Downing Street Says » Constitutional Reform Bill

Asked what steps the Government was intending to take following the result of the vote on the Constitutional Reform Bill in the Lords last night, the PMOS said that we regarded last night’s outcome as a serious matter. We wanted to get to the point where we were able to separate the role of the DCA Secretary of State and give him the time to concentrate on running – and reforming – the courts system. We believed that the judicial appointments process should be independent and that there was a need for a Supreme Court. Last night’s defeat was serious and important. However, we had no intention of rushing into a decision about what we were going to do next. We were going to have a period of reflection and then make a judgement. Asked if he was indicating that the Government didn’t have the ‘foggiest idea’ about what it should do, the PMOS said no. We had a very clear idea as to how we might progress. However, we were not going to be rushed into making an announcement today. Asked to go through the mechanics of invoking the Parliament Act should the need arise, the PMOS thanked journalists for the invitation to engage in a hypothetical discussion, but he would politely decline the request.

Asked if the re-introduction of the Constitutional Reform Bill into the Commons was the only option under consideration as Peter Hain had suggested, the PMOS said that rather than speculate about what the Government might do, he thought it was better for people to exercise a little patience and wait for the Government to decide. We would let people know what judgement had been made at the appropriate time. Asked if he was refusing to endorse Mr Hain’s words because there was a doubt about the merits of invoking the Parliament Act, the PMOS pointed out that Mr Hain had been talking about situations which might occur. We would wait and see what the reality was on the ground and then we would talk about it. People shouldn’t rush to read the end of the book first. They should work their way through it chapter by chapter.

Asked if Ministers were holding meetings to decide the next steps that should be taken, the PMOS said journalists could assume that the issue was under active consideration. Asked which Ministers were involved in those meetings, the PMOS said that he had no intention of providing a running commentary on what might or might not be happening or taking place. Suffice to say that the relevant people were involved. Questioned as to whether that included the Prime Minister, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister was being kept informed, as you would expect.

Asked to explain why the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) had been able to reach an agreement on a constitution and yet the UK was unable to do so, the PMOS welcomed the fact that some journalists were bothering to take notice of the historic day in Iraq yesterday. He said that last night’s events in the House of Lords had a party political dimension to them. Consequently, as a Civil Servant, he was unable to comment.

Questioned as to why the Government was rushing to get the Bill on the statute book in this parliamentary session when it hadn’t even been included in the manifesto, the PMOS pointed to the intrinsic merits of what the Government believed was right. In our view, the DCA Secretary of State should be able to focus on his job of running – and reforming – the courts system. Equally, we believed it was right to have an independent judicial appointments process and establish a Supreme Court. Obviously the debate about those issues was going to continue. However, we believed that what we were doing was right and that the measures would be implemented. Put to him that, in the end, the whole issue boiled down to an argument about the primacy of the House of Commons, the PMOS said the Government continued to believe that the will of the Commons should prevail. We would continue to press on with the Bill and hoped to see it on the statue book by the end of the current parliamentary session. However, we would take things step by step. Put to him that he was sounding more conciliatory than either Baroness Amos, the Leader of the House of Lords, or Peter Hain, the PMOS said he didn’t think he sounded like anything. He was simply being matter-of-fact. We were still deciding what to do. When a decision had been taken, we would let people know.

Asked to explain Baroness Amos’s comment last night that what had happened would have serious consequences for the future relationship of the two Houses, the PMOS said that we regarded the implications of last night’s events as a serious matter. That was why we wanted to resolve the issue and find a way to move forward. It was important for people to be patient and wait and see how things panned out. Asked if the Government was planning to speed up the next stage of reform of the House of Lords in the light of last night’s events, the PMOS said that the two issues were totally separate. As we had made clear, the Lords Reform Bill would be brought forward shortly.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

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

Comments:

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

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

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

» Tuesday, March 9, 2004

Constitutional Reform Bill

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries