Howard joins critics of Home Office 'gimmick'

The Government's rushed decision to split the Home Office into separate departments for national security and justice has run into deeper controversy.

Michael Howard joined the ranks of former home secretaries who oppose the change, which will take effect on 9 May, the week in which Tony Blair is expected to announce that he is standing down.

It also emerged that one consequence of the shake-up could be an early release scheme to reduce overcrowding in prisons. According to today's issue of the New Statesman, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, who will become Justice Secretary when the split is implemented, will propose the idea even though Mr Blair opposes it.

The magazine claims that John Reid, the Home Secretary, will use the seven-week period between Mr Blair's announcement and his successor being installed to "bury bad news". It would include a report on the soaring cost of the Government's identity card scheme, its decision not to bring in a "Megan's Law" allowing people to know whether paedophiles live in their area and a research report on the supervision of dangerous sex offenders. The Home Office dismissed the claims as "rubbish".

The decision to split the Home Office has already been criticised by Mr Reid's two Labour predecessors, Charles Clarke and David Blunkett. Yesterday Mr Howard urged Mr Blair at Prime Minister's Questions to think again about an "ill-considered" proposal that had attracted widespread criticism.

Mr Howard said that when he was Home Secretary, and Mr Blair his opposition shadow, the Home Office had a much wider remit than it has today - and that both men were able to discharge their responsibilities without any undue difficulties.

Mr Blair replied that when Labour came to power in 1997, asylum claims took 20 months, the backlog was 60,000 and crime had doubled. "So I think I prefer our experience to yours," he told Mr Howard.

Later, the former Tory leader said Mr Reid hadfailed to demonstrate how splitting the Home Office would assist the fight against terrorism. For the first time, the department would not be responsible for criminal justice, which was directly relevant to the battle and the Government had to consider whether the law was adequate.

Mr Howard said: "This government, when faced with a choice between a gimmick which will capture headlines in the next day's newspapers, or rolling up their sleeves and getting down to the hard and often boring business of making government work, will always go for the gimmick. And that's what this represents."

But Mr Reid insisted: "I believe it is crucial that the Home Secretary wakes up and thinks about the security of the nation first and foremost every morning. That is what I do now."

He said the new Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism, which will co-ordinate policies across government, would "provide that faster, brighter and more agile approach to the terrorist threat through a new drive, cohesion, and by providing a greater strategic capacity in our fight against terrorism".

The Home Secretary told the RUSI security think-tank: "The determination of terrorists must never be underestimated. But I am more determined to protect the values, ideals and security of the law-abiding citizens of our country."

He said: "Scaring people does not produce security; nor does fear create healthy markets for security or any other business. Rather, we are led to security through what our liberties enable us to do for our common good."

David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said: "It is bad enough that this Home Office split will be expensive, bureaucratic and do nothing to fix the problems afflicting the Home Office, but merely make them worse. It is outrageous that John Reid is prepared to use the time when Lord Falconer is temporarily in post and the Blair-Brown interregnum to rush out a series of announcements - with serious implications for public safety - just to avoid taking the flak."