Leader of Commons, Rt Hon Jack Straw MP, Press Briefing, 7 December, 3.45pm

Forthcoming Business

The Leader said that, on Monday, December 11, the House would debate the second reading of the Offender Management Bill (John Reid and Gerry Sutcliffe speaking for the Government), followed by proceedings on the Consolidated Fund Bill. On Tuesday, December 12, there would be the second reading of the Greater London Authority Bill (Yvette Cooper). Remaining business for the week would be: December 13 - second reading of the Justice and Security [Northern Ireland] Bill (Peter Hain and Paul Goggins); December 14 - a debate on Fisheries on a motion for the Adjournment of the House (Ben Bradshaw). On Friday, December 15, the House would not be sitting. Provisional business for the following week - Monday, December 18, the House would debate second reading of the Digital Switchover (Disclosure of Information) Bill (Tessa Jowell and Shaun Woodward) and, on December 19, there would be a debate on a motion on the Christmas Recess Adjournment (Nigel Griffiths).

House of Lords reform

Asked to indicate the envisaged timetable, Mr Straw said that the Government's response to the Joint Committee on Conventions, chaired by Lord Cunningham, was due before Christmas. It would be followed by a debate on it in the House of Lords where part of the outcome would be a Message to the House of Commons on the conclusion of the Upper House. MPs would then debate it, provisionally, during the first few weeks after the recess.

The Leader mentioned that cross-party group was meeting on the issue of the future composition. He hoped that there could be a White Paper by the end of January or early February, followed by a free vote on composition two or three weeks later, to enable time for it to be digested.

The Government, at that stage, would have to make a judgement whether there was a sufficient consensus to proceed, quite quickly, with a Bill or whether it drew breath.  The Leader said that the Joint Committee had managed to achieve a consensus and its report had described the conventions of the relationship between the Houses in greater detail. The issue had been discussed within the cross-party talks.

Iraq Study Group/Commons statement

The Leader, in response to a question, said that he had not rejected an Opposition request for a statement next week on the ISG report. He pointed out that he had told MPs during Business Questions earlier today that he could not promise a statement.

Mr Straw reminded journalists that he had pointed out that it was not usual to make statements on bilateral meetings of this kind, and that there would be an opportunity during Prime Minister's Questions next week to discuss the issue. He advised journalists to await the Prime Minister's comments at his press conference in the US. The purpose of Business Questions was to receive representations. Mr Straw referred to an exchange with an Opposition MP, in which he had undertaken to discuss it with the Prime Minister but also had not made any promise of a statement in advance of PMQs next Wednesday. The Leader then answered questions relating to party matters in connection with Iraq.

In response to further questions, Mr Straw said that the ISG report obviously was very significant. Pressed about the opportunity for a Parliamentary discussion on it, the Leader said he was not in the least opposed to having a debate on Iraq. He pointed out that the House had recently debated the subject during the Queen's Speech. He accepted the need for Iraq to be debated fully in the House; he always had done so, as had the Prime Minister.

The Leader rejected a suggestion that it was usual practice for the Prime Minister to make a Commons statement after such bilateral talks. It was normal to do so after EU summits and some other occasions.

Mr Straw said he understood the significance of the report; he had read the executive summary. Asked if he agreed with the burden of that, the Leader replied, yes. Pressed to explain in detail what he agreed with, he said others had been able to study the situation with greater intensity than he had during the past six months. He agreed that everyone had to pay close attention to it. Asked if it would be discussed at the Cabinet next Thursday, Mr Straw he could not be absolutely certain but he would be surprised if it was not raised. The Prime Minister was in charge of the agenda.

He was asked whether he had a sense of failure about Iraq, in view of his experience at the time as Foreign Secretary. Mr Straw said that, on the question of whether he thought it had been the correct decision to take the action against Iraq in March, 2003, the answer was yes, based on the best information that had been available. To the further question of whether "things have gone wrong," his response was "patently", as he had indicated to earlier in the year. Very few people had predicted the scale of the insurgency and the difficulty of the security situation, he added.

The Leader said that the Government had to work at where it was at. He rejected the suggestion that looked at objectively, the mission had failed. He said that, in retrospect, the extent of the effort to reduce the influence of Baathism had gone too far, which was acknowledged in the ISG report. The Leader, asked about the views of the former US Secretary of State at the time, said he was not party to the American discussions.

Christmas/celebration

He was asked about the contents of his latest column in his local newspaper. The Leader explained that a number of Muslim friends had indicated to him their irritation that, because of their belonging to a different religion, the implication was they were likely to be against celebrating Christmas. Mr Straw said that it was as much part of their culture as it was for Christians. He had wanted to make the point about the way in which the three religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam - were intertwined.