Blair: Reasons for detention law ‘compelling’
The proposal to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge is both “necessary” and “compelling”, the prime minister said today.
He used his monthly press conference to reiterate the case for the controversial proposal, just moments after home secretary Charles Clarke admitted the proposed period of detention for terror suspects would now be reduced, after cross-party talks held this morning failed to reach a compromise.
A new amendment that would “reduce the period from 90 days, but not as low as 28”, would now be tabled, Mr Clarke said.
But he added that the government would not consider any period below 28 days as appropriate.
In combative mood, the prime minister made plain that he believed “if we are forced to compromise, it will be a compromise for this country’s security”, pointing out that the proposal allowed for a judicial review every seven days.
And he defended the government against criticism that the proposal was ill-thought out, saying that the police “have put forward a compelling case, which I believe is necessary”.
“We should never forget that this terrorist attack happened just a few short months ago. So let me be very clear – this is not a plan brewed up by me.it is what the most senior police officers in the country, its what they have asked us [to do],” he said.
He made clear that the requirements of the police and security services had changed following the July 7th terrorist attacks in London, and said the complex nature of gathering evidence on terrorist suspects meant that the 14 day detention limit was no longer enough.
“The challenge of this type of terrorism is not one that can be met by the policing methods of the 1990s,” the prime minister added.
This was not about restricting civil liberties, he said, but about protecting the lives of ordinary citizens.
“Of course their liberties are important but so are the liberties of the people who may be victims of a terrorist attack and their most basic civil liberty – the right to life,” Mr Blair declared.
He concluded: “We do not want to compromise on the 90 days at all. It is not the right thing for this country”
Earlier, Mr Clarke indicated that while the government did not want to compromise, it might have to after failing to agree a cross-party political consensus.
The government wants to keep the 90-day measure, but has faced fierce opposition from the Tories, who favour the 28-day option, and the Lib Dems, who are pressing for the current 14-day limit to be kept in place.
Speaking after discussions with his counterparts, the home secretary explained: “I said very clearly that we do not accept 28 days as appropriate. I will be tabling an amendment to reduce the period from 90 but not as low as 28.”
He reinforced the point that the police, the probation service and the “overwhelming majority of the British public” wanted the 90-day period introduced.
“I regret very much that we have not been able to agree a cross-party political consensus,” Mr Clarke said.
He added: ” The 90 days recommended by the police is what we think is the best way to protect the country.”
