Failed terrorism law was excessive
Half an hour before the crucial House of Commons vote on the Government’s Terrorism Bill last Wednesday I found myself standing outside Parliament holding a pair of giant outsized fake teeth and a toothbrush. The photo shoot, with other local MPs to promote the bid for a joint Hull-York Universities Dental School, was a somewhat incongruous start to an afternoon of high political drama which culminated in the first defeat for the Government since taking office in 1997.
The most contentious part of the Terrorism Bill, the proposal to extend the detention period of terrorist suspects without charge from the current 14 days to 90 days, had caused much unease amongst Labour backbenchers, myself included. There are few more important issues ever facing a Member of Parliament than ensuring the security of the citizens of this country. I therefore listened very carefully to the arguments put forward to justify this extension both by the Police and the Prime Minister. But in the end while I supported a doubling of the current 14 day limit to 28 days, I did not think a convincing case has been made to extend the limit to 90 days or three months.
During the past two years the current legislation has led to only 11 people being detained without charge for the maximum 14 days – all of which have then subsequently been charged with an offence. From this evidence it does not appear that the Police have been so restricted in their work that they have been unable to put a case together. It is also interesting to note that in Spain and Australia, two countries that are vehement in fighting terrorism, the limit for holding suspects without charge is less than the 14 day limit currently in place in the UK.
There is a constant balance to be struck between maintaining security against terrorism and protecting the civil liberties which are so deeply entrenched in this country. In my mind 90 days detention without charge was excessive and not in keeping with the long established principles of Habeas Corpus and British justice which assume innocence until proven guilty and that the innocent are not imprisoned without charge for longer than is necessary .
Members of Parliament on all sides of the House of Commons shared a similar view and in the end the Government was defeated by a clear margin of 31 votes. I will not be joining those voices calling for the Prime Minister to resign in the aftermath of this defeat. I do hope though that this whole episode will impress upon Tony Blair the need to adopt a consensual approach to policy making involving both cabinet colleagues and backbenchers much more than has previously been the case.
