§ Q4. John Barrett (Edinburgh, West) (LD)Will the Prime Minister tell my constituents how far he thinks it is reasonable for them to walk to their nearest post office?
§ The Prime MinisterI obviously do not know the exact details of the hon. Gentleman's constituency, but we are putting between £300 million and £400 million a year into support for post offices. It is true, particularly in urban areas, that closures will take place, but the only way to stop those closures is to provide even greater subsidy and money. I am afraid that we cannot afford to do that, so we will continue to work with the association of sub-postmasters to provide as much help and cover as we possibly can. We set down minimum targets for the distance that people would have to go to a post office. The hon. Gentlemen will know that the reason for closures is that more and more people are putting the money that they get directly into their bank account. As I say, the only answer is an even bigger subsidy, which is not viable. So we are putting in, as I say, between £300 million and £400 million, which is, frankly, the most that we can afford at the moment.
§ Mr. Kevin McNamara (Hull, North) (Lab)My right hon. Friend will be aware of the decision of the United States Supreme Court about the conditions under which prisoners are held at Guantanamo Bay and their entitlement to legal representation to appeal against their conditions. He will also be aware of the statement of my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General that the British Government are not satisfied that British detainees at Guantanamo Bay can have a fair trial. In those circumstances, first, to what extent are Her Majesty's Government prepared to help to fund any appeal that may made by British detainees to the Supreme Court to examine their cases and, secondly, will the British Government seek to appear as an amicus curiae before the court to make representations on their behalf?
§ The Prime MinisterOur position is that the British detainees should be either tried fairly in accordance with international standards or returned to the UK. We have concluded that the military commissions process does not provide guarantees to the standards that we require. As my hon. Friend will know, five of the detainees were returned to the UK in March. We continue to work to resolve the situation of the remaining four detainees, and discussions with the United States are continuing.
§ Q5. Mr. Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon) (Con)Following the weekend revelations that the Home Secretary is or was the patron of an anti-vivisectionist society, what comfort can the Prime Minister give to the British scientific community and the hundreds of my constituents who continue to be 281 terrorised by animal rights terrorists and who feel that the Government, and specifically the Home Office, are not giving them the protection that they deserve?
§ The Prime MinisterFirst, it is wrong of the hon. Gentleman to run a perfectly fair point with a totally unfair point. The fact is that the Government are doing everything that we possibly can to protect people against what are clear abuses, and we have tightened the law, not loosened it, since we came to office. We are now looking at what we can do further but let me make it absolutely clear that the activities of those who harass and intimidate people engaged in legitimate research are completely unacceptable. It is for that reason that we have, as I say, already tightened the law. We are prepared to do so even further. The hon. Gentleman will know that many of his constituents have been in direct contact with us about this matter.