UK

Showers (AM and PM) 7° London Hi 10°C / Lo 5°C

Home Secretary forced into 'humiliating retreat' over detention plans

By Ben Russell, home affairs correspondent
Tuesday, 14 October 2008

Emergency legislation to bring the 42-day limit into force will lie on file, Smith said

PA

Emergency legislation to bring the 42-day limit into force will lie on file, Smith said

Plans to hold terror suspects for up to 42 days without charge were dramatically abandoned last night after the proposals were overwhelmingly defeated in the House of Lords.

In an emergency statement to MPs last night, Jacqui Smith announced a major U-turn, confirming she would pull the hugely contentious plans out of the Counter Terrorism Bill.

She backtracked on a key plank of Gordon Brown's legislative programme after peers inflicted a crushing defeat on the Government, voting by 309 to 118 – a majority of 191 – to reject any attempt to increase the current 28-day limit on detention.

The defeat was one of the largest in the Lords since Labour came to power, as ministers, including the former Labour Lord Chancellors Lord Irvine and Lord Falconer, rebelled to throw out the detention powers.

Ms Smith said an emergency bill reintroducing the 42-day limit would be kept on file in case of a national crisis. Amid rowdy scenes she condemned Conservatives and Liberal Democrats for voting against the measure. But opposition MPs rounded on the Government, for executing a humiliating U-turn.

Ms Smith said: "Those who have voted against these measures both in this House and in the other place are predominately from the two opposition parties. They should take responsibility for the defeat of this sensible and proportionate measure.

But Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, retorted: "Whatever the Home Secretary says, this was a crushing defeat for the Government. It did not just lose the vote in the Lords, it lost the argument and is undergoing a humiliating retreat."

Dominic Grieve, the shadow Home Secretary, attacked legislation "put forward in such a way that smacks of mere political posturing and gimmicks."

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the pressure group Liberty, added: "Liberty has been overwhelmed by public and parliamentary support for our campaign against this divisive measure. If this or any other future government tried again... we will be waiting."

The Home Office climbdown came amid warnings that a defeat in the Upper House would merely open the way to a humiliating fresh rebellion in the House of Commons on the issue.

MPs and campaigners said the Bill would run into fierce opposition if ministers attempted to defy the Lords and tried to reintroduce the 42-day plan in the Commons. The planned extension of detention was carried in the Commons by a majority of just nine votes despite a rebellion by 36 Labour MPs after Democratic Unionist and Ulster Unionist MPs swung behind MPs.

But privately, ministers have been warned that wafer-thin majority had been cut still further, with the loss of Labour MPs in Glasgow East and Glenrothes and the departure from the Commons of the London Mayor Boris Johnson, who did not vote in June's division.

Lord Dear, the former West Midlands chief constable and crossbench peer, led calls to remove 42 days from the Bill, condemning the move as "a shabby charade" designed to look tough on terrorism. He said: "There is almost universal opposition to what the Government proposes. It almost beggars belief that any administration could embark on such a course."

Lord Falkoner, the former Labour Lord Chancellor, said it was "fanciful" to argue that the plans would aid the fight against terrorism. Baroness Pauline Neville-Jones, the shadow Security Minister, said extending detention without charge was "unnecessary, undesirable and unworkable".

Lord Thomas of Gresford, the Liberal Democrat frontbencher, condemned plans to give MPs a vote to trigger the extended detention powers as a "farce". He said: "That's not just unconstitutional, it's contemptible." But Lord Carlisle, the Liberal Democrat peer and the Government's independent reviewer of anti-terror law, insisted the change was needed to help police disrupt terrorist plots.

He said: "The authorities in this country have been fantastically successful in the disruptions that they have performed. I believe that, putting it at its lowest, many hundreds of lives have been saved by the authorities."

Lord Tebbit, the former Conservative cabinet minister seriously injured in the IRA bomb attack on the Grand Hotel in Brighton, said the Tories would "rue the day" if they helped defeat the 42-day plan.

He told peers: "How exactly would they go about coming back to Parliament and asking Parliament to grant those powers?"

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Comments

12 Comments

It reminds me of a Billy Connolly skit about late night TV just be for the turn off whooah !

Posted by Pompey Dude | 14.10.08, 20:26 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

I see that within less than 24 hours of the Lords knocking this back, the government issues a warning of a "great terror plot". Suspiciously pat timing, yes?

Posted by John Davies | 14.10.08, 18:25 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Re: Smith, Jack & Felix

On July 11th 2006, the Home Secretary John Reid announced in Parliament that the Official Report (into 7/7) was wrong in giving the time of the train that the suspects took from Luton to London as 7.40am.

How can an official report get it so wrong on such a fundamental point....something here doesn't add up?

The Government claim CCTV footage in Luton and London (but I don't think have ever released it). The only one missing is the bus - as far as I know- where the hard disc drive wasn't working.

Presumably all this footage has the times on it, so why would such a fundamental error creep in? Can this footage be obtained under Freedom of Information requests. if not - why not?

It is a horrible thought that a Government might deliberately target its own people to push forward its twisted agenda, but we should not lightly dismiss the possibility. After all an independent investigation into 7/7 and 9/11 would clear it all up fairly quickly.

Posted by confused | 14.10.08, 14:28 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

The greatest terror inflicted upon the British people, is the terror of the speculators, and capitalists who have looted the people. I have a feeling that the 42 day detention law is aimed at a rebellion by the British people against these thugs. The power of nightmares!
False flag operations, staged terrorist strikes all are meant to divert attention from the real terrorists.

Posted by Guy Fawks | 14.10.08, 14:18 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Smith | 14.10.08, 08:43 GMT - I'm afraid that this may well be the case. I strongly suspect that this government has blood on its hands from flase flag events already, in addition to an illegal war. They do need to be brought to justice, before they create too many more more laws to dilute their accountability further.

Jack | 14.10.08, 09:43 GMT - they already have introduced a police state. It is just that the iron fist still shows a velvet palm. You'll quickly see the fist however when you join a protest against something the govt holds dear ... such as coal powered stations, the war and its dead, the ID cards, or being challenged for its atrocious and illegal undertakings.

We are already the most surveilled and catalogued population in the western world. We should be aware that the police do protect their own, so there is no accountability there either! See today's Indy on evidence tampering in the de Menezes case.

Posted by Felix Guattari | 14.10.08, 12:33 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

the number one threat to the people of this country is pandemic flu, not terrorism. 42 days is just another attempt to control the public. the police have more than enough powers -- the problem is they are incompetent and not up to the job. thats what the home secretary should be tackling.

Posted by josh | 14.10.08, 12:32 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Will the parliament and house of lords have a vote on cottaging?

Posted by john | 14.10.08, 11:54 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Look on the bright side, Jacqui; if the current legislation goes through , you won't have to worry about any more pesky inquests into deaths like that of Charles de Menezes.

Posted by Stephen | 14.10.08, 09:49 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Thank god that Lords have acted so swiftly and decisivly. The act would have made all of us essentially targets, with Britian gradually slipping into a police state.

It is great to see that liberty and freedom has won over proposed measures 'for our own security'. Mr Brown is propably well aware of his tenuous position in government currently and forcing thorugh the act would be near political suicide.

Posted by Jack P | 14.10.08, 09:45 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Now can we save some money and also get rid of the ID cards? New Labour should always be ashamed about all aspects of the police state they are trying to introduce.

Posted by Jack | 14.10.08, 09:43 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

12 Comments


Preparing for power

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date