Briefing by the Prime Minister’s Spokesman on: assisted suicide, Northern Rock, protectionism and misc
Assisted suicide
Asked whether the Prime Minister was sympathetic towards the proposed amendments to the Coroner’s Criminal Justice Bill, the Prime Minister’s Spokesman (PMS) told the assembled press that the Government’s position was that we believed that any change in the law in this area was an issue for individual MP’s and a matter for parliament to decide rather than Government policy.
The Prime Minister had made his personal opposition to any change clear, but that was his personal view. On the question of this particular amendment, as we had said in the past, we considered the matter to be most appropriately dealt with through a Private Members Bill (PMB). Asked whether a vote next week for instance would be whipped at all, the PMS repeated that it was an issue of individual conscience and a matter for Parliament and Members rather than for Government policy.
Put that that would suggest a free vote whilst also indicating that the matter would be dealt with by a PMB, the PMS replied that we had set out that it was more appropriately dealt through a PMB because of the emotiveness of the issue and the requirement that it was detailed debate and careful scrutiny. On the issue itself, it was a matter for individual MP’s.
Put that this would be an amendment to a Government bill and normally would be whipped, the PMS said that as far as he was aware, this would be treated as a matter for individual MP’s to decide. Put that if the amendment was passed and it was a Government bill, there would be members of the Government who would not feel able to vote for it, the PMS said he would not speculate on what might happen if amendments were passed or not.
Asked if the Prime Minister was against it, the PMS said that he was not in favour of a change in the law. Asked why that was, the PMS said that it was the Prime Minister’s view that the law as it stands and the decision in individual cases for the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) remained the best solution. Asked if the Prime Minister was happy to see the current compromise of the law effectively not being enforced due to the DPP ruling that it was not in the public interest continuing, the PMS said that the Prime Minister’s view was that it was right that decisions on prosecutions should rest with the DPP, which was the position as set out under the law.
It was right that each case should be reviewed individually in the light of all the evidence before the DPP decides whether prosecution should be brought or not.
Northern Rock
Asked whether the Prime Minister regretted not introducing a system to combat the collapse of a banking institution, the PMS replied that if people read the report closely, the relevant pages stated clearly that work on dealing specifically with the scenario of a major financial institution getting into difficulty for liquidity reasons had been ongoing. It showed that work was ongoing through 2005, 2006 and 2007, that in May 2007, the tripartite authorities agreed to develop a consultation document, that a discussion paper was produced later in 2007 and that that work formed the basis of some the changes that were put into the Banking Act.
Put that there were three years for this to be worked on and didn’t the Prime Minister feel responsible for the fact that it wasn’t carried out with more urgency, the PMS said that there were two points to make. There was work ongoing; this issue was considered in depth and it was right that a good deal of detailed work was carried out between 2004 and through to 2006, with the objective of putting detailed proposals together.
On the wider point of regulation, the Government had taken very important steps to change the regulatory regime by making the Bank of England independent and creating the FSA. As the Chancellor and the Prime Minister had also said, there would be lessons that we would have to learn from the global financial downturn. That was why the Turner Report was commissioned and that was why the Treasury would be bringing forward a White Paper ahead of the Budget, setting out what steps we were going to take to change the UK’s regulatory regime.
It was also why we were in Brussels today, talking to European partners and why we would be extending that conversation to G20 partners on what steps the EU and the international community could take to ensure that there was adequate global supervision of financial institutions and that there were appropriate rules in place.
Asked why Northern Rock were still issuing 125% mortgages after it had received Government support and the Prime Minister had said that 100% mortgages were a bad idea, the PMS said that this was covered in some detail in the NAO Report. Lord Mandelson had said this morning, that “the alternative was to put the whole business into receivership….That’s why decisions were taken to maintain mortgage lending.”
Asked why that would have helped Northern Rock survive, the PMS replied that as he understood it, the business was treated as a going concern in the period during which a new owner was trying to be found and that as soon as we had legislative power through the Banking Special Provisions Act, those mortgages were stopped.
Asked if the Government didn’t have the power to stop those mortgages before the act, the PMS said on the detailed response to the NAO Report, people should wait for the Treasury Report, which would be brought forward at the Public Accounts Committee hearing on the 30th March.
Protectionism
Put that Renault had moved 400 jobs from Slovenia back to France and was the Prime Minister concerned that his message on protectionism was falling on deaf ears, the PMS said he wouldn’t comment in detail on any particular moves by a foreign commercial organisation and how it ran its workforce. The Prime Minister, as set out recently, was determined that both the EU and the G20 would reaffirm their commitment to free trade and to ensuring that not only tariff barriers but non-tariff barriers were monitored to ensure that a free trade environment existed to allow global business to expand.
Asked if there was any clarity on who would be monitoring tariff barriers and non-tariff barriers, the PMS advised people to wait for the European Council to publish its conclusions. There were a whole range of discussions going forward to the G20 meeting on the 2nd April where this would also be discussed.
Misc
Asked if people could expect any announcements from Lord Mandelson or John Denham today, the PMS said that John Denham’s speech was about support that entrepreneurs received and there was no announcement anticipated from Lord Mandelson.
Asked whether the position on LDV remained the same, the PMS confirmed that it did remain the same.
Asked about the Prime Minister’s presence at D-Day, the PMS said that as he set out yesterday, we wanted to reiterate our support for veterans. The event in Normandy was being organised by the French Government and those plans were still coming together. We would be represented at an appropriate and senior level.