Home Westminster UnionsMedia Activism

28 days: government offers “concessions”


by Sunny Hundal    
February 26, 2008 at 4:10 pm

Via Anthony Barnett, I find that the home secretary is preparing to offer “concessions” in an attempt to avoid a rebellion against its plans to extend pre-detention charge for up to 42 days.

Under the proposal, MPs would be allowed to debate a decision to invoke the emergency powers within 10 days of a government decision. At the moment MPs would only be given a say within 30 days, a proposal seen as largely meaningless by critics – suspects could have been charged or released by the time MPs had a chance to scrutinise the need for an extension beyond the current limit of 28 days.

This is so meaningless as to be an insult to our intelligence. Martin Salter, Labour MP for Reading West, who Anthony rightly says is preparing to be a sellout, says we have: “got stuck in a sterile debate on the number of days”. So why not remove any delay of time in which MPs can debate the decision? It is cosmetic surgery and it is being thrown as crumbs to Labour MPs who still have control of their conscience. Feel free to write to Salter . As Anthony rightly adds: “There are few things more insufferable than MPs telling us how they are the guardians of our liberty and all the great things about Britain while the executive laughs up its sleeve and voters snort with derision.

Later this week I’ll be speaking alongside Liberty at an event organised by the Muslim debating group City Circle about how this campaign can be taken forward strategically. All are welcome to attend.


-------------------------

  Tweet  

About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by Sunny Hundal

Filed under
Blog ,Campaigns ,Civil liberties ,Detention (28 days) ,Labour party ,Westminster


9 responses in total   ||  



Reader comments

Sunny, that event gives day and location but not time. What time does it start and finish?

Starts around 6:30pm I believe.

I ultimately just had to wonder where the man got the gall to believe , quite aside from the problems of Government holding powers that the judiciary should hold for objective reasoning, that MPs will have anywhere near enough expertise, knowledge and courage to ever hold the home secretary “to account” when a potential terrorist is being talked about.

Hell, even when it is someone proven to be using taxpayers money in a disgusting way they stand up and applaud him, what hope have suspects of terrorism got?

4. douglas clark

Sunny,

Will there be video of this? I’d really like to have been there, but it is not possible.

Are comments down? I have attempted 3 times to post a comment here.

OK, apparently not. Is it the HTML/attempt at vb-code that is causing the problem? OK, once more with no formatting at all…

Slightly OT, but:

This is the same Martin Salter MP who pushed for the ‘Dangerous Pictures Act’ (otherwise known as the ‘possession of extreme pornographic images’ law. This would make the possession of images portraying sexual violence (i.e. BDSM porn) punishable by up to 3 years in prison and Sex Offender Registration.

More detail on this at my blog (1)
Frank Fisher on the Dangerous Pictures Act at Comment is Free (2).

“I have received opposition…from groups claiming to represent the bondage, domination and sado-masochistic communities. I have learned that they organise themselves into munch clubs—I do not want to go any further into that…If people want to do weird things to each other they still can, but I say, “Don’t put it on the internet.”" – Martin Salter MP (3)

1. http://questionthat.me.uk/2007/11/vicious-cycle.html
2. http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/frank_fisher/2007/10/all_the_fun_of_the_fear.html
3. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2007-10-08a.111.3

OK, apparently not. Is it the HTML/attempt at vb-code that is causing the problem? OK, once more with no formatting at all…

Slightly OT, but:

This is the same Martin Salter MP who pushed for the ‘Dangerous Pictures Act’ (otherwise known as the ‘possession of extreme pornographic images’ law. This would make the possession of images portraying sexual violence (i.e. BDSM porn) punishable by up to 3 years in prison and Sex Offender Registration.

“I have received opposition…from groups claiming to represent the bondage, domination and sado-masochistic communities. I have learned that they organise themselves into munch clubs—I do not want to go any further into that…If people want to do weird things to each other they still can, but I say, ‘Don’t put it on the internet’” – Martin Salter MP (TheyWorkForYou)

More on this at my blog: http://questionthat.me.uk/2007/11/vicious-cycle.html

8. dreamingspire

For more (lots more) on MS MP read janestheone http://janestheones.blogspot.com/

I ultimately just had to wonder where the man got the gall to believe , quite aside from the problems of Government holding powers that the judiciary should hold for objective reasoning, that MPs will have anywhere near enough expertise, knowledge and courage to ever hold the home secretary “to account” when a potential terrorist is being talked about.

It is a sham, a fig leaf, a bribe to make MPs feel better about getting rid of habeas corpus, locking someone up without the opportunity to challenge it.

MPs will not be able to scrutinise or debate the decision to lock up the individual – they will only be able to debate in the broadest sense what the Government claims are the reasons for needing the power (the “exceptional operational need”). Indeed they will not be given any meaningful information with which to debate the need in case it prejudices the outcome of any operation or trial.

Worth reading the Uncorrected Oral Evidence at a recent Home Affairs Committee, particularly the questions from James Clappison and Gary Streeter.

It is a sham, and an affront to our liberties and our intelligence.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs


    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

     
    Liberal Conspiracy is the UK's most popular left-of-centre politics blog. Our aim is to re-vitalise the liberal-left through discussion and action. More about us here.

    You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed.
    RECENT OPINION ARTICLES
    TwitterRSS feedsRSS feedsFacebook


    25 Comments



    5 Comments



    38 Comments



    15 Comments



    4 Comments



    15 Comments



    47 Comments



    41 Comments



    34 Comments



    19 Comments



    LATEST COMMENTS
    » Richard posted on I know how let down Libdems must feel

    » Sunny Hundal posted on Press Complaints Commission says general homophobia is allowed

    » Peter Reynolds posted on Why Labour was right to reject Bob's drug policy

    » Ken Coyne posted on Press Complaints Commission says general homophobia is allowed

    » Robert Long posted on Press Complaints Commission says general homophobia is allowed

    » Robert Long posted on Press Complaints Commission says general homophobia is allowed

    » David posted on Press Complaints Commission says general homophobia is allowed

    » David posted on Press Complaints Commission says general homophobia is allowed

    » Ken Coyne posted on 49 universities are or were under occupation

    » the a&e charge nurse posted on John Pilger shames himself by attacking feminists over Julian Assange

    » sally posted on I know how let down Libdems must feel

    » sdv_duras posted on Why we want to ‘recall’ Aaron Porter as NUS President

    » sdv_duras posted on Why we want to ‘recall’ Aaron Porter as NUS President

    » Andy H posted on Press Complaints Commission says general homophobia is allowed

    » Phil Hunt posted on Prosecutors urge care on retracted rape claims