Government defeated on terror plans
MPs today voted by 322 votes to 291 to reject the government’s proposals to allow police to hold terrorist suspects for up to three months without charge.
The move is a huge blow to Tony Blair’s authority, who has long insisted that the powers are crucial if police and security services are to effectively tackle terrorism.
Instead, MPs voted in favour of an amendment to extend the current maximum detention time of 14 days to 28 days. It is Mr Blair’s first defeat since Labour came to power in 1997.
Ministers had rejected a compromise on the 90-day proposal, introducing instead a sunset clause that would see the legislation expire in 12 months’ time.
Mr Blair hoped that this provision, with assurances that any detention would be subject to weekly review by a senior judge, would be enough to reassure MPs.
Speaking in the Commons before the vote, the prime minister appealed to their “sense of responsibility” and urged them to back the plans.
However, the Tories had insisted they would not support any extension of the maximum detention period beyond 28 days, while the Lib Dems wanted to keep the current limit of a fortnight.
A vote on the issue was postponed last week pending further cross-party discussions, but on Monday, home secretary Charles Clarke announced the government would not move on the 90-day period.
During prime minister’s questions today, Mr Blair said he was “sorry” that it had not been possible to reach a consensus on the issue, but it was now up to individual MPs to make a decision during this afternoon’s vote.
“According to the police and those charged with fighting terrorism this is not something that is peripheral – it is integral, and every person in this house is going to have to make a decision about the security of this country,” he told the Commons.
Michael Howard was the first to challenge Mr Blair, asking him to find a “single case” where police needed 90 days to gather the necessary evidence to charge a terror suspect.
“I think there is a general mood in this house for increase in time during which people should be able to hold people without charge. The question is, should that period be 90 days?” the Tory leader said.
Responding, Mr Blair repeated his claim that police had provided “cogent and intelligent” arguments as to why the extended time – which would be subject to weekly review by a senior judge – was necessary to fight this new type of “mass casualty terrorism”.
“I appeal to the house to have some sense of responsibility here – this is an occasion in which it is important that we do what is responsible, what is right and what is necessary to protect this country’s security,” he said.
Amid cries from the opposition benches of a “police state”, Mr Blair continued: “We are not living in a police state. But we are living in a country that faces a real and serious threat of terrorism.
“[It is a] terrorism that wants to destroy our way of life, inflict casualties without limit and when those in charge of protecting provide a compelling case of action, my duty is to support them, and so in my view is the duty of every member of this house.”
And he rejected Mr Howard’s warning that the new measures could alienate members of minority communities, giving rise to social unrest akin to that seen in Paris, and blocking off a significant source of intelligence information.
The closeness – and importance – of today’s ballot was shown by the decision to recall chancellor Gordon Brown and foreign secretary Jack Straw from trips abroad to vote.
And Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy asked the prime minister whether he expected – even if the vote went the government’s way today – the terrorism bill would ever pass the Lords.
Citing the opposition of a number of law lords, Mr Kennedy said he thought it unlikely, adding: “What will they do at that juncture – will they try to build up a fresh consensus, or ram it through with the Parliament Act?”
Mr Blair insisted the detention proposals were “the right thing in these circumstances”, adding: “I find the position of the Lib Dems unsurprising, and that of the Tories surprising – but whatever it is, sometimes it is better to lose and do the right thing than to win and do the wrong thing.”
