Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Anti-Social Behaviour, Gambling, Climate Change and Margaret Hassan.
Anti-Social Behaviour
The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) briefed journalists on the Prime Minister’s anti-social behaviour speech this afternoon. He pointed in particular to the announcement about giving more power to town and parish councils - which now covered something like a third of England - to build cleaner, safer neighbourhoods - specifically the power to issue fixed penalty notices (FPNs) for offences like dog-fouling, litter, graffiti and night-time noise. The FPNs would vary in amount, ranging from £30 to £100, depending on the offence. For example, a £50 penalty notice would be issued for dog fouling. The PMOS pointed out that town councillors would not be personally responsible for issuing FPNs. This would be the job of rangers and wardens whom town councils already employed. David Blunkett had also announced today that civil courts would be able to order compulsory drug treatment with an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO). The purpose of this was to strengthen our drive to break the link between drugs and crime. Put to him that no member of the Lobby had ever seen a parish or town council ranger or warden and were not even aware that they existed, the Times correspondent took the opportunity to inform his colleagues that there were, in fact, wardens in Norfolk where he lived. Responding to the resulting babble of excitement from journalists, the Times correspondent said that he didn’t just go up to Norfolk at weekends to play golf, you know.
Questioned as to whether this new role for wardens and rangers was necessary in the light of the fact that the police and community support officers did the same job, the PMOS pointed out that just as there were different elements of anti-social behaviour, there were also different responses to it at different levels, depending on what the offence was. For example, persistent drunken loutishness outside a pub would require one kind of response, while terrorising a neighbourhood would require another - just as dog-fouling or graffiti would necessitate yet another. It was important not to under-estimate the real difficulties that anti-social behaviour caused communities and the subsequent desire of local communities to take action. People should be very wary about dismissing these problems as minor complaints, because to some people they were not. Put to him that the new responsibilities given to wardens and rangers increased the danger of introducing "army after army to nose into people’s lives", the PMOS said that he would disagree. If someone was destroying a neighbourhood by spraying graffiti everywhere, for example, no one would consider it nosing into the offender’s life to make sure they stopped doing it. Put to him that this was already the responsibility of police and community support officers, the PMOS said that this wasn’t necessarily the case at a local level.
Asked if parish and town councils had been consulted about the new proposals, the PMOS said that there had been full consultation on these matters with the relevant parties, as you would expect. Asked who would fund the new measures, the PMOS said that these measures were about empowering parish councils to tackle the problem of anti-social behaviour. In any event, parish and town councils already employed rangers and wardens to act on a local level. Asked if rangers and wardens were being asked to take on additional responsibilities, such as issuing FPNs for dog-fouling, because police officers thought they were above such things, the PMOS said that anti-social behaviour, such as dog-fouling, was a real problem which destroyed neighbourhoods. However, we recognised that the police had other priorities. Therefore, it made more sense to give certain powers to wardens and rangers because they were better able to act at a local level.
Gambling
Asked when Downing Street would reply to Frank Field’s questions about the Prime Minister’s contacts with gambling companies, the PMOS said that they would be answered in due course. As we had already made clear, the Prime Minister had not met Thomas Baker. However, Mr Baker had met with No 10 officials. That being so, it was equally important to point out that those officials had also met representatives from charities and a wide range of other bodies, as was entirely proper. The PMOS pointed out that although it was true that the Bill had changed after Mr Baker’s meeting in Downing Street, it was important to be clear that it had actually changed against his interests, not in support of them. As we had stated last Friday, the legislation had changed in order to reduce the number of gaming machines that were permitted in casinos, not increase them as Mr Baker had obviously wanted. Asked if there were any objections in principle to releasing details about contacts the Government had had with gambling organisations, the PMOS reminded journalists that it had never been our practice to brief on every single meeting the Prime Minister or any of his officials had. That said, it was our duty to point out inaccuracies in any media report, as indeed he had done today.
Climate Change
Asked to explain Jack Straw’s assertion today that the UK was leading by example on climate change by cutting carbon dioxide emissions when Margaret Beckett had announced yesterday that allowances for carbon dioxide emissions were being increased, the PMOS said that as he understood it, we would still be within the range as set out in our Kyoto targets. Mrs Beckett had been talking about a technical adjustment in her speech yesterday, rather than calling into question our commitment and our ability to meet the targets we had said that we would meet.
Margaret Hassan
Asked for an update on the kidnapping of Margaret Hassan in Iraq, the PMOS said he recognised the responsible way in which the media were approaching this issue. However, we were not commenting on it for very good reasons, which he was sure journalists would understand.
delicious
digg
facebook
