Downing Street Says » Cash for Honours

Asked if it was still the case that there had not yet been an approach from the police to question the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) replied that was correct.

Asked to confirm that the Prime Minister and all Downing Street staff would give the police full co-operation in their investigation, the PMOS said the position on that had been made clear, and he did not need to reiterate it. It had always been made clear that Downing Street would co-operate fully. However, that did not mean that the PMOS would give a running commentary on anything to do with a police investigation.

Asked if we expected everyone to co-operate with the Parliamentary enquiry, the PMOS said that we would co-operate fully where we needed to. The PMOS said that he was not going to give a running commentary on either enquiry.

Asked if there had been requests by the police for any documents, emails etc from the Prime Minister, the PMOS said again that he was not going to give a running commentary. We had made clear the position on the one question which we thought was valid; beyond that, we were not going to in any way give a running commentary.

Asked by Channel Four if we were expecting the Prime Minister to have to break his summer holiday in order to talk to the police, the PMOS replied that the question was a hypothetical one, and the PMOS repeated that we were not giving a running commentary on the investigation. The PMOS had been asked today if we had had any approaches from the police to interview the Prime Minister, and he had said: no.

Asked if any Downing Street officials had already been questioned in the enquiry, the PMOS repeated that he was not giving a running commentary. People could ask as many times as they liked, but we did not comment on police investigations, as that was the right and proper approach of the Government.

Asked if the Ministers who were being questioned by the police had access to Government lawyers, the PMOS replied: same answer as above.

Put that the question was not about commenting on the investigation, the PMOS said that it was and he was not going to answer it.

Asked why was Lord Sainsbury’s office was taking a different view regarding commenting on the situation, the PMOS replied that it was a matter for Lord Sainsbury. In terms of Downing Street, the PMOS had made clear our position.

Asked if the same was therefore true of Ian McCartney, the PMOS said again that he had made clear our position.

Put that taxpayers had a right to know whether they were paying for Government lawyers, the PMOS replied that taxpayers would rightly expect us to allow police investigations to go forward without giving a running commentary.

Asked what Lord Levy was doing in relation to the Middle East crisis, the PMOS replied that as he had said repeatedly this week, the value of Lord Levy’s work in the Middle East was that it was private.

Put that Lord Levy had attended a few public events, for example, the press conference with the Israeli Prime Minister, the PMOS said that the vast bulk of his work was behind the scenes and that was why it was effective.

Put that commenting and giving a factual answer were two different things, and people felt that there should be an opportunity to have factual answers to questions like if a No10 official was being interviewed by police, there should be a "yes" or "no" answer to that, the PMOS said that there was no right of appeal. We had taken the decision that we were not going to comment on police investigations, and people would consider it wrong for us to do so on any other matter. Therefore, it was equally wrong for us to do so on this matter.

Put that there was a difference between answering questions about police investigations and answering questions on taxpayers’ money being spent on Government lawyers, the PMOS said that the question about taxpayers’ money was asked in the context of the police investigation.

Put that the question could be answered without having to comment on the investigation, the PMOS said that it could not, because people knew as well as he did that it would be interpreted in the context of the police investigation.

Put that surely the reason we did not want to comment on a police enquiry was because we did not want in any way to obstruct it or influence it, and the same was true of those who had access to Government lawyers, the PMOS replied that people knew the implications that would be read into such an answer.

Put that they might be unhelpful to us, but they would not have an impact on the police enquiries, the PMOS said that it would be precisely interpreted in the context of a police investigation.

Asked repeatedly about how it would affect the investigation, the PMOS replied that he was not answering the questions because it was in relation to a police enquiry which was on-going.

Put that other people like Lord Sainsbury had been able to comment, and it was only Downing Street that would not comment, the PMOS replied that Downing Street’s position had been completely consistent with this police investigation, as indeed to every other police investigation.

Asked again why Downing Street would not comment when Ministers who spoke on behalf of the Government had, the PMOS said that we had adopted throughout, and not just in this police investigation but others too, a policy of not commenting, and we would maintain that policy.

Asked if we would let people knew if the Prime Minister did get interview, the PMOS replied that he could rely on one thing, which was that people would keep asking.

2 Comments »

We are all waiting for this odious Anglophobic racist party’s latest medacious spin on yet another political crime.
Comment by Tostig Godwinson — 22 Apr 2007 on 9:08 pm | Link
I do not think that the Attorney General should be involved in any decision to prosecute in the cash for honours investigation. He has become too closely involved with the Labour government and his impartiality has become seriously compromised
Comment by J.Harrison — 23 Apr 2007 on 10:41 am | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

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

Comments:

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

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

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

» Friday, July 14, 2006

Cash for Honours

2 Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries