asked if the Prime Minister would be watching sport over the weekend, the PMS said that the Prime Minister would try and find time during the course of tomorrow to watch the sport, like many other people in the country would.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13485.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-12 11:00:52" post_date_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:52" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-12 11:00:52" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-12 10:00:52" post_name="misc-9" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4776" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4776" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was aware of any evidence that British arms had ended up in the hands of the Burmese Government, the PMS said, re the arms embargo to Burma, that there was currently an EU arms embargo and what the Prime Minister had called for today was a review to ensure that that was properly enforced. He had also talked about beginning discussions with our partners about a wider UN arms embargo on Burma. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Prime Minister's friendship with Aung San Suu Kyi and whether or not the Government had had any direct contact with her, the PMS said that the Prime Minister was a great admirer of Aung San Suu Kyi; she was one of the individuals he wrote about in his book on courage. There had been contact with her family, but it was best to check the details with the Foreign Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/output/Page13487.asp&quot;&gt;PM statement on Burma &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13498.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:58" post_name="burma-statement" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Burma Statement" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4777" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4777" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Re the Telegraph's story this morning, it was asked if the subject of transport and road prices in the Queen's speech would be different to what was expected. The PMS said that there was a certain amount of bafflement regarding the Telegraph's story this morning; the whole premise seemed to be that it was the existing Government's position that there would be legislation to be brought forward to enable a national road pricing scheme, but actually the draft legislation, which was published in May, did not include any such provision. The whole premise of the story was wrong in the sense that its depiction of the Government's existing position was not an accurate one; there had been no change in that position. What the Government wanted to see was road pricing working in local and regional pilots before making a decision about whether or not a national scheme was needed; that was no more than a re-statement of the existing policy so nothing had changed.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13498.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:57" post_name="transportroad-prices" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Transport/Road prices" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4778" comment_count="2" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4778" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked why Michael Connarty was wrong when he had said that the red lines would disappear in 5 years, the PMS said that there were two separate issues and that the Foreign Office would be replying in detail to Mr Connarty's letter. One issue was in relation to the UK opt-in on justice and home affairs issues; that was indefinite. The second issue was ECJ jurisdiction over JHA issues for which there was a transitional period of 5 years before coming into effect. In a sense, what was happening was that two things were being conflated, the opt-in and the transitional arrangements. Our opt-in would always remain so we would always retain the flexibility to opt-in where we believed it was in our national interest to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to clarify the position re Treaty negotiations, the PMS said it was the Government's view that the negotiations that had taken place and the current text that was circulating secured our red lines. However, we were not at the end of the process yet; we needed to remain vigilant and cautious, as such we would not be making any definitive statement on this until the negotiations were concluded.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was convinced that there was no need for a referendum in the sense that if the red lines were not as water-tight as he would want then he would not sign it, the PMS said that was correct. The Prime Minister had answered that point very clearly during the press conference with President Barroso last Thursday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if that meant there would be no referendum under any circumstances, the PMS said the Prime Minister had made clear that if the red lines were violated he would veto the Treaty; therefore any treaty he would sign-up to would be a treaty where our red lines were respected, therefore, as the Prime Minister had said, in those circumstances a referendum would not be needed.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13498.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:56" post_name="eu-treaty-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="EU Treaty" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4779" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4779" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government thought marriage should be recognised by the tax system, the PMS said that marriage was recognised in the tax system and always had been through Capital Gains Tax and Inheritance Tax. The Prime Minister made this very clear on the Today Programme on 11 July. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there should be further incentives for married couples, the PMS said it was not for him to pre-empt future budgets; we had strengthened the extent to which marriage was recognised in the tax system in relation to Inheritance Tax and Capital Gains Tax. In relation to Income Tax, it has been a long-standing principal that people were taxed on an individual basis; this Government had introduced measures to recognise children in the tax system and this was the right way to deal with children and families in relation to Income Tax.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In relation to Andy Burnham, it was asked if it would be wrong to infer that there would be any changes in personal taxation i.e. Income Tax, the PMS said that the Treasury had been making clear that what Andy Burnham had been saying was nothing more than a re-statement of what the Prime Minister had already said; marriage is recognised in the tax system for Inheritance Tax and Capital Gains Tax but in relation to Income Tax it was right that we recognise children.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there was no going back to the point at which couples could transfer allowances, which had been abolished by this Government, the PMS said that what the Prime Minister had been referring to when he had been talking about recognising marriage in the tax system, was Inheritance tax and Capital Gains Tax.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13498.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:55" post_name="tax-system" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Tax System" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4780" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4780" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was concerned about the growing crisis in Britain's dental services, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had been answering questions on this issue this morning so it was best to refer back to his words. As he and Ben Bradshaw had said, there have been significant improvements; 28 million people see an NHS dentist at least once every 2 years; there are 21,000 dentists providing NHS services (4, 000 more than in 1997), but clearly there was more to do.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13498.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:54" post_name="dental-services" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Dental Services" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4781" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4781" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Prime Minister's thoughts on abortion, the PMS said that the Prime Minister was asked about his thoughts on abortion during an interview with New Woman magazine last year so that was the best place to get direct words from him. His general view was that these were matters that should be guided by scientific evidence.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13498.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:53" post_name="abortion" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Abortion" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4782" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4782" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had made clear this morning that he wanted to get on with governing and asked about his vision for the future re his conference speech, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had set out his position on the future direction the country needed to take many times before and would continue to do that; he would continue to demonstrate how that was being backed up by action.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that recent events had left the Prime Minister looking 'indecisive and lacking voracity' and that that was as close as you could get to saying that he had been lying re opinion polls and the general election, the PMS said that they were party matters and the Prime Minister had answered questions on all these matters at his press conference last week.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13498.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 11:00:52" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:52" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 11:00:52" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 10:00:52" post_name="misc-10" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4783" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4783" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had spoken to the campaigners who delivered the petition earlier that day, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that there had been a brief discussion and the Prime Minister was able to listen to some of their concerns. He pointed again to the statement the Prime Minister had issued earlier in the day.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/output/Page13487.asp&quot;&gt;PM statement on Burma&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13501.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 15:45:58" post_name="burma-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Burma" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4784" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4784" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about Capital Gains Tax and whether the Government had any sympathy with the idea of some kind of exemption or transitional relief for small businesses, the PMS said that the Chancellor had set out his decision on the matter in the Pre-Budget Report last week. It was a major simplification of the Capital Gains Tax regime, but for detailed questions it would probably be best to speak to the Treasury. Asked what the No. 10 view of the subject was, the PMS said that the view was that the Government had done a huge amount to help small businesses and to help the small business sector over the last ten years.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13501.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 15:45:57" post_name="capital-gains-tax-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Capital Gains Tax" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4785" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/15/4785" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to comment on stories suggesting the Prime Minister was considering blocking donations to local parties, the PMS replied that there was an ongoing review of these matters being undertaken by Hayden Phillips and that was how the issue was being considered.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government was expecting a working peers list soon, the PMS said he had not seen anything to suggest that might be the case, but he would check. Asked whether the list for Tony Blair's retirement honours had been completed, the PMS replied that he had no information on the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any reaction to comments made by Gisela Stewart regarding an EU referendum, the PMS replied that people knew what the Government's position was on an EU referendum and this had not changed. Asked if the Prime Minister had any reaction to Stuart's comment of him &amp;quot;lacking veracity,&amp;quot; the PMS said that Gisela Stuart had set out her views on a referendum many times before, so none of this was a great surprise. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be the only Scot cheering on England on Saturday and did he know the words to &amp;quot;Swing Low, sweet chariot,&amp;quot; the PMS replied that he would swim past that particular piece of bait.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for more details on the Digital Switchover happening on Wednesday, the PMS replied that people should check with the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, but that this was the first stage of the UK's Digital TV switchover.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be a Chinese-British Summit before the end of the year, the PMS said that it would not necessarily be before the end of the year. Put that the previous Prime Minister had instituted an annual summit and would it therefore be missed in 2007, the PMS said that he would check what the facts were and when and where previous summits had taken place.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13501.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-15 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-15 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-15 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-15 15:45:56" post_name="misc-11" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4786" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/16/4786" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began the briefing by informing Lobby that at Cabinet this morning David Miliband reported back from his meeting at the General Affairs Council yesterday, and there had been a discussion of parliamentary business.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was discussion on the European Treaty, the PMS replied that David Miliband reported back from the meeting he attended yesterday which he also described fully in his interview on the Today Programme this morning.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Cabinet had got round to discussing the shape of the Queen's Speech yet, the PMS replied that the process and discussions around the Queen's Speech were already ongoing, and &lt;a href=&quot;/output/Page12422.asp&quot;&gt;we had published the Draft Legislative Programme earlier in the year&lt;/a&gt;. The PMS also reminded journalists that a date had been set (which would obviously take away some of the fun for the Lobby in the build up to the Queen's Speech). &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13505.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-16 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-16 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-16 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-16 10:00:58" post_name="cabinet-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Cabinet" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4787" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/16/4787" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister said in his &lt;a href=&quot;/output/Page13500.asp&quot;&gt;tribute to Ming Campbell &lt;/a&gt;that he may continue to have a major role in public life, and asked if the Prime Minister had anything in mind, the PMS replied that his words were a general tribute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to Ming Campbell, the PMS replied she was not aware that the Prime Minister had spoken to him, but that we would not ordinarily brief on the Prime Minister's discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Ming Campbell was mentioned at Cabinet at all, the PMS replied that he was not mentioned during the part of Cabinet for which she was present.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13505.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-16 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-16 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-16 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-16 10:00:57" post_name="sir-menzies-campbell" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Sir Menzies Campbell" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4788" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/16/4788" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to Sir Menzies Campbell, the Prime Minister Spokesman (PMS) replied that the Prime Minister had not, as far as he was aware.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13514.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-16 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-16 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-16 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-16 15:45:58" post_name="sir-menzies-campbell-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Sir Menzies Campbell" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4789" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/16/4789" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that it was a year since the collapse of Farepak and asked if there was any possible rescue package along the lines of Northern Rock, the PMS replied that clearly the circumstances relating to Northern Rock and Farepak were very different. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any possibility of compensation, the PMS replied that the position set down previously had not changed.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13514.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-16 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-16 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-16 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-16 15:45:57" post_name="farepak" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Farepak" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4790" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/17/4790" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any scenario whereby the Prime Minister could sign up to a treaty in Lisbon and still put it to the people in a referendum, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that the Prime Minister's position was clear. If the Prime Minister believed the treaty violated the red lines, then he would veto the treaty. The only treaty the Prime Minister would sign up to was one that would protect the red lines and in those circumstances the Government would not believe a referendum would be necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how optimistic the Prime Minister was of getting a deal this time round, the PMS replied that, as is well known, the current text of the treaty that had been circulating did secure the red lines, but there would be further discussions over the coming days. The Government would not be in a position to claim definitively that the red lines had been secured until there was a final agreement on the text, meaning that the Government would remain cautious.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if a final agreement had to be reached at the Lisbon summit, or would there be room for further negotiations between now and December, the PMS said the expectation was that there would be political agreement on the text at the summit and it was anticipated that the document would then be translated for formal signing in December.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there were suggestions from the Scrutiny committee that the treaty was not legally watertight, and was the Government confident that it could not be torn up if someone was to challenge it, the PMS replied that the Foreign Secretary had given a very robust defence of the Government's position on the issue and made clear that in the Government's view, the red lines in the current text were watertight.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there were any points in the latest draft that the Government would be challenging, the PMS reiterated that in the current text available, the Government believed that it's red lines had been secured and that was the key issue.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to what extent was the Prime Minister eager that the treaty issue was put aside eventually, so that Europe could start doing other things, and what else would he like to see Europe getting stuck into, the PMS said the Prime Minister was very strongly of the view that it was necessary to make these changes in order to enable and enlarge the European Union to function, but a lot of time had been spent on this inward looking institutional debate. Once this was concluded the focus would need to be put back onto issues that affected real people, for example, economic growth, jobs, the environment and security.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again if the Prime Minister had a speech or agenda he wanted to set out, the PMS reiterated that the Prime Minister was of the view that the focus needed to be put back onto real issues and away from the institutional debate. There would be discussion of these issues at the summit probably on Friday, if as expected, the treaty was agreed by Thursday evening. It would be a debate that the Prime Minister would be actively participating in, both at the summit and in the period beyond.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be speaking to the summit on the matter of anti-protectionism after reports had suggested he would do so, the PMS said he had not seen or would necessary recognise those reports, but clearly the Prime Minister had argued many times that a global Europe and an open Europe was needed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again what issues the Prime Minister would be raising, the PMS said he would be setting out his position on the need to take forward economic reform, the climate change debate, and the need for Europe to play a lead role on reinvigorating the trade talks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was the Government's view that the new treaty was distinct from the previous constitutional treaty, because a) it was an amending treaty or b) because it had the red lines included, the PMS said it was both. Firstly, it was not a constitution and the conclusions of the council in June were explicit that the constitutional concept had been abandoned and this was an amending treaty. Secondly, for the UK, the treaty that affected the country was different from the treaty that affected other countries because of the red lines and the opt-ins and opt-outs that the Government had secured.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government gave both factors equal parity, the PMS said he was not sure he would want to put weighting on them, but obviously both factors applied.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how long the summit would last, the PMS said that it was not for the Government to anticipate exactly how the summit would pan out and that often, unexpected things occurred at these events. The PMS again said that the Government would not be making any definitive judgements until it had seen the final text of the treaty, so one had to remain cautious.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would raise issues such as Burma or Darfur, the PMS replied that as far as he was aware those issues were not on the agenda, but there was a fairly lengthy discussion of those matters at the Foreign Minister's meeting on Monday.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13524.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-17 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-17 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-17 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-17 10:00:58" post_name="europe" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Europe" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4791" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/17/4791" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be taking his England shirt, the PMS replied that he had no plans to. The PMS confirmed that the Prime Minister was still going to the Rugby World Cup Final on Saturday. Asked if the Prime Minister had discussed the matter with Nelson Mandela, the PMS said not as far as he was aware.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13524.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-17 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-17 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-17 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-17 10:00:57" post_name="misc-12" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4792" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/17/4792" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman started by drawing attention to a letter the Prime Minister had written to the Portuguese Prime Minister, in his capacity as President of the European Union, copied to all other Heads of State. The main message of the letter was about the need to move on from an inward-looking institution debate and start focusing all our efforts on the real issues facing Europe around economic growth, jobs, the environment and security.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked on a scale of one to ten how important the Prime Minister thought the Treaty was, the PMS said that he would not want to put a number on it; as the Prime Minister said in his letter, the Treaty is important in ensuring that the EU can function effectively. But as he also said, we have now had a long period of internal institutional debate and it was now time to move on from that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister regarded the Treaty negotiations as getting in the way of priorities or if the list of priorities was something which would be achieved as the result of negotiations, the PMS said that the Prime Minister thought that it was clearly necessary to amend the Treaty as a result of enlargement. Once that process was concluded it would be time to move on and start focusing all of our efforts, not on internal inward-looking institutional issues that have consumed a lot of the EU's energy in recent months and years, but on the issues that matter to real people. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister's view was that there had been enough tinkering with the Treaty, the PMS said the Prime Minister had made clear that we had had a fairly long period of internal debate on these matters and we needed to get down to the nuts and bolts of economic reform in Europe in order to address some of the big issues around growth, jobs, the environment and security.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if that meant the Prime Minister did not share the views of President Sarkozy re strengthening the EU, the PMS said it was not for him to interpret what President Sarkozy said. He went on to say that the Prime Minister has a great deal of respect for President Sarkozy, has worked very closely with him and would continue to work very closely with him. All leaders acknowledged that it was important that Europe was seen to be addressing issues that mattered to real people.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought that there were areas of the Free Trade Agenda where Europe should take a more protective stance, the PMS said that he did not want to comment on the details of specific negotiations, but as a general principal the Prime Minister thought that free trade was a good thing and he was in favour of open markets.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be discussions on Friday morning at the EU Summit re competing visions of globalisation in the EU, the PMS said that he would not characterise it in those terms, but clearly we would anticipate a discussion, which we expected would happen on Friday subject to details of the Treaty being finalised, about the general issue of how Europe responds to the challenges of Globalisation. The Prime Minister was setting out some of the issues today in that debate, which he thought should be focused on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister's letter to President Barroso was written to be provocative in Paris, the PMS replied not at all; it was written in order to set out the Prime Minister's views ahead of the Summit.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was sticking to his thoughts about enlargement re Turkey, the PMS said the Government's position on Turkey was well established and unchanged.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the French Presidency was talking about trying to revive EU peacekeeping activities and asked if this was in reference to Africa, the PMS said that people should not read too much into particular references in this letter about peacekeeping.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the subject of Burma would be raised at the Summit, the PMS said that there had been a long discussion about issues relating to Burma at the Foreign Minister's meeting on Monday and that that was the main substantive discussion. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13529.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-17 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-17 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-17 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-17 15:45:58" post_name="europe-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Europe" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4793" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/17/4793" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be watching any particular sport over the next few days, the PMS said he was sure the TV would be on in the background of the office for both the important football games taking place later today.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13529.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-17 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-17 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-17 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-17 15:45:57" post_name="sport" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Sport" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4794" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/18/4794" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by telling the assembled press about the Prime Minister's schedule while in Lisbon. The Prime Minister was currently in a meeting of the European Socialists. Following that, he would be having bilateral meetings with Prime Minister Socrates of Portugal and Prime Minister Prodi of Italy. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The PMS then gave a brief outline of how things stood at that current moment. As had been said earlier in the week by the Foreign Secretary, the Government's view was that the current draft of the treaty secured all the UK's red lines. The Government would be remaining cautious until the meeting had been concluded, but there had been nothing during the course of the day so far, to suggest that there had been any attempt to reopen any of the red lines. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister wrote to Prime Minister Socrates, copied to other Heads of Government yesterday, setting out his view that once the discussions on the treaty were concluded, it would be time to end this long period of inward looking institutional debate that had characterised European discussion in recent years and get the focus back onto issues that affected real people in Europe. There would be further discussion of this tomorrow. The PMS added that the International Monetary Fund had announced yesterday that forecasts for growth had been reduced in the major economies, with the IMF downgrading the forecast for the US from 2.9% to 1.9% and also downgrading growth in the G7 and Euro areas, including the UK.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;With growth slowing in the US next year, the Prime Minister's view was that it was even more important for Europe to show leadership on economic policy matters and in three areas inparticular. Firstly, by pushing ahead with the economic reforms, including a positive and coherent response to the challenges of globalisation. Secondly with Europe leading the talks on the reinvigoration of the trade deal and thirdly, strengthening cooperation in Europe, in the light of work undertaken by the Financial Stability Forum, on measures to promote stability in financial markets, inparticular, enhancing transparency in financial markets in relation to issues such as debt, risk management and other issues.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13557.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-18 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-18 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-18 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-18 15:45:58" post_name="pms-schedule" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="PM's schedule" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4795" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/18/4795" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would have nothing to contribute, given that the Government was just waiting to see if other countries re-opened the red lines, the PMS replied that as it was clear throughout, the overwhelming priority for the Government in relation to the treaty negotiations was to secure the red lines. The Prime Minister was of the opinion that given the enlargement of Europe, the reforms of the treaty were necessary to make Europe function; he believed that the treaty secured that and most importantly secured the red lines.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister would insist on a caveat in the treaty to ensure that the ECJ would not undermine the red lines in the future, the PMS said that the Foreign Secretary had made clear in front of the European Scrutiny Committee that there was no reason to believe there was any scope for the ECJ to undermine the British red lines in future.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the word &amp;quot;shall&amp;quot; had been removed from the treaty, as the Foreign Secretary said it should be, the PMS replied that as far as he understood, it would be. Asked what the word had been replaced with, the PMS said it was a question of removing the word &amp;quot;shall.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the ratification process would be for the treaty, the PMS said that first of all the treaty would need to be agreed. Political agreement on the text was anticipated later today and there would then need to be a process of translating the treaty into different languages, ahead of the signing later that year. Following that, the treaty would need to be ratified by the UK Parliament in the normal way.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when a political agreement could be expected, the PMS replied that it might not happen that evening as it would depend on whether other countries had issues outstanding with the treaty. The PMS added that it would be difficult to give any precise guidance, but the working session was due to finish at 8pm and one might anticipate that there would be further discussions over dinner.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what issues other countries had, the PMS said that that was not for him to comment on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had anything to say on the comments made by President Putin and President Ahmadinejad yesterday and would the issue be raised with anyone at the summit, the PMS said he didn't anticipate any comment from the Prime Minister on the subject. The Foreign Ministers would be having a separate dinner that evening where no doubt a wide range of foreign policy issues would be discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought he would be damaged by refusing to take into account polls which showed that the majority of the British population wanted a referendum, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had answered different variations of the question many times before. As he had made clear, if the UK was joining the Euro, a referendum would be necessary and he was one of the first to argue that point. However, this was not a constitution and the constitutional concept had been abandoned. The red lines had been secured, it was an amending treaty and like other amending treaties that had gone before, it did not require a referendum. The Prime Minister had come to the summit to stand up for British interests and he would do that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked on the specifics of parliamentary processes for the treaty, the PMS replied that such comments were a little premature at this point. The priority for the Government was to reach agreement on the treaty.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had given up all hope of there being a referendum, the PMS reiterated that the Prime Minister would only agree to the treaty if the red lines were secured. In principle, if the red lines were not met, a case for a referendum could be made, but it would be the Prime Minister's intention to veto the treaty if the red lines were not secured.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what would be discussed at the Prime Minister's bilateral with Prime Minister Prodi, the PMS replied that it would be the first time the two had met face-to-face since the Prime Minister had taken up his position. They had known each other for many years and would want to discuss issues related to that weekend, particularly how to carry forward the debate on globalisation. It would be an opportunity to have a more general debate about UK-Italy relations and look ahead to Italy taking on the Presidency of the G7 next year.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had read the treaty, the PMS replied that he was sure he had.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was happy with the text on the table and did he have any bilateral plans with the Polish President, the PMS said that the Government was content with the text. It was possible the Prime Minister would have some discussion with the Polish President during the course of the next couple of days.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any reaction to reports within the Labour Party regarding a change to the Capital Gains Tax measures outlined in the PBR and if the treaty was vetoed, should there be a referendum, the PMS replied that there was no reaction to the reports. The PMS added that if the treaty was vetoed, there would be no treaty to have a referendum on.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13557.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-18 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-18 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-18 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-18 15:45:57" post_name="europe-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Europe" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4796" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/18/4796" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;In response to the question of what the Prime Minister thought about the job cuts in the BBC, the PMS said that the Prime Minister thought it was a matter for the BBC governors. Put that this was not what the Leader of the House had just said, the PMS replied that he had not seen what the Leader of the House had said, but it was the Prime Minister's view that the matter was for the BBC governors.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be raising the Madelaine McCann case with the Portuguese Prime Minister, the PMS replied that it was a matter for the police and the relevant authorities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had seen the football the night before, the PMS replied that the television was on in the background so it was likely that the Prime Minister had seen parts of both games.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In response to the question of who would be hosting the Prime Minister at the Rugby World Cup final on Saturday, the PMS said that the Prime Minister would be there as the guest of President Sarkozy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if President Mbeki and Nelson Mandela would be going to the Rugby on Saturday, the PMS said that he did not know.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13557.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-18 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-18 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-18 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-18 15:45:56" post_name="misc-13" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4797" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/22/4797" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Government's views on the issues relating to the Turkish/Iraq border, the Prime Minister's Spokesman told the assembled press that a statement had been made by the Foreign Secretary condemning the attacks by the PKK and sending the deepest condolences to the families of the victims.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The PMS went on to say that the Government's general position was that the PKK was clearly trying to undermine the Turkish Government's efforts to improve the situation of people in the South-East of the country and to provoke conflict between Turkey and Iraq and damage regional stability. Turkey's allies, including the UK, admired the resilience shown in seeking to resolve the issue of Iraqi territory being used to support these attacks. The Government encouraged the Turkish Government to continue to seek a solution through dialogue with the Iraqi Government. The Government supported the continuation of those efforts and urged the Iraqi Government, with the support of the Kurdish regional Government, to take the necessary steps to prevent the use of Iraqi territory for these purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the origin of the Prime Minister's meeting with Prime Minister Erdogan was, the PMS said that it had been in the Prime Minister's diary for some time and it was not related to recent events.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would specifically tell Prime Minister Erdogan not to indulge in any incursion or invasion of Northern Iraq, the PMS replied that the Government's position was to encourage the Turkish Government to continue to seek a solution through dialogue with the Iraqi Government. Pressed on military involvement by Turkey across the border, the PMS said the Government admired the resilience that Turkey had shown in seeking to resolve the issues of Iraqi territory and it encouraged the Turkish Government to continue to seek a solution through dialogue with the Iraqi Government.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13581.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-22 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-22 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:58" post_name="turkey" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Turkey" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4798" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/22/4798" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Chancellor's meeting with the business community suggested that proposals were not set in stone, the PMS replied that the Chancellor's meeting was to discuss the issues that had been raised by the business community. The Chancellor had made the position of the Government clear on this. The PMS added that for specifics it was best to speak with the Treasury.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that on the one hand the Government was introducing measures that the Business Council unanimously opposed, but on the other the Prime Minister would be attending a high-profile meeting with business leaders, the PMS said that the purpose of the Business Council was to discuss long-term policy and areas and issues that would determine the long-term economic wellbeing and competitiveness of the UK. Insofar as businesses having specific issues with one policy measure announced by the PBR, people would have an opportunity to discuss it with the Chancellor this afternoon.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13581.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-22 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-22 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:57" post_name="business-council" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Business Council" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4799" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/22/4799" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister shared President Sarkozy's view that Tony Blair would make a first class EC President, the PMS referred people back to what the Prime Minister had said on Friday in Lisbon, when he was asked the same question:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Tony Blair would be a great candidate for any significant international job and as you know, the work that he is doing in the Middle-East is something that is of huge international importance, but I have to say that on the issue of the Presidency of the Council, there has been no discussion of this and it would be premature to have any discussion as these amending treaties have still got to be ratified by the Parliament's of the individual countries.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how long the Prime Minister would drag out the debate on the EU Treaty, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister intended to ensure that there was full possible scrutiny of the Treaty in Parliament.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13581.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-22 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-22 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:56" post_name="european-council" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="European Council" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4800" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/22/4800" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to comment on reports that the Government would send more troops to Afghanistan due to other NATO forces being withdrawn, the PMS said that the Ministry of Defence had made clear that the Government did not recognise those reports and had no current plans to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had felt stung by soon to be published comments made by the Schools Minister in a new book, the PMS replied that he would not be making any comment at all on the book.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about reports highlighting the issue of the Government taking back money from schools that had not spent it by the end of the year, the PMS said that it would be best to talk to the Department on the specifics.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was a specific focus for the Prime Minister's meeting with Prime Minister Olmert, the PMS said that it had been in the diary for some time, Prime Minister Olmert was in London and they would want to take stock of where things stood in the Middle-East peace process and other regional issues.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13581.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-22 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-22 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-22 10:00:55" post_name="misc-14" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4801" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/22/4801" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for a more specific timetable on what the Prime Minister had set out in his statement, and if all of this would happen in Parliament before the next Council, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that he did not envisage it happening before December. First the Treaty had to be translated into 27 languages, and then it would be signed sometime in December. Once that had happened, the parliamentary procedure would then start.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had said that he would ratify the Treaty in December at the Council, and did this not rather nullify the point of having a parliamentary discussion, the PMS replied that the Treaty would to be ratified by Parliament, so there needed to be a process of transposing the Treaty into domestic legislation to give it a UK legal basis. This was what the parliamentary process would do. The normal process of ratification would happen, but it could only be done once there was a Treaty to ratify. There was only a political declaration on the text in Lisbon, not a formal signing of the Treaty. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Treaty would be ratified by Britain once it had been approved by Parliament, the PMS replied that this was correct.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was still two possible dates when this could happen, the normal Brussels Summit or the other possible Lisbon Summit, the PMS replied that exactly when and how the physical Treaty was signed was a matter for the Presidency to decide. The general expectation was that it would happen at the Brussels European Council on the 13th December, where it would be called the Treaty of Lisbon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if any move to qualified majority voting (QMV) would have to be subject to a binding vote in the House, the PMS replied that the way the so called passerelle worked (this was the provision in the Treaty that allowed movement in some areas from unanimity to QMV) was that it could only happen on an unanimous basis. Britain like any other country had to agree by unanimity for any move to QMV in the areas set out in the Treaty, but we were saying that this would not just be the Government, we would subject that to a prior vote in Parliament.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister needed to ask anything of his European partners for this, the PMS replied that as it was subject to unanimity, it was up to the UK Government how we exercised our effective veto, and we decided that before we exercise our veto we would consult Parliament and there would be a vote on it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was considering entering into the Schegen agreement, the PMS replied that we had an opt-in, nothing had changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if this prior vote in the House was absolutely binding, the PMS replied that it would be. We would give our consent to further moves to QMV in the passerelle clauses in the Treaty following a prior vote in the House.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again on the timetable if all stages would be completed by Easter, the PMS replied that we would see. We were clear that there needed to be a full process of scrutiny.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been a change in the commitment not to oppose institutional change from ten years to six years, as the Prime Minister had referred to this Parliament and the next, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was also setting out, as he had done on Friday, various dates by which items of the existing Treaty would come into effect.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that David Cameron had suggested Labour MPs should be given a free vote on this, the PMS replied that normal parliamentary procedures would apply.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how many days the parliamentary process would take, the PMS replied that we did not have an estimate of the exact number of days at this point, but it would be a very full and detailed process of scrutiny.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had said that he was against all further institutional changes in the relationship between the EU and member states, and this presumed that it was all moving in one direction, the PMS replied that we did have a clause in the Treaty that did allow for repatriation of powers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for clarity on the passerelle, one interpretation would be that the Government already knew that it would oppose any extension to QMV, the PMS replied that clearly one would have to take a view on the individual passerelles, a lot of these QMV measures applied to relatively trivial matters.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about pre-approval towards QMV on ad hoc proposals, the PMS replied that it was true that the Prime Minister had put an additional constraint on the Government in terms of how it can exercise its negotiating power in Europe.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had put to colleagues at the European Council that he was opposed to further institutional changes, and asked if when he spoke to the Council he gave an indication of timescale to the opposition, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister set out his position clearly in the statement to the House. His position was very clear, and was a position reiterated by a number of other leaders at the Council.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for clarification on QMV measures that did not affect the UK, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was talking about areas in this new Treaty that extend QMV. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that presumably there might be further QMV measures relating to the Euro for example that did not effect the UK, but any area whatsoever that extends to QMV would have to be voted on in the House, the PMS replied that the passerelle did not apply to all QMV in the Treaty, only a number of specific areas where this self amending mechanism was in place.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that in the Global Europe document, it says that Europe should influence the debate on how the IMF and central banks respond to global financial challenges, and asked if this was something new that the Prime Minister was pushing for, that the EU speaks with one voice on the IMF, the PMS replied that we were not proposing anything new in relation to the European Union's representation and the way that it operates at the IMF.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the President of the European Council would be &amp;quot;the servant&amp;quot; of national governments, the PMS replied that it was because he was appointed by national governments, the Council, and he chaired the meetings. But it was individual member states that had the vote who decided matters.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again if the Prime Minister had changed his position from 2017 to eight years at the most, the PMS replied that there had been no change to the position. Nothing that the Prime Minister had said was inconsistent with what was said on Friday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked that assuming this proceeded as the Government would like, when would the High Representative and the President of the Council be in post, the PMS replied that they would be appointed to take effect from when the Treaty would take effect, which would be January 2009. That was assuming the Treaty had been ratified by all member states by that date, bearing in mind that for example in Belgium the process had to go through 9 separate parliaments. But assuming the Treaty was ratified by the end of 2008, it would come into effect in January 2009, and these new positions would be appointed from that date.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that this meant the decision on who would get the jobs would be made next year, the PMS replied that that was a reasonable assumption.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the new Commission started, the PMS replied that the new Commission would start in September 2009. One of the issues that the Prime Minister had to intervene on was to ensure that there was not a separate European Parliament process for the Higher Representative who was also a Commissioner, so that if there had been that would have effectively given the European Parliament a veto over the appointment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was at all attracted to the Liberal Democrat idea of a referendum on &amp;quot;in or out&amp;quot; of Europe, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister did not think this was necessary.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13582.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-22 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-22 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-22 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-22 15:45:58" post_name="europe-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Europe" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4802" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4802" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by outlining the two main issues discussed at this morning's Cabinet. Firstly, there was an update from Jack Straw on the Constitutional Reform Agenda and how that was being taken forward. Secondly, there was a discussion led by Ed Balls on taking forward next steps on diplomas.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to specify what Ed Balls was announcing today, the PMS said he was announcing how the agenda was being taken forward in relation to diplomas which was one of the issues which came out of the Tomlinson review.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if diplomas were to replace A-levels, the PMS said it was best to wait for the statement later today.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13606.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:58" post_name="cabinet-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Cabinet" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4803" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4803" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if Constitutional Reform included House of Lords reform, the PMS referred to the Prime Minister's statement on the Constitutional Reform Agenda on 3 July and said that it was much wider than just the issue of the House of Lords reform. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was fair to characterise it as everything except House of Lords and voting, the PMS said that the House of Lords was being taken forward; there was a broad agenda of constitutional reform matters and the House of Lords was clearly part of that. There was a statement on a wide-ranging package of measures announced by the Prime Minister in July. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister's ideas highlighted in his Constitutional Reform Agenda statement on 3 July, e.g. a statement of British values/a British Bill of Rights and Duties, amounted to a British Constitution and would consider having a referendum on that, the PMS said that that was getting way ahead of ourselves; the proposals set out in July were how we could work up a British statement of values which might then be a pre-cursor for a British Bill of Rights at some point in the future should a consensus emerge around that following discussions; we needed to take this step by step.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked, to that end, if there would be anything constitutional in the Queen's speech, the PMS replied that the draft Queen's speech had stated that there would be a Constitutional Reform Bill.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Jack Straw had specified any areas where progress had been made re the Constitutional Reform Agenda, the PMS replied that progress had been made across a broad front but that it was for Jack Straw to set out the next steps, which we would expect him to do shortly.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13606.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:57" post_name="constitutional-reform-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Constitutional Reform" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4804" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4804" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked how concerned the Prime Minister had been that Turkey had threatened to destabilise the only stable region in Iraq, the PMS said that it was best to wait for the Prime Minister's press conference with Prime Minister Erdogan later that morning. The joint UK/US statement issued over night in Washington, following discussions between the Foreign Secretary David Miliband and Condoleezza Rice, stated the current position.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister and Prime Minister Olmert would be discussing in their meeting, the PMS reminded journalists that the meeting had not taken place yet but that they would discuss a wide range of issues relating to the Middle East peace process and other regional matters, however it was best to wait until the press conference when a better account of discussions could be given.&lt;br /&gt;Asked in relation to the US/UK proposal for a meeting in Istanbul if there was a sufficient degree of urgency to prevent a Turkish incursion, the PMS replied that clearly we were treating this matter with the urgency it required; there were intensive discussions about this in Washington involving the Foreign Secretary and Condoleezza Rice; there were further meetings today with the Prime Minister of Turkey and there would be further discussions in the period ahead. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13606.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:56" post_name="turkey-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Turkey" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4805" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4805" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought that the country was ready for 70 million people, the PMS referred to the ONS press release that morning and pointed out that they prefaced their findings with the phrase 'if passed trends continue'. They went on to say that 'the assumptions underlying national population projections' were 'demographic trend based'; they were not forecasts so it was an extrapolation of historical trends, not a forecast, as the ONS explicitly states. The ONS did not attempt to predict the impact that future Government policies, change in economic circumstances or other factors might have on demographic behaviour; this subject needed to be looked at in that context. In relation to the general issue, the Government had set up the Migration Impact Forum (MIF), which included representatives from the police and local authorities and we would also be introducing our tough new points system to help manage migration, which would come into effect in approximately 150 days time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again how the Prime Minister felt about the figure of 70 million, whether it was a forecast or not, the PMS repeated that the Government had introduced the MIF, which included all the key bodies, in order to ensure that we could manage the impact that migration has on communities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to explain more about the MIF, the PMS said that the Home Office could give as much detail as was needed on it.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13606.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:55" post_name="population-growth" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Population Growth" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4806" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4806" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the letter the Prime Minister had received from the Leader of the Opposition about the Phillips review, the PMS said that it was a party matter. There were ongoing inter-party talks chaired by Sir Hayden Phillips and there was a further meeting due to be held at the end of the month but beyond that there was nothing more to add.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13606.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:54" post_name="phillips-review" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Phillips Review" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4807" comment_count="4" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4807" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Guardian had been right to say that the Government will do a u-turn on renewable energy, the PMS said that Ministers were not planning a u-turn on any pledges to combat climate change and we were not seeking to effectively abolish the target for renewable energy, which was agreed by the European Union in the spring. Obviously there was a discussion taking place within Europe involving the Commission and Member States about the implementation of that target; meeting the target would be challenging and obviously we wanted to make sure that the system was well-designed, cost-effective and practical but it was not the case that Ministers were planning a u-turn on any of the pledges that we had made.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that if it was found not to be practical the Government could not carry it out, the PMS said that we were working with the Commission and other Member States to ensure that it was implemented in a way that was practical.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if other departments had prevented the meeting of targets, the PMS said that in the last couple of months we had given consent for the world's biggest offshore wind farm in the Thames. We had also given consent for a Fullabrook wind farm in north Devon, an offshore wind farm off Teesside, the Wave Hub deep-sea socket off Cornwall, as well as having announced a feasibility study into the Severn Barrage. As such there was a very active agenda being taken forward across all Government departments in relation to renewables. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13606.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 10:00:53" post_name="renewable-energy" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Renewable Energy" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4808" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4808" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that both the Prime Minister and Prime Minister Olmert of Israel had talked about further sanctions on Iran in their press conference earlier that day and what would those sanctions include, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that the Prime Minister had set out that the Government was prepared to step up sanctions, both at an EU and UN level. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This assessment would follow the report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which was due in November. Until that point the PMS stated that she would not get into detail of the exact proposals to be considered. The PMS added that both the Prime Minister and Prime Minister Olmert were expressing their readiness to bring about further, tougher sanctions should they be required.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13610.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 15:45:58" post_name="iran" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iran" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4809" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4809" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had watched Assistant Commissioner Yates give evidence at the &amp;quot;cash-for-honours&amp;quot; inquiry to the Public Administration Committee, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had only just finished a press conference with another world leader and he would now be focussing on other matters of Government.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13610.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 15:45:57" post_name="honours-inquiry" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Honours Inquiry" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4810" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/23/4810" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister retained full confidence in Douglas Alexander as the UK General Election coordinator, following a report published today about the Scottish elections, which criticised Mr Alexander, the PMS said that the Prime Minister retained full confidence in all of his cabinet team. The Defence Secretary and Secretary of State for Scotland Des Browne would be responding to the report in the House of Commons and the PMS asked that people look at his responses to such questions.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13610.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-23 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-23 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-23 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-23 15:45:56" post_name="scottish-elections" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scottish Elections" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4811" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4811" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had full confidence in Douglas Alexander, the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman (PMS) replied that the Prime Minister did have full confidence in Douglas Alexander.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why, the PMS replied that the Scottish Secretary Des Browne set out the Government's response yesterday to the Gould Report. As Ron Gould made clear there was &amp;quot;No intention to assign blame to individuals or institutions&amp;quot;. He also said, &amp;quot;We should not lose sight of the many positive aspects of the elections and the fact that by far the majority of the voters understood the new aspects of the process in spite of its complexities&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13616.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:58" post_name="scottish-elections-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scottish Elections" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4812" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4812" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for the Prime Minister's explanation of the state of play with foreign prisoners, and what was the Government doing to get rid them, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister's general position on this was that two years ago 1,500 prisoners were deported, last year 2,500 prisoners were deported, this year so far we had deported over 3,000, and we were on track to meet the commitment to deport 4,000 foreign prisoners. This would be the largest number of foreign prisoners ever deported in any one year. We had speeded up our systems including by having dedicated prisons where we could concentrate immigration officers who work on deportation. We had signed an EU prisoner transfer agreement, which meant that prisoners would increasingly serve their sentences in their own countries. And we were also implementing country specific action plans with the countries that had the largest number of prisoners here. So we were increasing the number of foreign prisoners being deported, and we were taking action in order to facilitate that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we had deals yet with Jamaica and Nigeria, or were negotiations still ongoing, the PMS replied that negotiations were on going. For example in the past couple of weeks a high level delegation had been sent to Jamaica to push for progress with the Jamaican Government. No doubt the Prime Minister would also want to raise this personally with the Jamaican Prime Minister when they meet in the margins of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting next month. We were making progress. We had agreements with over 100 countries, there was clearly more we need to do in order to reach agreements with other countries, but we were progressing. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how many foreign prisoners remained in prisons waiting to be deported, the PMS replied that the Home Office could give the exact figures on this. As was well known, there were 11,000 prisoners in foreign jails; we were significantly increasing the rate at which prisoners were being deported from 1,500 two years ago to 2,500 last year, and to 4,000 this year.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had said in his Conference speech that in future very serious foreign criminals would be automatically deported, and asked how this was developing, the PMS replied that this was being taken forward in relation to non-EU citizens. The Borders Bill included provisions that meant we would be able to deport non-EU nationals automatically if they had been convicted of a crime carrying a sentence of over one year, or if they had been convicted of any of the long list of crimes specified in the Bill which included both drug and gun crimes. For EU citizens we currently consider deportation for anyone sentenced to more than 2 years, we were now saying that we would also consider people convicted of specific offences including drug and gun crimes. And for newcomers it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to argue the right of family life defence, which was the defence used in the Chindamo case. So for non-EU nationals we were legislating in order to make this happen, and for EU nationals we were saying for anyone convicted of a sentence of more than two years, or for those convicted of specific offences including drug and gun crime, we would consider them for automatic deportation. And if they fought this, we believe it will be very difficult for them to use the right of family life defence because by definition they are newcomers into the country.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that surely the EU prevented us from &amp;quot;kicking out&amp;quot; fellow citizens of the EU, the PMS replied that it did not, only if they could use the right of family life defence. But if they were newcomers then it would be difficult to see how they could use that defence.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked was it not the case that we could not send back many non-EU citizens because of Human Rights issues, the PMS replied that they would be considered for deportation, and obviously we were looking to reach agreement with as many countries as we can in order to deport foreign citizens. For example in relation to the risk of them being subject to torture if they went back, we had recently reached agreement with Jordan, Lebanon, and Libya among other countries.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked on EU nationals, if they were newcomers and even if they were deported, could they not just come straight back, the PMS replied that because they were being deported, they would then serve their sentence overseas. In terms of what the Prime Minister specifically said in his Conference speech, for EU nationals, if they commit a crime, they get deported.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13616.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:57" post_name="foreign-prisoners" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Foreign Prisoners" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4813" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4813" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what was on the agenda for the meeting with Sepp Blatter and at what stage was our bid for the 2018 World Cup, the PMS replied that they would raise a wide range of issues, including discussions on the 2018 World Cup acquisitive bid among other things. The Prime Minister had made it clear that he would support a bid if the Football Association decided to go forward with a bid. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13616.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:56" post_name="sepp-blatter-meeting" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Sepp Blatter Meeting" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4814" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4814" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be saying anything on reported Turkish incursions in Iraq, the PMS replied that there was nothing to add to what the Prime Minister said yesterday where he spoke at great length about this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had said yesterday that he wanted a solution by diplomatic means, and Turkey were now shelling positions inside Iraq, and asked was the Prime Minister disappointed that his council had not been heard, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was not disappointed that his council had not been listened to. The Turks continued to show restraint despite considerable provocation, and we continued to encourage the Turkish Government to seek a solution through dialogue with the Iraqi Government.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13616.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:55" post_name="turkeyiraq" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Turkey/Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4815" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4815" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what was on the agenda for the Business Council, the PMS replied that it would be a wide ranging meeting. Despite what was written in some of the newspapers today, the Business Council would be perfectly entitled to raise whatever they would like to raise.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Capital Gains Tax would be raised, the PMS replied that he was sure members of the Business Council could raise whichever issues they wanted to raise.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was ever any advice given to members not raise Capital Gains Tax, the PMS replied not to his knowledge.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13616.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 10:00:54" post_name="business-council-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Business Council" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4816" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4816" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what the PM had said in the clip re his meeting with Sepp Blatter, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) said that he had had a very constructive meeting; we were hopeful that the FIFA Committee would allow European countries to bid for the 2018 World Cup. He also said, as he had said before, that if the Football Association were to put forward a bid for the 2018 World Cup, he would like to see the tournament come back to England.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why European countries were not able to bid for the World Cup, the PMS said that the question was whether or not European countries were allowed to bid for the 2018 World Cup given the rotation system that applied; that was a decision which FIFA had not made yet, but if they were to open it up to European countries and the FA decided to bid then that would be something that the Prime Minister would very much support.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we were losing the argument with FIFA that European countries should be able to bid, the PMS said that we should wait and see; the Prime Minister was hopeful that the FIFA Committee would allow European countries to make a bid for the 2018 World Cup but that was a decision they had to make on their timescale.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the FA would make a decision, the PMS said that it was a matter for them but that they hoped to clear up the situation relatively soon.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:58" post_name="football-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Football" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4817" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4817" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that Digby Jones had said that the business community thought the CGT changes were a terrible thing and that he would raise these concerns with Chancellor, the PMS said that he had not seen the comments and would not want to say anything about comments he had not seen. He added that the Chancellor had had a meeting on Monday with the business community where they raised their concerns.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:57" post_name="capital-gains-tax-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Capital Gains Tax" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4818" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4818" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had anything specific to say to the Business Council or if it was a purely listening event, the PMS said it was the first meeting of the Council and there would be a discussion about some of the longer-term policy areas that would effect the future economic competitiveness of Britain.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:56" post_name="british-business-council" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="British Business Council" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4819" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4819" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what the message to President Karzai would be tomorrow, the PMS said that, in relation to Afghanistan, we had always made clear our long-term commitments and there was no more to say in advance of tomorrow's meeting; there would be media afterwards.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that security would be uppermost on the agenda, it was asked whether we would send three thousand extra troops, which NATO said were needed, the PMS repeated what he had said earlier in the week; troop numbers were kept constantly under review but there were no current plans to send extra troops.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the UN had estimated that an extra battle group was needed and that we had said we would not send another battle group, the PMS said that what we had said was that we kept these issues constantly under review but we had no current plans to send extra troops. If that were to change then obviously we would make an announcement.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:55" post_name="president-karzaiafghanistan" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="President Karzai/Afghanistan" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4820" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4820" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was the case that the Government had accepted and apologised for mistakes that were made but was rejecting the charge made by the Gould report that mistakes were made for partisan purposes, the PMS said that the Gould report did not say that. If you looked at what the Gould report said in terms of that interpretation, what he said was that 'what was characteristic of 2007 was a notable level of party self-interest evident in Ministerial decision making, especially in regards to the timing and method of counting and design of ballot papers'. What Gould went on to say when he was explaining what that meant later in the report, was that 'it had become increasingly clear that too much political debate was associated with the design of the Scottish parliamentary and local government ballot papers. Regarding the parliamentary Scottish ballot papers, months of partisan political discussion and debate wasted valuable time which otherwise could have been used to establish a ballot paper which voters could easily understand'. That was a position that the Government accepted but what Gould was saying was that there was too much time spent on partisan political discussion rather than issues that directly effected voters.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Government was claiming that Gould's definition of the word partisan was discussions within and between political parties, the PMS replied that that was correct.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the report said 'partisan self-interest evident in Ministerial material making', the PMS said that Gould went on to explain what that meant; too much of the political debate was associated with the design of the Scottish parliamentary and local government ballot papers. He was not singling out any individual or institution; he was saying that, almost without exception, the voter was 'treated as an afterthought', by virtually all the other stakeholders. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that 'Ministerial decision making' meant Ministers, the PMS replied that in the process of taking those decisions too much time was devoted to discussions which were of a partisan and political nature. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Ministers were at fault, the PMS said that the Government was accepting that there were issues that Ministers had to deal with and we were accepting the call of the recommendations in the report. Douglas Alexander had made his statement about this earlier today. We were clear that Gould was not singling out any individual; he was making a more general comment. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there were only two Ministers at the Scottish Office, the PMS said that Gould had said yesterday, 'there was no intention to assign blame to individuals or institutions'. There were repeated efforts yesterday to try to get him to blame specific individuals and he did not do that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for Gould's definition of the word partisan, the PMS referred to page 48 of his report, Problem no. 1, which said, &amp;quot;too much political debate was associated over the design of the Scottish parliamentary and local government ballot papers'. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was aware that Douglas Alexander was going to make a statement during PMQs, the PMS said the Prime Minister had spoken to Douglas Alexander about these issues, as expected.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had full confidence in Douglas Alexander, the PMS replied yes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Douglas Alexander had offered to resign, the PMS replied no.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:54" post_name="scottish-elections-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Scottish Elections" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4821" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4821" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that, from the Prime Minister's answers at PMQs, he was sympathetic to head teachers re the retrospective nature of the proposals which were aired earlier this year, the PMS said that, as the Prime Minister had said at PMQs, we would listen to the issues raised in the consultation. The consultation was ongoing and did not finish until Friday; we could then expect quite a swift response from DCMS from that consultation. Jim Knight said yesterday, in Parliament, when asked about the claw-back of balances, 'we are consulting on that, and no decision has been made to do it. The consultation closes this Friday, and I will look to quickly make decisions and announcements, certainly in respect of some aspects. People have raised concerns particularly about the retrospective nature of some of the proposals that we consulted on, and I would like to provide some certainty on that as quickly as I possibly can'. Therefore Jim Knight had acknowledged some of the issues that had been raised in relation to the retrospective nature of some aspects of this proposal, but the consultation was still ongoing until Friday and we could expect an announcement from DCSF. The Prime Minister had made it clear that we would listen to the issues raised in consultation but also it was right that money which was allocated to schools was spent on schools, and we did not want to see ongoing accumulation of balances; we wanted to see the money allocated to schools and spent on schools.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:53" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:53" post_name="school-balances" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="School Balances" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4822" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4822" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Had there been any contact between Downing St and the Speaker's office after PMQs, the PMS said there had not been as far as he was aware.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister thought of the loutish behaviour of his PPS, the PMS said it was best if the PPS addressed that issue.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:52" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:52" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:52" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:52" post_name="pmqs" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="PMQs" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4823" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/24/4823" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that if there was no national commitment to reach the 20 per cent renewables target by 2020 it was asked why David Miliband had said last year that there would be 20 per cent target re electricity renewable supply by 2020, the PMS said that there were two separate points; one was that there was an overall EU target for renewables, which was about 20 per cent target for all power generation, essentially carbon emission; then there was a different 20 per cent target, which the UK had set, which only related to electricity generation. Therefore, the EU target was not just electricity, it covered all carbon emissions more generally, so it was a different 20 per cent to the 20 per cent David Miliband had talked about which was just electricity generation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the target would be more like 10/15 per cent, the PMS said that we should wait and see; there were discussions going on within the European Union as to how that 20 per cent overall target was allocated between the member states.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13620.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-24 16:45:51" post_date_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:51" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-24 16:45:51" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-24 15:45:51" post_name="renewables" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Renewables" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4824" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4824" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked why Britain needed a Bill of Rights and how would a 21st Century Bill of Rights differ from the one introduced in the 17th Century, the Prime Minister's Spokesman told the assembled press that it was a subject that both the Prime Minister and the Justice Secretary would be touching on in their respective speeches later on. There was not much he could say in advance of that, just that the Government did say in July that it would be having a discussion and consultation on a Statement of British values, with a view potentially to a further consultation on a British Bill of Rights. Asked if it would be an updating of the existing bill or would the emphasis be on British values, the PMS said it was a very consultative, long-term process and people should wait until the speech and the statement had taken place, in order to have a more fruitful discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister's speech and Jack Straw's speech would cover the same subjects, the PMS replied that both would cover the general issues around the constitutional reform agenda. The Prime Minister would also be talking about general issues around liberty as well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be more said in the Prime Minister's speech on the benefits of a written constitution, the PMS said that he thought the Prime Minister would touch on these general issues, but he would also be focussing on some of the more specific issues that arose out of the constitutional reform agenda and issues talked about by the Prime Minister in July, as well as some of these long-term issues.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13629.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:58" post_name="bill-of-rights" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Bill of Rights" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4825" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4825" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked when a statement on household rubbish collection could be expected, the PMS replied that it was clearly a very complex issue; there were a lot of difficult issues that needed to be considered; it was important that the right balance was struck and it would also be important to have the right mechanisms in place. Once the Government was in a position to make an announcement it would do so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Downing Street was putting the breaks on a decision being made and was the statement on the plan simply delayed or not going to be given at all, the PMS replied that there was never a decision made on there being a publication today and he had never suggested that people should anticipate any announcement when alerting the press to future Government business. It was a complex matter and the Government needed to consider the responses to the consultation. A way needed to be found to strike the right balance and that's what the Government would do.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to clarify in terms of policy whether the Government was still minded to do it, the PMS reiterated that it was a complex matter and there was a whole range of issues that needed to be looked at. When the Government was in a position to make an announcement they would do so.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13629.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:57" post_name="household-rubbish-collection" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Household Rubbish Collection" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4826" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4826" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be any further comment on Turkey and Iraq, the PMS said there was nothing further to add to what the Government said yesterday. The Government was aware of the reports about the incidents inside Iraq, but these had not been verified by the Government of Iraq or by the Government of Turkey and the UK would continue to call on the Government of Turkey to seek a diplomatic solution.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13629.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:56" post_name="turkeyiraq-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Turkey/Iraq" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4827" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4827" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had spoken about burden sharing in that morning's press conference and did that mean within NATO, or also a sharing of the burden with Afghan troops and security forces, the PMS replied that he thought both were true. When the Prime Minister talked about burden sharing it was normally in relation to NATO, but clearly, as President Karzai was making clear, the Afghan Government would also like to see more training and an increasing contribution from Afghan security forces to the security situation in Afghanistan. It was a shared objective that the Government held with the Government of Afghanistan.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13629.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:55" post_name="afganistan" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Afganistan" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4828" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4828" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister expected members of his Government to stick to the MP's honour system when claiming where their main home was, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister would expect members of his Government to stick by the ministerial code.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked where the Prime Minister's main home was, the PMS replied that he was sure it was in London, but he would check that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to clarify that the London address was indeed 10 Downing Street, the PMS replied that he was as certain as he could be that that was where the Prime Minister declared his official residence.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13629.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:54" post_name="mps-expenses" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="MP's Expenses" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4829" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4829" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if banning the smacking of children was under review, the PMS replied that it was his understanding there had been a consultation on the subject, but on process, people should check with DCSF.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if money surpluses being taken back from schools would be retrospective, the PMS said that the subject had been covered at great length in yesterdays lobby briefing, following the Prime Minister's statement, so he did not have anything further to add to what was said yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for the Prime Minister's view on David Lloyd George, as he would be present at the unveiling of his new statue, the PMS said that the Prime Minister's general view if asked, would be that Lloyd George was a very distinguished war-time Prime Minister and a very distinguished reforming Chancellor of the Exchequer.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13629.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 10:00:53" post_name="misc-15" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4830" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4830" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/output/Page13630.asp&quot;&gt;Read the speech in full&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about the review of the right to gain entry to your home, and what we were hoping to achieve, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) replied that as the Prime Minister said in his speech, there were currently 250 separate powers relating to the ability of various authorities to enter homes and premises. So the main purpose of the speech was to try and rationalise these different powers into a single code. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was a fair assumption to think that there would be fewer reasons to enter you home after the review, the PMS replied that the intention was that there would be a greater degree of clarity about under what powers and on what basis people would be entering homes or premises.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had a view on the 30 year rule, and did he have a figure in mind that he would like it reduced to, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister did not have a particular figure in mind, that was one of the reasons why he had set up this review to see if a consensus could be reached around an alternative figure. The purpose of this and one important background factor was that now we had introduced freedom of information, looking at exactly what the interaction was between the FOI rule and the 30 year rule.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how the Prime Minister squared what he said on liberty this morning with his intention to deprive people of more of their liberty by raising the detention without charge to 50 days, the PMS replied that there was a consultation underway on this matter. The Government had set out a number of proposals in July, of which the one referred to was one possible option. The Prime Minister was trying to set out how we can ensure that we deliver on the traditional British value of liberty in a modern world, where information has changed, there was much more information about people's biometrics, and we were facing new threats from terrorism. It was about how we update a traditional view of liberty in a world where we faced very different challenges, such as in relation to terrorism, and a number of other issues that meant the challenge we faced now was different from the challenge we faced in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if modern liberty just meant less liberty, the PMS replied that was not the case, it was about making sure there were sufficient checks and balances in the system. And to ensure that they are able to respond to the challenges we faced in the 21st century.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked where we were on the Bill of Rights, the PMS replied that it was not the intention of the speech to take this forward. Clearly there was a long-term debate and discussion that we would need to have, the Prime Minister initiated that in July and referred to this earlier today. The main focus today was the challenge of delivering on our values of liberty in a modern setting, with a number of very specific and concrete measures to take that forward.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if this would be some years down the line, the PMS replied that clearly there were a number of big steps that would need to be taken before we got to that point, and this was a long term process.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any suggestion in the Prime Minister's remarks on ID cards and biometrics that there might be a reconsideration of the fundamental proposition, the PMS replied that this was not his interpretation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked to contextualise the speech, the PMS replied that the purpose of the speech was that the British people rightly valued the concept of liberty. It was something that had been associated with this country for many years. But we faced new challenges. The question was how do we adapt to these new challenges whilst remaining true to the British value of liberty. The Prime Minister was looking at how we update and take forward issues such as freedom of information, freedom of expression and media reporting, the right to protest and parliamentary powers, in a 21st century setting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Government's policy was now on ID cards, the PMS replied that the Government's policy on ID cards was the policy that had been set out many times before and had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister referred again today to the possibility of a written constitution, and asked if there would be a referendum on this, the PMS replied that we were a long way from that point. This was a question that needed to be addressed at some point in the future, but that was not really what the Prime Minister was focussing on today, it was very much an issue for the longer term.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be called a &amp;quot;Bill of Rights and Duties&amp;quot;, and did the Prime Minister recognise that to incorporate duties into a Bill of Rights was fraught to say the least, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had always been of the view that the rights agenda needed to be balanced by a responsibilities agenda. But exactly what a Bill of Rights would be called was not really an issue for today.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister recognised that there were problems with this, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister recognised that as a general principal, alongside rights came responsibilities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Jack Straw seemed to be improvising in the Chamber, and asked why all of this was coming out today in what seemed to be a bit of a hurry with Jack Straw racing to the Chamber to tell everybody before the Prime Minister said it all outside of Parliament, the PMS replied that following the Prime Minister's statement in July a whole series of processes were initiated, mostly taken forward by the Ministry of Justice. It seemed sensible 3 months or so down the line to give Parliament and others an update as to where we were. This was a multi track, quite diverse set of issues that Jack Straw brought together in a single statement. Those announcements were made to Parliament first. The Prime Minister's speech did not include anything of a substantive nature that had not been announced by Jack Straw in Parliament. He was addressing a wider philosophical issue about the nature of liberty in the 21st century. But this was something that had been on the Prime Minister's mind for some time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked on the idea of criminals benefiting from their dastardly crimes, and would there be legal aid for people to pursue these criminals through the courts, the PMS replied that this would have to be considered by the Ministry of Justice as they take this forward. The general point was that there was a consultation initiated in 2006 on making sure that crime did not pay, and obviously the Prime Minister believed very strongly in the principal that criminals should not profit from their activities. There were a number of options put forward at that time. One of them was putting payments to criminals on a statutory basis, and the other was pursuing a route through the civil courts. As part of that consultation, one of the issues that came up was concern from various media organisations that should we criminalise in the way originally proposed, that could harm investigative journalism. Clearly we would not want to do that. Whilst sticking to the very strong principal that criminals should not profit, the Prime Minister said today that we believed the most appropriate way of dealing with this was through the civil courts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if that would include police payments, the PMS replied that we were mainly focussing on the media issues that had been raised, but the Ministry of Justice would have a definitive answer on that.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13633.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:58" post_name="liberty-speech" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Liberty Speech" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4831" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4831" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any reaction on Iran following Condolezza Rice's comments, the PMS replied that the Foreign Office put out a statement around lunchtime today. That set out the Government's position and we had nothing further to add.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13633.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:57" post_name="iran-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Iran" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4832" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4832" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Chancellor had said in the Treasury Select Committee that banks should be stopped from hiding debt on balance sheets, and asked if anything could be expected in the Queen's Speech, the PMS replied that this was something that had been said before by the Chancellor, and was also something referred to in the joint UK/French/German Statement on financial markets that we agreed in Lisbon last Friday. But in terms of specifics in terms of how this was being taken forward, journalists were best to speak to the Treasury.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13633.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:56" post_name="debt" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Debt" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4833" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4833" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the total bill for MPs' allowances had gone up by 5%, and asked did the Prime Minister think the public was getting value for money, the PMS replied that these were matters for Parliament.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13633.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 16:45:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 16:45:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:55" post_name="mps-allowances" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="MPs' allowances" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4834" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/25/4834" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be any review of the power of the NAO or anything arising from the resignation arising from Sir John Bourn, the PMS replied that this again was something for Parliament to take forward. The PAC were responsible for the governance of the NAO, and they had announced that they would be bringing forward proposals to look at the governance of the NAO. But that was something that was very much for Parliament rather than for Government.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the implications were for Government spending, the PMS replied that the main implication for Government was that if they did bring forward any proposals that had legislative implications, then we would need to find legislative time for that. And Jack Straw said today that as part of the Constitutional Reform Bill we would make space for any legislative proposals that came out of the PAC review.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13633.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-25 16:45:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-25 16:45:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-25 15:45:54" post_name="national-audit-office" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="National Audit Office" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4835" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/26/4835" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that Ed Balls had said he spent most of his time in his constituency and asked if the Prime Minister was concerned he was not committed to his job, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) said that that was a question for DCFS and Ed Balls' spokesman.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister believed Ed Balls, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister thought Ed Balls was a very good Cabinet Minister. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13634.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-26 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-26 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:58" post_name="ed-balls" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Ed Balls" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4836" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/26/4836" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for details on the National Security Strategy; whether or not there would be a debate in the House of Commons and the country and if it would be published before Parliament, the PMS said that the expectation was that there would be a document published sometime before the end of year. We would expect it to happen while Parliament was sitting.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13634.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-26 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-26 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:57" post_name="national-security-strategy" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="National Security Strategy" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4837" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/26/4837" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for an update re the situation on detention without charge and whether or not we were waiting for an amendment on the Criminal Justice Bill, the PMS said essentially, yes. The Prime Minister made a statement regarding this in July where he set out a number of options including doubling the period up to 56 days. There was an ongoing consultation ahead of any legislation that may emerge in the next session.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be a separate bill, the PMS said that in the list of Draft Bills, which were published in the Draft Queen's Speech, there was a separate Counter Terrorism Bill.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13634.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-26 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-26 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:56" post_name="detention-without-chargecriminal-justice-bill" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Detention Without Charge/Criminal Justice Bill" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4838" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/26/4838" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what to expect from the Saudi Arabian visit next week, the PMS said that there was not much to say at this point. There was a state visit from the King of Saudi Arabia; obviously they were an important ally for us and next week would be an opportunity to take stock of bilateral issues.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be raising any human rights issues with the King of Saudi Arabia next week, the PMS said that the Prime Minister would be raising whatever issues he considered to be relevant and important.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had brought up the subject of human rights with President Erdogan on Tuesday, the PMS said there had been an opportunity to ask the Prime Minister questions at the press conference. He went on to say that the main issue discussed was the security situation in south-eastern Turkey.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13634.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-26 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-26 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-26 10:00:55" post_name="saudi-arabian-visit" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Saudi Arabian Visit" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4839" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/29/4839" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by informing Lobby that the Prime Minister had recorded a climate change message for the International Carbon Action Partnership, which was launching today in Portugal. The scheme involved several European countries, American States and other parties. The Prime Minister recorded the message as he was unable to attend.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13642.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-29 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-29 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-29 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-29 10:00:58" post_name="climate-change-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Climate Change" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4840" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/29/4840" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked for any background on the rather sudden announcement that the Foreign Secretary had adopted a son and pulled out of meeting with the Saudi Foreign Minister, the PMS replied that she would not be getting into any details regarding the Foreign Secretary's personal circumstances. The Foreign Office had issued a short statement that set out the brief detail, but the meeting would go ahead today with Kim Howells in the Foreign Secretary's place.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for reaction to the news this morning that Saudi Arabia had given Britain intelligence material that could have prevented the 7/7 bombings, the PMS replied that the Home Office had already issued their response to that particular issue, and we had nothing further to add to that. The UK-Saudi Arabia &amp;quot;Two Kingdoms&amp;quot; dialogue taking place today would provide us with an important opportunity to discuss a wide range of issues which would include peace and security in the Middle East, and also our joint determination to fight terrorism.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be raising the issue of human rights in Saudi Arabia with the King, the PMS replied that as we said last week when asked this question, as the meeting was not until Wednesday, we would not be getting into details. But the Prime Minister would obviously raise issues that he believed to be appropriate. Where we have had concerns in the past regarding human rights, we had made those views clear to the Saudi authorities. But equally we did have to recognise that there were important developments underway in Saudi Arabia, for example the establishment of the National Human Rights Council.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for the Prime Minister's position on the Serious Fraud Office inquiry, and whether he believed that it was still a good idea that this should have been dropped, the PMS replied that the Government's position on this issue had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government was still opposed to a public inquiry on the 7/7 attacks, the PMS replied again that the Government's position on this had not changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with the Saudi King that Britain was not doing enough to fight terrorism, the PMS replied that particular issues surrounding counter-terrorism had been dealt with by the Home Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if counter-terrorism ministers would be attending the &amp;quot;Two Kingdoms&amp;quot; dialogue, the PMS replied that we would check the exact cast list, but Kim Howells would be attending and counter-terrorism was one of the issues on the agenda.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was correct that neither the Foreign Secretary or the Saudi Foreign Minister would be attending, the PMS replied that as we had said, Kim Howells would be attending in place of David Miliband in light of the personal circumstances that had arisen.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Foreign Office told the Saudis that the Foreign Secretary would not be attending, the PMS referred journalists to the Foreign Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister thought was good about Saudi Arabia's human rights record, the PMS replied that the Government had where necessary raised concerns that we had regarding human rights. But equally we recognised that there were developments underway with the establishment of the National Human Rights Council for example. There had also been recent local council elections, and encouraging statements from the authorities that women would vote next time elections take place. So whilst we had raised concerns in the past, we did also have to recognise developments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Prime Minister became aware that the Foreign Secretary would not be attending the meeting, the PMS replied that she would not be getting into details, but the Prime Minister was aware of the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked why the Saudi Foreign Minister was not attending, the PMS replied that that question should be addressed to the Foreign Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that it was a snub, the PMS replied that she certainly did not recognise that description of events.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Kim Howells' opposite number would be attending, the PMS replied that it was her understanding that he would be attending.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for the official reason given for the Foreign Secretary not attending, the PMS replied that she did not have the statement to hand, but the Foreign Secretary was unable to attend due to personal circumstances of a happy nature. But Lobby would appreciate that it was not her position to brief on these things.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13642.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-29 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-29 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-29 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-29 10:00:57" post_name="saudi-state-visit" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Saudi State Visit" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4841" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/29/4841" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the Liam Byrne statement on immigration, the PMS replied that the update had been scheduled for some time, and asked Lobby to wait for the content from Liam Byrne tomorrow.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with David Cameron that the numbers of immigrants was too high at the moment, the PMS replied that the Government was committed to managing migration in Britain's national interest, in that it was Government's role to set a framework that ensures that migration was both managed and to the benefit to the UK. It was vital that we take the social impact of immigration into account when making decisions, which was why we had set up the Migration Impact Forum to asses the impact on local services, and why we would be introducing the points-based system in around 140 days time. But it was important that we also recognised the economic benefits of migration. We had chosen not to go down the route of arbitrary targets.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the statement would be oral or written, the PMS replied that she believed it would be a Written Ministerial Statement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was still the Government's policy to oppose an annual limit on migrants, the PMS replied that the Government's policy on that issue had not changed. We were ensuring that migration was a managed process and one that continued to benefit the UK, but one that continued to take into account the impact on local services.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Home Office was privately considering that perhaps there should be some change on the policy of opposing an annual limit, the PMS replied that as she had said, the Government's position on this had not changed, what we were looking at was managed migration.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13642.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-29 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-29 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-29 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-29 10:00:56" post_name="immigration" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Immigration" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4842" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4842" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by referring journalists to a quote from the Prime Minister in reaction to FIFA's decision regarding the Football World Cup, opening the way for European countries to bid for the tournament in the year 2018:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I am delighted that FIFA have opened the door for the World Cup to come back to England. By 2018, it will be 52 years since England hosted the World Cup. The nation which gave football to the world deserves to have the greatest tournament back on these shores. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;With the Olympics in 2012, possibly the Commonwealth Games in 2014, the Rugby World Cup in 2015 and the Cricket World Cup in 2019, a Football World Cup in 2018 would crown what I believe can be the greatest decade ever for British sport.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;If The FA decide to go ahead and bid for the tournament, they know they will have the full support of the Government behind them, and we will make it our mission to persuade other countries to back us in bringing the World Cup back to England.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="world-cup" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="World Cup" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4843" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4843" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be calling off his meeting with the King of Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that the Prime Minister's meeting would go ahead as planned. As the PMS had said that morning, Saudi Arabia was one of the UK's important international partners and the Government saw the visit as being an opportunity to deepen and broaden that relationship. The Foreign Office had held their UK-Saudi Arabia Two Kingdoms dialogue today, where issues including peace and security in the Middle East and the countries shared determination to fight terrorism were raised. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Whilst the Government had raised concerns with Saudi Arabia, it was also necessary to recognize the developments that were underway in that country. Asked if the meeting was not called off, would the Prime Minister raise the issue of civil liberties and human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that people would have to wait for the meeting to take place.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="saudi-arabia" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Saudi Arabia" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4844" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4844" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was a slightly unusual procedure for a statement to be released by the Labour Party under the name of the Immigration Minister, attacking David Cameron's speech on immigration and did the Government share the views expressed by the Labour Party, the PMS replied that she would not get into the Labour Party response. The PMS added that in the next ten minutes, Tony McNulty would respond as Government Minister at the Home Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Liam Byrne's response was not the Government's response, the PMS said that it was done in a party political capacity, but his response stood. However, people could expect a further response from Tony McNulty this afternoon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be the same response or a different response the PMS pointed out that Tony McNulty had not given the response yet, so people would have to wait to hear what he had to say. Asked if he would disagree with the comments of Liam Byrne, the PMS said she couldn't see that being the case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was because Liam Byrne was doing the Borders Bill, the PMS replied that it was correct that he had been caught up on various things today.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="immigration-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Immigration" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4845" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4845" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had a chance to congratulate the Foreign Secretary yet, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was aware of the Foreign Secretary's good news and would be passing on his good wishes.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="misc-16" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4846" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4846" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by referring journalists to a quote from the Prime Minister in reaction to FIFA's decision regarding the Football World Cup, opening the way for European countries to bid for the tournament in the year 2018:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I am delighted that FIFA have opened the door for the World Cup to come back to England. By 2018, it will be 52 years since England hosted the World Cup. The nation which gave football to the world deserves to have the greatest tournament back on these shores. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;With the Olympics in 2012, possibly the Commonwealth Games in 2014, the Rugby World Cup in 2015 and the Cricket World Cup in 2019, a Football World Cup in 2018 would crown what I believe can be the greatest decade ever for British sport.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;If The FA decide to go ahead and bid for the tournament, they know they will have the full support of the Government behind them, and we will make it our mission to persuade other countries to back us in bringing the World Cup back to England.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="world-cup-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="World Cup" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4847" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4847" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be calling off his meeting with the King of Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that the Prime Minister's meeting would go ahead as planned. As the PMS had said that morning, Saudi Arabia was one of the UK's important international partners and the Government saw the visit as being an opportunity to deepen and broaden that relationship. The Foreign Office had held their UK-Saudi Arabia Two Kingdoms dialogue today, where issues including peace and security in the Middle East and the countries shared determination to fight terrorism were raised. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Whilst the Government had raised concerns with Saudi Arabia, it was also necessary to recognize the developments that were underway in that country. Asked if the meeting was not called off, would the Prime Minister raise the issue of civil liberties and human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that people would have to wait for the meeting to take place.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="saudi-arabia-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Saudi Arabia" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4848" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4848" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was a slightly unusual procedure for a statement to be released by the Labour Party under the name of the Immigration Minister, attacking David Cameron's speech on immigration and did the Government share the views expressed by the Labour Party, the PMS replied that she would not get into the Labour Party response. The PMS added that in the next ten minutes, Tony McNulty would respond as Government Minister at the Home Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Liam Byrne's response was not the Government's response, the PMS said that it was done in a party political capacity, but his response stood. However, people could expect a further response from Tony McNulty this afternoon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be the same response or a different response the PMS pointed out that Tony McNulty had not given the response yet, so people would have to wait to hear what he had to say. Asked if he would disagree with the comments of Liam Byrne, the PMS said she couldn't see that being the case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was because Liam Byrne was doing the Borders Bill, the PMS replied that it was correct that he had been caught up on various things today.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="immigration-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Immigration" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4849" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4849" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had a chance to congratulate the Foreign Secretary yet, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was aware of the Foreign Secretary's good news and would be passing on his good wishes.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="misc-17" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4850" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4850" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by referring journalists to a quote from the Prime Minister in reaction to FIFA's decision regarding the Football World Cup, opening the way for European countries to bid for the tournament in the year 2018:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I am delighted that FIFA have opened the door for the World Cup to come back to England. By 2018, it will be 52 years since England hosted the World Cup. The nation which gave football to the world deserves to have the greatest tournament back on these shores. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;With the Olympics in 2012, possibly the Commonwealth Games in 2014, the Rugby World Cup in 2015 and the Cricket World Cup in 2019, a Football World Cup in 2018 would crown what I believe can be the greatest decade ever for British sport.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;If The FA decide to go ahead and bid for the tournament, they know they will have the full support of the Government behind them, and we will make it our mission to persuade other countries to back us in bringing the World Cup back to England.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="world-cup-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="World Cup" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4851" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4851" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be calling off his meeting with the King of Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that the Prime Minister's meeting would go ahead as planned. As the PMS had said that morning, Saudi Arabia was one of the UK's important international partners and the Government saw the visit as being an opportunity to deepen and broaden that relationship. The Foreign Office had held their UK-Saudi Arabia Two Kingdoms dialogue today, where issues including peace and security in the Middle East and the countries shared determination to fight terrorism were raised. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Whilst the Government had raised concerns with Saudi Arabia, it was also necessary to recognize the developments that were underway in that country. Asked if the meeting was not called off, would the Prime Minister raise the issue of civil liberties and human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that people would have to wait for the meeting to take place.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="saudi-arabia-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Saudi Arabia" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4852" comment_count="2" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4852" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was a slightly unusual procedure for a statement to be released by the Labour Party under the name of the Immigration Minister, attacking David Cameron's speech on immigration and did the Government share the views expressed by the Labour Party, the PMS replied that she would not get into the Labour Party response. The PMS added that in the next ten minutes, Tony McNulty would respond as Government Minister at the Home Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Liam Byrne's response was not the Government's response, the PMS said that it was done in a party political capacity, but his response stood. However, people could expect a further response from Tony McNulty this afternoon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be the same response or a different response the PMS pointed out that Tony McNulty had not given the response yet, so people would have to wait to hear what he had to say. Asked if he would disagree with the comments of Liam Byrne, the PMS said she couldn't see that being the case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was because Liam Byrne was doing the Borders Bill, the PMS replied that it was correct that he had been caught up on various things today.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="immigration-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Immigration" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4853" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/1970/01/01/4853" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had a chance to congratulate the Foreign Secretary yet, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was aware of the Foreign Secretary's good news and would be passing on his good wishes.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_date_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="1970-01-01 01:00:00" post_modified_gmt="1970-01-01 00:00:00" post_name="misc-18" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4854" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/29/4854" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by referring journalists to a quote from the Prime Minister in reaction to FIFA's decision regarding the Football World Cup, opening the way for European countries to bid for the tournament in the year 2018:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I am delighted that FIFA have opened the door for the World Cup to come back to England. By 2018, it will be 52 years since England hosted the World Cup. The nation which gave football to the world deserves to have the greatest tournament back on these shores. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;With the Olympics in 2012, possibly the Commonwealth Games in 2014, the Rugby World Cup in 2015 and the Cricket World Cup in 2019, a Football World Cup in 2018 would crown what I believe can be the greatest decade ever for British sport.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;If The FA decide to go ahead and bid for the tournament, they know they will have the full support of the Government behind them, and we will make it our mission to persuade other countries to back us in bringing the World Cup back to England.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-29 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-29 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:58" post_name="world-cup-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="World Cup" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4855" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/29/4855" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be calling off his meeting with the King of Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that the Prime Minister's meeting would go ahead as planned. As the PMS had said that morning, Saudi Arabia was one of the UK's important international partners and the Government saw the visit as being an opportunity to deepen and broaden that relationship. The Foreign Office had held their UK-Saudi Arabia Two Kingdoms dialogue today, where issues including peace and security in the Middle East and the countries shared determination to fight terrorism were raised. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Whilst the Government had raised concerns with Saudi Arabia, it was also necessary to recognize the developments that were underway in that country. Asked if the meeting was not called off, would the Prime Minister raise the issue of civil liberties and human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, the PMS said that people would have to wait for the meeting to take place.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-29 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-29 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:57" post_name="saudi-arabia-4" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Saudi Arabia" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4856" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/29/4856" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was a slightly unusual procedure for a statement to be released by the Labour Party under the name of the Immigration Minister, attacking David Cameron's speech on immigration and did the Government share the views expressed by the Labour Party, the PMS replied that she would not get into the Labour Party response. The PMS added that in the next ten minutes, Tony McNulty would respond as Government Minister at the Home Office.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Liam Byrne's response was not the Government's response, the PMS said that it was done in a party political capacity, but his response stood. However, people could expect a further response from Tony McNulty this afternoon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it would be the same response or a different response the PMS pointed out that Tony McNulty had not given the response yet, so people would have to wait to hear what he had to say. Asked if he would disagree with the comments of Liam Byrne, the PMS said she couldn't see that being the case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was because Liam Byrne was doing the Borders Bill, the PMS replied that it was correct that he had been caught up on various things today.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-29 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-29 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:56" post_name="immigration-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Immigration" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4857" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/29/4857" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had had a chance to congratulate the Foreign Secretary yet, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister was aware of the Foreign Secretary's good news and would be passing on his good wishes.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13648.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-29 16:45:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-29 16:45:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-29 15:45:55" post_name="misc-19" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4858" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/30/4858" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by telling the assembled press that the main item discussed at Cabinet that morning was the Queen's Speech. Asked about the contents of the speech, the PMS said that the draft of the Queen's speech set out a large number of potential Bills on which there would then be consultation, as well as consultation on the overall package itself. For the first time the Government had given an indication of what Bills were being considered and what the likely content of those Bills would be, in advance of the actual Queen's speech next week.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13655.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-30 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-30 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:58" post_name="queens-speech" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Queen's speech" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4859" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/30/4859" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked what steps were being taken by the Government to make sure figures for the number of immigrants were correct, after the Government got its figures wrong for the number of foreign workers in the UK, the PMS replied that it was clearly a matter for the relevant departments, the DWP in this case. Once the department was alerted to this particular issue, they had taken steps to inform the public of the updated situation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when minister's were first made aware the figures were wrong, the PMS said that it was best to speak to DWP on the matter. Asked when the figures for violence carried out on ethnic minorities would be published as they were expected today, the PMS replied that he didn't have any information on the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government was doing anything more broadly on getting migration figures into shape, the PMS replied that in relation to all of the Government's statistics, it wanted to make sure the Government operated on the best possible information. That was why reforms had been made to the statistics system with the introduction of National Statistics and the reforms that had been made to the ONS in the late 1990's. Subsequent reforms had recently been legislated on, in relation to moving towards full statutory independence for the ONS. So it was true there were steps in hand and it was the Government's intention to ensure it always had the best information in order to inform policy decisions. The PMS added that on specifics in relation to specific numbers it would probably be best to talk to the individual departments rather than to No.10.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the ONS had been complaining for four years that the migration figures were inadequate and based on tiny samples, the PMS said that it was his understanding that these were figures put together by DWP, but again in terms of specifics it was best to speak to DWP. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In response to the suggestion that a lot of local authorities had complained about migration figures in relation to their funding and were there any moves to change the way they were gathered, the PMS reiterated that it was the Government's intention to always ensure that the public sector as a whole, had the best possible information available. That was why once the situation had come to light, the Government had amended the figures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister himself was taking any steps to ensure that cross-Government, there was a review into the way in which such figures were gathered, the PMS said that when the Prime Minister was Chancellor he had taken a number of steps to improve and enhance the system for collating and publishing statistics. Asked if the Prime Minister thought anything had to be done now, the PMS replied that there were obviously issues that had arisen and these would have to be looked at. However, this was a particular issue that had arisen in relation to DWP and Peter Hain had dealt with it yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King had said that statistics were &amp;quot;hopelessly inadequate&amp;quot; and the Government did not have any statistics on migration that were accurate, the PMS said that clearly there had been an issue in relation to checking peoples records when they left the country and that was something the Government was seeking to amend by reintroducing exit controls. Put that Mervyn King was talking about people arriving as well as leaving the country, the PMS said that he did not have the full text of the Mervyn King intervention. The PMS added that it was his recollection that Mervyn King was making a more general comment about population and migration statistics and it was addressed more to the ONS.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked again if the Prime Minister was broadly happy with how the migration figures were collated and whether he believed them to be adequate, the PMS said that the Prime Minister believed that the Government needed to have the best possible systems in place in relation to all statistics and that was why significant reforms had been made to the statistical system when he was Chancellor, in order to improve the overall reporting of statistics.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government would be willing to fund the money to produce decent migration statistics, the PMS replied that the Government already funded the ONS and the relevant departments for their statistics. If there were particular issues that people had identified, then obviously these would need to be looked at, but the PMS was not aware that there were such issues, or that there were such requests or bids for extra funding in the system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the Prime Minister's mood was when he was informed of the statistics, the PMS said it was fair to say that the Prime Minister was focussing on the business of Government and getting on with the job.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought the Government now had the best possible system in place, the PMS replied that such things needed to be kept under constant review and where there were issues such as this arising, action had to be taken to identify the issues and then take corrective action. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was a review under way of how the figures were collected, the PMS said that this had only recently come to light, DWP had announced the figures and it was for them to look at their own internal systems.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that calls made by Peter Hain to inform people about the change in information last night, came through the Downing Street switchboard and had he made the calls from Downing Street, the PMS said not to his knowledge. It was a normal way of contacting people and he advised people not to read anything into it.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13655.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-30 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-30 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:57" post_name="migration-figures" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Migration figures" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4860" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/30/4860" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about the possibility of there being a bin tax, the PMS replied that the Government's response had not changed since he was last asked about it on Thursday. It was a complex issue, there were lots of difficult issues that needed to be considered, it was important to strike the right balance. That was why the Government had announced yesterday that there would be some pilot schemes, looking at ways in which local authorities can introduce incentives for household waste minimisation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Prime Minister had vetoed the idea, the PMS replied that last Thursday he had said that it was a very complex issue and would need to be considered carefully. This was at a time when it was being put to the Government that they were on the point of announcing a national charge for people putting their rubbish out. What was announced yesterday was that there would be a power introduced for some local authorities to pilot schemes in order to improver incentives for household waste minimisation. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government would decide on which local authorities could carry out the pilot schemes, the PMS replied that it would be up for local authorities to come forward with specific proposals, but exactly how this would be taken forward would be made clear in further announcements.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13655.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-30 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-30 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:56" post_name="bin-tax" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Bin tax" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4861" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/30/4861" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to comment on what the Prime Minister would be talking to the King of Saudi Arabia about and would that include human rights violations, the PMS replied that he could not say anything in advance of the meeting. Obviously Saudi Arabia was a very important ally and one of Britain's most important international partners. The Government wanted to have a constructive relationship with the Saudi's who were an important partner in cooperation in the fight against terrorism and it was important that the UK continued to engage with them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Prime Minister last visited Saudi Arabia, the PMS said he was not sure if the Prime Minister had visited Saudi Arabia but would check for people.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13655.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-30 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-30 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:55" post_name="saudi-arabia-5" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Saudi Arabia" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4862" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/10/30/4862" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister welcomed the IOC's decision to allow a British Olympic football team, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had set out his views on such matters in the past and the position had not changed. The PMS added that he would have to check exactly what the position was, but he was sure they had been set out in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if David Miliband was at Cabinet this morning, the PMS replied that he was not at Cabinet.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister would be wearing a white tie this evening, the PMS said that the dress code for the event was set by the Queen and the Prime Minister would abide by it. Asked if it was true that the Prime Minister had spent &amp;pound;3000 on taxpayer's money on a suit for the event, the PMS replied that he did not know but would check if people wanted him to.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13655.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-10-30 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-10-30 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-10-30 10:00:54" post_name="misc-20" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Misc" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4863" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/05/4863" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was confident that British banks could weather the current crisis, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that Alistair Darling had been on the radio that morning speaking on the subject. As the Chancellor had said, there was concern about the extent of the exposure that some of the big American banks had. But as the Chancellor had also said, banks and many banks in this country had very strong balance sheets after years of making very good profits. Asked if the Prime Minister had a view on the subject, the PMS said that the Prime Minister thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was the Government spokesman on economic matters and he had spoken about these matters that morning on the radio.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13706.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-05 11:00:58" post_date_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-05 11:00:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:58" post_name="finance" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Finance" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4864" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/05/4864" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had had any contact with Commonwealth leaders on the subject since his telephone conversation with General Musharraf on Thursday and did he have any concerns about the situation, the PMS replied that clearly there had been contact with all levels of the Government in Pakistan, as well as with other countries to discuss the matter. As the Foreign Secretary had said on Saturday, the Government was gravely concerned about the situation in Pakistan, and the Government had urged President Musharraf to restore constitutional order as soon as possible and to confirm that elections would be held on schedule in January.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if any further steps were being considered, the PMS said that the Government were considering the implications for it's development and other assistance programmes in Pakistan. These things were kept under review, but the key thing from the Government's point of view was to have confirmation that elections would be held on schedule in January and the restoration of normal democratic and constitutional processes. Put that the Government expressed concern but did not condemn the emergency, the PMS replied that the Government expressed concern and reiterated the need for commitment to be reaffirmed over elections taking place in January. The Government wanted to see the normal democratic processes being restored.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister thought the position of the state of emergency helped or hindered the war on terror, the PMS said the Government wanted to see a prosperous, peaceful, secure and stable Pakistan and this was clearly in the interest not only of the people of Pakistan, but of the region and the world as a whole. The Government thought the best way of achieving that would be to restore the commitment to democratic processes and in particular the elections in January.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that there were reports this morning of General Musharraf himself, being under house arrest and was that a concern for the Government, the PMS replied that the Government had seen the reports but had also seen the denial of them by President Musharraf, so the PMS would not identify any particular aspect. It was a more general concern about the fact that the Government needed to see the restoration of normal constitutional practice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had spoken to Benazir Bhuto or any other political figures, the PMS repeated that the Government was in contact with a wide range of people in Pakistan at all levels, but he did not want to comment on anyone specific. It would be best to check with the Foreign Office on specifics.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was a time limit on the Government considering the implications for its development and assistance programmes, the PMS advised people to wait and see how things developed. Asked to put a figure on the development aid to Pakistan, the PMS replied that he did not have that figure to hand, but he was sure DfID would have it.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13706.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-05 11:00:57" post_date_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-05 11:00:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:57" post_name="pakistan" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Pakistan" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4865" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/05/4865" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister was still convinced about the need to increase the period of time terror suspects could be kept in custody, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had set out his position on the subject in his statement to the house on the 25th July 2007 and that position had not changed. There was a case for going beyond 28 days as the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and others had said on numerous occasions and the Government was in the process of consulting on what the most appropriate method might be for doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Director General of MI5 was making a speech today, in which he would be warning people of the current security threat and had the Prime Minister read the speech or known about the timing of it, considering the Government could be rolling out new anti-terror legislation tomorrow, the PMS replied that the timing was entirely a matter for MI5 and was not influenced by the Government. The PMS added that he did not accept the premise of the question necessarily, that the Government would be rolling out details or coming out with new proposals tomorrow in relation to counter-terrorism. Put that there would be a bill tomorrow on the subject; the PMS said that people would have to wait and see what the Queen said. The PMS was not suggesting otherwise, but equally he was not suggesting that there would be new detailed proposals tomorrow.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if talks with other party leaders had continued on the issue, the PMS said it was his understanding that there had been some discussion, but it was being very much led by the Home Secretary, so it would be best to check with the Home Office.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13706.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-05 11:00:56" post_date_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-05 11:00:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:56" post_name="counter-terrorism" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Counter Terrorism" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4866" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/05/4866" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister was considering shelving the role-out of ID cards, the PMS replied that there had been no change on the Government's position on ID cards. There had been one newspaper report on Sunday and the Home Office had made clear that there was nothing to substantiate it. Asked if the report was &amp;quot;garbage,&amp;quot; the PMS said that he did not want to use such language, but the Government had been denying those suggestions quite forcefully.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked on the report in the Guardian saying there was to be a review on the technology used, the PMS reiterated that the position on ID cards had not changed. The PMS added that these things were kept constantly under review as people would expect, but nothing had changed in regards to ID cards.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Prime Minister had ordered any fresh review into the technology since he became Prime Minister, the PMS said he was not aware of any review.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13706.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-05 11:00:55" post_date_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-05 11:00:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:55" post_name="id-cards" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="ID Cards" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4867" comment_count="1" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/05/4867" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked about reports on a separate immigration bill and whether the points-based system could effectively reduce the EU immigration rate by 35,000, the PMS replied that he had seen the reports, but it would be best to check with the Home Office on the specifics.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked on the points system again and the possibility of ending up with a system with a minimum and maximum amount in terms of migration, the PMS said the whole point of the points-based system was to put in place a framework which would help identify and give weightings to particular sectors of the economy. It was then for individuals and individual businesses to make decisions as to the exact numbers of people that would come in and out, year by year.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the threshold was set at a particular level for different industries and therefore the Government was effectively imposing a cap, the PMS said it would depend on decisions being taken by individuals. The points-based system was about the weighting attached to people with specific skills, depending on an assessment of what the skills needs were for the economy. It was not about setting overall limits. Put that projections or realistic assumptions could be made about the number of people using that framework, the PMS replied that it was a different matter from suggesting that there should be an overall cap enforced, so that once the cap was reached, no further people could be let into the country, regardless of what the needs were of the economy or businesses. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked whether people could assume that the advisory group would make projections, the PMS replied that it would be a matter for them. For the detailed process by which they would operate, it would be best to speak to the Home Office. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13706.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-05 11:00:54" post_date_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-05 11:00:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:54" post_name="immigration-6" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Immigration" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4868" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/05/4868" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked whether the Government felt it could proceed with any legislation on party funding following the collapse of talks last week, the PMS said there were two distinct matters, the Government position and the Labour Party position. The PMS said he could only speak for the Government, which was trying to seek a consensus through the Hayden-Phillips process. In terms of any particular statements in relation to legislation or proposals being taking forward, it would probably be best to wait for the Queens Speech tomorrow, when a follow-up discussion could take place.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13706.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-05 11:00:53" post_date_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-05 11:00:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-05 10:00:53" post_name="party-funding" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Party Funding" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4869" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/06/4869" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by reminding Lobby that the Prime Minister had said in the House that it was our intention to extend up the age range of the statutory right to request flexible working. A Department for Business, Enterprise &amp;amp; Regulatory Reform press notice made clear that we were going to have an independent review of how the current right to request flexible working could be extended to parents of older children. The PMS emphasised that it was a review of how, not whether to extend up the age range. The review would be conducted by Imelda Walsh, the Human Resources Director of Sainsbury's. The PMS then read out some facts on flexible working. The statutory entitlement of flexible working was currently for parents of children under the age of six, and of parents with disabled children up to the age of 18. This accounted for 6.25million parents. If this was extended to parents of children under the age of nine, there would be and extra 1.4 million parents. If it was extended to parents of children under the age of 12, there would be and extra 2.6 million parents. And if it were to be extended to parents of children under the age of 17, there would be an extra 4.5 million parents. All of this was on top of the original 6.25 million.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked for a timescale for the review on flexible working, the PMS replied that clearly we would want this to be a consultative process, we would want this to be in consultation with business, and that was why we had chosen somebody from the corporate sector to head up this review. On exact process it was probably best to check with DBERR.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what the general proposals were in terms of flexible working, and what did it allow a typical worker to do, the PMS replied that it gave people a statutory right to work flexibly. In other words, perhaps working from home, or having flexible hours for example.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the proposal would be for all parents that worked with children, the PMS replied that at the moment there was a statutory requirement that parents with children up to the age of six, plus parents with disabled children up to the age of 18, had the right to request flexible working. We were consulting on how we could extend this to parents of older children. There was already a well-established mechanism in place for parents of a particular group of children, this was about extending that to parents of older children.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about the financial costs of this proposal, the PMS replied that this was something that would have to be looked at as part of the review process.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was correct that with the under six proposals, employers only had a set number of reasons that they could use to refuse, the PMS replied that his understanding was that this was correct.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there would be penalties for employers who refused, the PMS replied that again DBERR could give the exact details. But in a sense we were not proposing a new regime. There already was a regime, so there would be a straightforward factual answer to the question that DBERR could give. We were extending the existing regime to a wider group of parents.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if this applied to all companies, the example of the corner shop was mentioned in Parliament, the PMS replied that the example of the corner shop was about pensions. But as he had said, this proposal was not to change the scope of the existing legislation in terms of what was covered, so this again was a straightforward question that DBERR could answer. This was about how we extended this to parents of older children, not changing the scope.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if this would make the British economy more or less competitive, the PMS replied that employer groups had supported action we had taken in the past in relation to flexible working. This was something that we wanted to take forward in consultation with employer groups, and that was why we had asked somebody from the business community to lead this review.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked when we could expect them to come back with developments, and was there guidance on a preferred age, the PMS replied that obviously there were a number of factors that needed to be taken into account, and on the exact process it was probably best to speak to DBERR. We would look at all the issues in terms of taking a view as to what the appropriate age limit for children might be. In a way the reason we had set up this review, was to make sure that we did a cross examination of this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that if the age limit was 17 then there would be huge costs, the PMS replied that this was one of the issues that would need to be looked at, and why we wanted to do this in consultation with the business community.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that if it was a matter of how rather than whether, and asked what would stop the Government wanting to accept this, the PMS replied that we had done this step by step, and there were a number of factors that need taking into account in making that decision. But this Government had a good track record in relation to introducing flexible working measures step by step. We were the first Government to introduce the statutory right to flexible working. The Prime Minister, as Chancellor, on a number of Budgets and Pre-Budget reports took action for example to increase statutory maternity pay as well. This was something that we needed to do step by step.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13712.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-06 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-06 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:58" post_name="flexible-working" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Flexible Working" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4870" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/06/4870" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked when the Prime Minister would be publishing his proposals on Inheritance Tax, the PMS replied that if someone put in an FOI request then that would be looked at. But as the Prime Minister had made clear, the proposals for the reform to Inheritance Tax that was made in the Pre-Budget Report was something that was actively considered ahead of the Budget.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Tory leader had made a call for the records to be released just now, and the Prime Minister made clear that the records vindicated his version of events, and was this not a good justification to issue records now to prove that the Tory leader was absolutely wrong, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister had said what he had said in the House, and we would consider the request from the opposition leader.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how long this might take, the PMS replied that we had just had this request and we would consider it. Asked if we were lawfully allowed to do this, the PMS replied that if there was an FOI request, and we would have to look under the law as to what we were able to do, but if there were a request then it would be something that we would need to respond to.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if we could voluntarily release them, the PMS replied that he was sure the Government could publish whatever it wanted to publish. But there was a well-established mechanism of getting the information in to the public domain through the FOI process.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13712.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-06 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-06 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:57" post_name="inheritance-tax" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Inheritance Tax" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4871" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/06/4871" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that there was not a great deal in the Queen's Speech on counter-terrorism, the PMS replied that we had not suggested that this was the opportunity to bring forward new detailed proposals on counter-terrorism. We had said there would be a counter-terrorism Bill, but clearly there would be a process of consultation that would continue no doubt over the weeks ahead. We had always said that we wanted to take this forward in a consultative way and on a consensual basis, and that remained our intention.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13712.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-06 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-06 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:56" post_name="counter-terrorism-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Counter-Terrorism" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4872" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/06/4872" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked to flesh out what sort of things we were looking at in terms of citizenship, the PMS replied that there was not much he could say at the moment. We had asked Lord Goldsmith in July to look at a number of issues in relation to citizenship. All we were doing today was saying that we would bring forward a draft bill in order to take forward any recommendations from that process that required primary legislation.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13712.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-06 16:45:55" post_date_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-06 16:45:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:55" post_name="immigration-7" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Immigration" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4873" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/06/4873" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that the Phillips Report suggested going ahead with a formula on more state funding for parties in elections, and asked if it was on the basis of the Phillips Report that the Government was proceeding, the PMS replied that a distinction need to be made between the Labour Party position and the Government position. It was not for him to talk about the Labour Party position. The Government, through the Hayden Phillips process, was trying to find a consensual solution to this. But it was for the parties to work together to find that solution.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Government would bring forward proposals, the PMS replied that it was the intention to bring forward proposals, but it was the intention to bring forward proposals on the basis of cooperation and consensus between the parties.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13712.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-06 16:45:54" post_date_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-06 16:45:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-06 15:45:54" post_name="party-funding-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Party Funding" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4874" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4874" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;The Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) began by telling the assembled press that Lord Drayson would be taking leave of absence from the Government to pursue an opportunity to compete in the US Le Mans motor racing series. It was an unforeseen opportunity that had arisen from his success in coming second in this year's British GT championship. Lord Drayson was a committed motor racing fan and he had been given a unique opportunity to compete in the US Le Mans series next year, which was apparently the next step towards being able to qualify for the actual Le Mans series, which was a long-held ambition of his. The PMS went on to say that there was an exchange of letters between Lord Drayson and the Prime Minister that set this out in detail.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lord Drayson would be replaced as Minister for Defence Equipment and Support by Baroness Ann Taylor. Lord Drayson was also jointly a Minister at the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR.) Lord Bach would be returning as a member of the Government as a Lords Whip, supporting BERR's business in the House of Lords, with Pat Mcfadden handling the regulatory brief at BERR.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that British troops had been saying that their equipment was not of a sufficient standard and was this connected to the fact that Lord Drayson had been spending too much time motor racing, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister in his letter, had set out the many achievements of Lord Drayson in Government and most people in the sector and elsewhere would accept that Lord Drayson had been a very good and very committed Minister. But because this unique opportunity had arisen and he did not think it could be combined with his Government responsibilities, Lord Drayson had decided to take a leave of absence.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if taking a leave of absence meant that Lord Drayson was guaranteed to come back to his old job, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had said in his letter that he looked forward to Lord Drayson's return to Government when his leave of absence ended, but to make it clear, Ann Taylor had been appointed on a permanent basis as the new Defence Minister. Put that people did not know how long Lord Drayson would be away for, the PMS confirmed this and added that the Government was not necessarily saying he would come back to his old job, merely returning to Government.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the phrase &amp;quot;leave of absence,&amp;quot; referred to the House of Lords rather than the Government or did it refer to both, the PMS replied that Lord Drayson would continue to be a supporter of the Government in the House of Lords. Asked if Ann Taylor would continue to be paid as a Parliamentary Under-Secretary still, the PMS replied that she would be.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Lord Drayson was paid while he was a Government Minister, the PMS said he was unpaid. Put that it was an extra salary now, the PMS confirmed that it would be, but added that people should bear in mind that the number of paid Minister's was the same as it was since the formation of the Government at the end of June. The reason for that was that Lord Evans had left the Government, Baroness Farrington had given up her salary and Baroness Morgan would now be paid as a Baroness in waiting rather than a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State. What that meant was that in total, the number of paid Ministers was the same as it was at the end of June. Asked if there was any connection between the people giving up their salaries and the Lord Drayson decision, the PMS said they were separate decisions. Lord Evans had left several weeks, if not months ago.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if Lord Drayson had a Government car and was he behind the wheel, the PMS said he assumed that Lord Drayson had a Government car but would not continue to do so once he had left the Government. The PMS advised people to check with the Ministry of Defence as to whether Lord Drayson drove the car or not.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13715.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:58" post_name="lord-drayson" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Lord Drayson" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4875" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4875" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had any view on how long terrorists should be held without charge, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister's view was the Government's view, which was set out very clearly in July. Based on the trends that had been emerging in terms of the time needed to collate all of the relevant information, the Government believed that there was a case for going beyond 28 days in future. The document that the Home Office published on the 25th July 2007, set out a number of options and one of those options was to legislate to extend the current limit beyond 28 days. That was described as the Government's preferred option. The Prime Minister in his statement to the House on the 25th July, said that the Government was proposing for consultation this option, which would be an extension of the current limit of up to 28 days more, or a lesser period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put by the BBC that Jacqui Smith was not aware of that this morning, the PMS said that Jacqui Smith did know that, but he had been given more of an opportunity to answer the question by his BBC questioner than Jacqui Smith had by hers that morning. The Government's position on the subject had not changed and it was as set out in the Home Office consultation document and the Prime Minister's statement on the 25th July.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that Jacqui Smith had said that she'd like to see post-charge questioning for offences other than terrorism and if that was the Government's position, what sort of offences were being considered, the PMS said that he did not think Jacqui Smith was saying anything new. Put that Jacqui Smith mentioned the figure of 58 days that morning, the PMS made clear that 58 days was a different proposal that had been put forward by Liberty and others. Jacqui Smith had been saying that there were a number of maximum dates in the public domain; one was up to 56 days, which was the Government's preferred option. The alternative was the Liberty proposal where as he understood it, the Government could declare a state of emergency and it could last for 30 days beyond the 28 days, the current extension period, which was how the figure of 58 days would be reached.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that people were assured that 90 days were needed to question people and why was it now a matter of 56 days, the PMS replied that the Government was trying to find a consensual position on the subject. Clearly there was a discussion that people wanted to have, as to what the right number might be. The Government had said that there should be a maximum limit and Jacqui Smith had reiterated that this morning. In the Government's view, there was a case for going beyond 28 days, but as was said in July, the Government was consulting on a proposal that would take the maximum limit up to 56 days.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that all sides were talking about how the process had to be based on evidence and would any be forthcoming, the PMS said that he assumed people had read the Home Office consultation document, published in July, which had set out the increasing trends on the amount of information that was necessary to process in a number of terror cases in recent times. Put that none of the evidence specifically targeted an extra 28 days, the PMS said that it had set out and explained the complexity of some of the recent cases. The PMS offered to go through the facts and figures, but added that it was set out quite clearly in the document.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the police had asked for post-charge questioning to be extended to other non-terrorist crimes, the PMS said that he did not know the answer to that and that people should check with the Home Office.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13715.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:57" post_name="counter-terrorism-3" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Counter-Terrorism" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4876" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4876" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had regarded the Governor of the Bank of England's recent comments as helpful, the PMS said that he had nothing to say on the matter except that as had been said repeatedly, the Prime Minister thought that the Governor of the Bank of England was doing a first rate job. Asked if he expected the Governor to be re-appointed, the PMS replied that there would need to be a process in relation to re-appointment, but repeated that the Prime Minister thought that the Governor was doing a first rate job. Put that the Governor had pressed hard for legislation on deposit guarantees and had the Governor suggested this when the Prime Minister had been Chancellor, the PMS said he did not want to get into talking about internal Tripartite Committee discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister thought it was a rational response by Northern Rock savers to queue up and withdraw their savings during the Northern Rock crisis, the PMS replied that as the Government had made clear at the time, people were entitled to do whatever they liked with their money. These were decisions that were taken by individuals. The key point was that the Chancellor took decisive action in order to stop the run on Northern Rock.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13715.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:56" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:56" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:56" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:56" post_name="bank-of-england" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Bank of England" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4877" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4877" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any update on inheritance tax documents being released if an FOI request was made, the PMS said that it would have to be considered and there was no update.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13715.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:55" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:55" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:55" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:55" post_name="inheritance-tax-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Inheritance Tax" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4878" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4878" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the slogan &amp;quot;British jobs for British workers&amp;quot; would continue to be used by the Prime Minister, the PMS said that the Prime Minister thought, for the reasons that he had set out in his speech to the TUC in September, that there were 600,000 vacancies in this country; there were a number of arrangements in place with Job Centre Plus which focused on British nationals and there were agreements in place with large employers to help find jobs for those people.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13715.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:54" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:54" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:54" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:54" post_name="jobs" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Jobs" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4879" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4879" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Put that Bev Hughes had suggested in the past that flexible working should actually be extended to all workers and were the Government considering taking that course of action, as there was a risk of childless people taking the burden of people with families, the PMS said the Government wanted to take action in order to help hard-working families and it's position was set out yesterday.&lt;br /&gt;Asked if the Government would look at helping out hard-working single people in the long run, the PMS asked people to take the matter step-by-step. At the moment the Government had introduced a statutory right to legislation for parents with children under six and it was consulting on how to extend that to older children.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13715.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:53" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:53" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:53" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:53" post_name="flexible-working-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Flexible Working" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4880" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4880" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked, in relation to the situation in Pakistan, if the Prime Minister had been making enquiries and taking a direct role or if the Foreign Secretary had mainly been dealing with it, the Prime Minister's Spokesman (PMS) said that the Prime Minister was obviously keeping a keen interest in the situation and had been in discussions with the Foreign Secretary in recent days.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister had spoken to President Bush about the situation in Pakistan and whether or not people would hear about it if he had, the PMS said that people would not necessarily hear about it but that we were in contact with the US Administration and the White House regarding this and other matters&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was concerned that Pakistan was a nuclear power, the PMS said that obviously we wanted to see a stable, prosperous and secure Pakistan, which was in the interests of not only the region but the whole world as David Miliband had been making clear.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what that meant in terms of security and nuclear weapons, the PMS said that we wanted to see a secure Pakistan and that that was in everybody's interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there had been any enquiries regarding the subject of security, the PMS said, that as would be expected, internal Government discussions on a whole range of issues were considered, including in relation to security and other matters.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13717.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:58" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:58" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:58" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:58" post_name="pakistan-2" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Pakistan" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4881" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4881" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if it was the Prime Minister's intention to reappoint the Governor of the Bank of England, the PMS said that the Governor's appointment expired in June of next year and that there would have to be a process in advance of that; this was not something that needed to be considered at this moment. As was said this morning, the Prime Minister thought that Mervyn King had been a first-rate Governor of the Bank of England.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the normal procedure was that the appointment of the Governor of the Bank of England was decided before Christmas, the PMS said that that was not the case. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put that the Bank of England thought that the appointment would be made before Christmas and asked if there was any reason why the decision had been left till early next year, the PMS said that we had not decided to do anything; the appointment expired in June of next year and a decision would be taken in advance of June.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if there was any guidance as to when a decision would be made, the PMS said he would not expect anything to happen this year.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Put again that the normal procedure was that an appointment was made before Christmas and asked if he could point to an occasion when the Governor had not been appointed at that time, the PMS said that he did not recognise that as the normal procedure; the previous Governor was appointed in the Pre Budget Report 2002, ahead of the June 2003 appointment, which was considered at the time to be exceptionally early and people were surprised by how early that appointment was made, but he would not want to suggest that that set any sort of precedent.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Prime Minister was comfortable about potentially going into a financial downturn over the next 12 months with Mervyn King as the Governor, the PMS repeated that the Prime Minister believed that Mervyn King was a first-rate Governor of the Bank of England and had worked with him for many years. The PMS went on to say that he would not announce a decision on who the Governor of the Bank of England will be after June as that was a decision for the Queen, the Prime Minister and the Chancellor to take at the time. He repeated that the Prime Minister believed Mervyn King to be a first-rate Governor of the Bank of England.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked repeatedly if there was any reason not to make a decision now due to the suggested rift between the Treasury and the Bank of England, the PMS said that both the Treasury and the Bank of England had been denying any suggestion of a rift between them. The Governor's term did not expire until June next year and a decision would be taken in advance of that. He again repeated that the Prime Minister believed that the Governor had been a first-rate Governor of the Bank of England.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p style=&quot;float: right;&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pm.gov.uk//output/Page13717.asp&quot;&gt;original source&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

" post_content_filtered="" post_date="2007-11-07 16:45:57" post_date_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:57" post_excerpt="" post_mime_type="" post_modified="2007-11-07 16:45:57" post_modified_gmt="2007-11-07 15:45:57" post_name="bank-of-england-governor" post_parent="0" post_password="" post_status="publish" post_title="Bank of England Governor" post_type="post" to_ping="" />
  <downingstreetsaid ID="4882" comment_count="0" comment_status="open" guid="http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/11/07/4882" menu_order="0" ping_status="closed" pinged="" post_author="2" post_category="0" post_content="&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government was still hopeful that it would get the 56 days preferred option, the PMS said that 56 days was not the preferred option, the preferred option was to consult on an extension up to the maximum of 56 days. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Government would be quite happy with less, the PMS said that we would want to consult and seek a consensus on an extension of up to 56 days. It was important to emphasise that the other aspect of the proposal in July was to introduce much tighter judicial and Parliamentary oversight for any potential detention beyond 28 days and that was a key part of the proposal.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the Legislation would include a specific figure, the PMS said that would be expected but that that was only one part of the proposal and an important part of the proposal was also the extra measures in relation to judicial and Parliamentary oversight.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked about the argument that post-charge questioning removed the need for detention, the PMS said that it was not just the Government that didn't necessarily think post-charge questioning was sufficient; the Home Affairs Select Committee reached that conclusion as well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked if the figure of 56 was there for any reason other than it was double 28, the PMS said it was always up to 56; in a sense 56 was the maximum of the maximum. Jacqui Smith said this morning that we would expect there to be maximum limit. Obviously there would need to be a discussion and a consensus needed to be found regarding exactly what the right number should be; there needed to be a maximum limit and in terms of initiating the consultation in July, we said that that maximum limit would be up to 56 days.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked what could be done to change the Opposition's view on this, the PMS said we should wait and see; there had been discussions with the opposition parties and he was sure that there would be discussions in the period ahead, but it was the Government's intention to try to find a consensus. The Home Office set out the evidence in the consultation document in July and as he had said before, there had been discussions and he was sure there would be further discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asked how the figure was determined and put repeatedly that it would have to come from the Government, the PMS said that there would have to be discussions; an initial range was al