Goldsmith savages 42 days bill
The government’s controversial anti-terror plans were last night roundly attacked by former attorney general Lord Goldsmith QC. “The case has not been made out for that extension and I can’t personally support it,” he said.
Now we need a defeat on 42 days
Now that it has backed down over the 10p tax band, we need the government to lose over the 42 days legislation too. Labour loyalists might balk at this but not only would it be good for our democracy, but its an incredibly bad piece of legislation.
On Monday Jackie Ashley faithfully asked loyalists to hold their nose:
For after the 10p vote will be plenty more possible crises, not least the vote over the 42-day detention proposal. On both, I am 100% against the official government view and, with every instinct, on the side of the Labour rebels. But disaster is looming and the real parliamentarians have carefully to weigh in the balance what they now do, and ask how much likelier it will make a Tory landslide a year hence.
This sort of thinking is appalling. It is the road of good intentions to hell.
continue reading… »
DPP chief also against 42 days
Britain’s most senior prosecutor last night questioned whether the government’s controversial proposal to detain terror suspects for up to 42 days without charge was even directed at “a real problem”.
28 days: Smith won’t “cave in”
Though defeat looms for the home secretary, Jacqui Smith says she won’t “cave in” to pressure on the 42 days extension.
28 days: Police already the power
Ministers don’t need to extend pre-charge detention to 42 days because they already have the power to almost indefinitely hold suspects, a rebel Labour MP told the Guardian today.
28 days: A game of bluff
It should come as no surprise that, in an effort to push its plans to extend pre-charge detention to 42 days, the home office has started citing the number of terrorist plots in Britain. Playing to the gallery in the News of the World this Sunday, Jacqui Smith said: “There are 2,000 individuals [the intelligence services] are monitoring. There are 200 networks. There are 30 active plots. We can’t wait for an attack to succeed and then rush in new powers. We’ve got to stay ahead.”
The first problem with this approach is the way successive home secretaries have cynically exploited such figures to push through controversial legislation on terrorism. After all, this is at least the fourth anti-terrorism bill since 2001, and each has been controversial in the way our government has tried to extend its powers. Shadow home secretary David Davis articulated it best when he responded yesterday by saying: “It is a sign of desperation that the home secretary is citing as ‘new’ evidence details given in a speech by the head of MI5 five months ago.”
continue reading… »
Cabinet split on 42 days
The Guardian reports today that the cabinet is split on whether pushing for extending pre-charge detention to 42 days is a good idea or not.
28 days: government offers “concessions”
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.
Will these MPs vote with their conscience?
I’ve put together a full list of Labour MPs who abstained or voted against the government’s last vote to extend pre-charge detention to 90 days. This time round, as I’ve said recently, they’re trying to extend this to 42 days. Thanks to Amnesty International and OurKingdom for providing me the information. We feel these are most likely to be persuaded that voting with the government this time around is also a bad idea.
Each MP’s name is linked with their email address. Please feel free to email them saying something along the lines of: ‘Don’t be convinced by the home secretary if you have a conscience.‘
To paraphrase Tesco, every email counts. We need to let them know that we’re watching.
Campaign against 42 days extension
The government will try and push its Counter Terrorism Bill through parliament in the next few weeks. This bill includes the provision to hold someone in detention, without charging them, for 42 days – a two week increase on the current limit of 28 days. Unsurprisingly, New Labour has been trying to paint this extension of police powers in benign terms. But we should not be fooled. Why? Because:
Despite vague allusions to ‘emergencies,’ the reality of the new proposals is that the Home Secretary can activate these powers at any time. There is no need for a public emergency of the type often drawn upon by government ministers; the ‘nightmare scenario’ of police overwhelmed by multiple terror plots. Indeed, an individual case can be trigger enough. Parliamentary safeguards proposed are anything but. The Home Secretary only has to inform Parliament that she has triggered the 42-day limit. Parliament will only be allowed to a vote up to 30 days later and then only if the government is seeking to renew the powers for another 30 days – by which time suspects could have already been held for six weeks. Further, even if used unlawfully, the decision to trigger the 42-day limit cannot be challenged and the power could not be struck down.
We have to try and oppose this draconian piece of legislation by:
1) Raising awareness that the vote is coming to parliament soon
2) Encouraging people to write to their MPs opposing this bill.
3) Informing of events, protests or publicity stunts on the issue.
4) Generate and share ideas on what we can do.
So far, we have: a Facebook group designed to raise awareness; a Downing St. petition against it; a basic list of public figures opposing it. Clearly, this is not enough.
The problem is that the home secretary has been doing a lot of arm-twisting over the past few weeks and there’s a threat going around to Labour MPs who dare to help the government lose its first big vote. I have a bad feeling this will go through.
If we are serious about opposing this latest attack on our civil liberties, we have to do more. So, here goes:
1) We are going to blog this issue regularly (from now until the vote) along with OurKingdom. Please join our campaign by doing the same!
2) Compass is asking for submissions to a consultation. Add your views (until 15th).
3) I’ll soon publish a list of MPs who opposed the 90 days extention. It’s best we put pressure on them specifically.
4) Ideas or suggestions for a publicity stunt later this month welcome!
5) An event is planned later this month at City Circle. Will let you know more soon.
28 days: Can a Labour revolt work?
Jacqui Smith’s campaign may yet hit some hurdles if this works:
The former health secretary Frank Dobson is rallying opposition among Labour MPs for a full-scale revolt against Gordon Brown’s proposal to allow suspected terrorists to be detained without charge for up to 42 days. [hat tip: Leon]
Frank Dobson is leading 49 Labour MPs in revolt; can anyone get us their names? There are still people in the party with a conscience, at least. Even the head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, doesn’t see the need to extend past 28 days. The home secretary can’t get anyone to support her plans and yet she soldiers on. Why is this Labour government hell-bent on generating ill-will with its supporters? Friday’s Indy was spot-on when it called this an “unhealthy obsession with counting the days“.
The Facebook group we launched on Friday has grown to over 1,300 1,400 over the weekend. Use that or this blog to throw out ideas, links or other ways to contribute to this campaign. And if you haven’t already, please sign the Amnesty International petition on the Downing st website and spread the word. Blogger Liam has made some blog buttons which you can see / use from here. If you have more ideas for buttons or raising awareness of this campaign, get in touch or leave a message underneath.
A Downing St petition
Amnesty International have launched an e-petition against government plans to extend pre-charge detention from 28 days. Do take out 10 seconds and sign it..
The Facebook group has grown by over 500 members since yesterday and AI haven’t even begun promoting it yet. Yesterday, Nick Clegg condemned Jacqui Smith’s plans to extend it to 42 days. I hope the Libdems and Tories join forces on this one to defeat the government.
So, what can we do and what is the point of a Facebook group where Liberty’s lobbying failed? Well, this campaign isn’t over yet simply because the home secretary has scaled down her plans from 56 to 42 days. The bill still has to be passed doesn’t it? Secondly, the point of our online campaign on Facebook and blogs is to raise awareness of this issue and get like-minded people together on an issue. From there, we have to find ways to break out of this small world and take the campaign out there in innovative ways. In other words, getting people to join a Facebook group is not an end in itself, but a potentially useful space to bring people together and see if anyone has innovative ideas to take this further.
Campaign page
42 Days Later
So it seems that forty-two is not only the ultimate answer to life, the universe and everything, but also (suddenly) the government’s favoured proposal for extending the maximum period during which a suspected terrorist can be held and interviewed without charge…
… and in the best traditions of Deep Thought, the fictional supercomputer who provided the ultimate answer, the government’s own answer to the question of how long the state should be able legally justify holding a suspected terrorist without bringing charges bring us no closer to an understanding of their own ultimate question -
Why is such a protracted period of detention without charge, the longest of any Western liberal democracy – if one excludes the extra-judicial detentions at Guantanamo Bay from consideration – (allegedly) necessary?
In commenting on this latest bid in the game of ‘Play your suspension of habeas corpus right’, one has to sincerely hope that Fraser Nelson is consciously playing dumb for effect in querying how the government arrived at the number 42, although perhaps even he thinks that the obvious suggestion that this may derive from nothing more substantial than the time-honoured haggling practice of ’splitting the difference’ is stretching credibility a little too far.
Personally, I wouldn’t be quite so sure.
continue reading… »
28 days: The campaign gathers pace
I’ve written quite a few times on our campaign to try and stop the government from extending the 28 days pre-charge detention period. From today this campaign moves into second gear.
We’re starting with Facebook. For that, we’ve teamed up with Amnesty International, OurKingdom and City Circle to raise awareness of the issue and spread the word. Please join the group and invite your friends!
Update: The home secretary has today backed away from 56/58 days and now wants to push for 42 days. Without convincing anyone or having the evidence for it. It’s a farce.
28 days: Select committee not in favour either
The Guardian is reporting today that the home affairs select committee is broadly not in favour of extending pre-charge detention past 28 days either!
“It’s not going to be supportive of the suggestion of an extension of 28 days,” a source close to the confidential report told Guardian Unlimited. “The general gist is that there is no evidence suggesting we can go beyond 28 days.”
The Financial Times broke the story. I have I’ll have more updates on this campaign in a day or two.
28 days: Two new reports against extending
As you can probably gather I am actively trying to build up resources, gather information and be more pro-active in the campaign against extending the 28 days pre-charge detention period. Feel free to use this button on your blog or change it around. I’ll be posting more buttons soon.
Today, two new reports will put more pressure on the government.
In separate reports, Amnesty International [here] and Justice [here] both said there was no case for extending the current limit of 28 days — higher than any other European Union state or the United States — for the detention of terrorism suspects. Amnesty set out 10 reasons why extending pre-charge detention was unjustified while Justice said that U.S. laws limiting detention to 48 hours have not stymied terrorism investigations there.
I can’t find either report though, anyone have links? In the Guardian today Marcel Berlins calls Brown’s obsession with extending the 28 days “increasingly incomprehensible”.
Yesterday, Henry Porter’s latest column was bang on the money:
What is needed – and here I hope someone is listening – is a mass movement on the lines of the Countryside Alliance, which goes across all parties and absorbs the skills and expertise of countless activists. Now is the moment to create a movement in defence of our privacy, security and freedom.
He’s referring to campaigning against ID cards but this equally applies to this. Anthony Barnett from OurKingdom and Lynne Featherstone MP are willing to sign up. Are you?
Campaign page
28 days: List of names against extension
This will become a constantly updated list of public figures against extending the 28 days pre-charge detention period. Please mention those you think are relevant (with links) in the comments below.
All Conservative party members?
All Liberal Democrat members?
(There will be a separate post for Labour MPs)
Lord Goldsmith, former attorney general
“There needs to be a limit to this. And while any limit is arbitrary I thought that we were really in the right place with the decision the Commons ultimately took.” …He saw “no evidence to go beyond 28 days”. [The Guardian]
Ken Macdonald, director of public prosecutions and head of CPS
“It seems to us 28 days has been effective and has provided us with powers, supervised by the courts, that have been useful to us.” [The Guardian]
Lord Woolf, former lord chief justice
“I like very many other people have not been convinced by the case for increasing the period. … I would prefer, myself, to allow them to be charged and if, after they are charged, so that they know what they are facing, they are still subject to questioning, albeit in custody.” [The Guardian]
Jonathan Evans, head of MI5
He refused to say whether he backed the proposal and was described as “distinctly unenthusiastic” by one of those present. [The Telegraph]
Baroness Scotland of Asthal, QC
[The Times]
Vera Baird QC, solicitor-general
Also believes the case has not yet been made. [The Times]
Lord Falconer, former lord chancellor
Does not believe the government had made a coherent case for the extension, and that it would not be justifiable to extend detention beyond 28 days simply because further time was needed to investigate an individual suspect in a complex case. [The Guardian]
Parliament
Joint Committee on Human Rights and Commons Home Affairs Select Committee
[The Guardian]
In the news: The Home Secretary has admitted that there has not been one single case since 9/11 when police enquiries would have been aided by holding a terror suspect for more than 28 days.
Campaign to stop extension of 28 days detention
I am, like many others, alarmed at this government’s repeated attempts to extend the detention-without-charge period for more than 28 days. It is already the longest in the world. New Labour is becoming addicted to authoritarian legislation and we need to actively challenge that.
I’d like to start by exploring what part blogs can play in being part of a broader coalition to challenge the government on this issue.
We could start by collecting information that supports our cause.
- What are the alternatives to extending 28 days?
- Who opposes this extension and what have they said?
- Which journalists and commentators are also opposed?
- What other organisations are actively campaigning on this?
- What events are taking place to build support on challenging the government?
Any other ideas, readers?
I’ll soon start posting on each of the above. Please feel free to post any information that comes to mind in relation to the above points. As Henry Porter said this weekend:
How have we allowed this rolling putsch against our freedom? Where are the principled voices from left and right, the outrage of playwrights and novelists, the sit-ins, the marches, the swelling public anger? We have become a nation that tolerates a diabetic patient collapsed in a coma being tasered by police, the jailing of a silly young woman for writing her jihadist fantasies in verse and an illegal killing by police that was prosecuted under health and safety laws.
How indeed. Also worth reading is this article by Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty.
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or rss feeds.
» Why don’t MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours?
» Obama is right to slam BP – and why capitalists should too
» Why does Phillip Blond see civil cohesion as a security issue?
» So what if the Labour candidates went to Oxbridge?
» Last night’s Labour hustings: will it get interesting or turn to torture?
» It’s now down to Ken to win London for Labour
» The Labour people need
» Blog Nation: what would you like to see discussed?
» The Labour leadership’s token contender.. and it’s not Diane Abbott
» In defence of these fraternal nominations
» Is this the end for the socialist left?
|
26 Comments 66 Comments 20 Comments 12 Comments 10 Comments 18 Comments 4 Comments 25 Comments 49 Comments 31 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » sally posted on Complete tits » Joanne Dunn posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Lovely Lynnette Peck posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Nick posted on Why don't MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours? » Bob B posted on Complete tits » Nick posted on Complete tits » Mike Killingworth posted on Complete tits » Mr S. Pill posted on Complete tits » Nick Cohen is a Tory posted on Complete tits » Nick Cohen is a Tory posted on Complete tits » Matt Munro posted on Why I'm defending Ed Balls over immigration » Kate Belgrave posted on Complete tits » Kate Belgrave posted on Complete tits » Nick Cohen is a Tory posted on Obama is right to slam BP - and why capitalists should too » Thomas Hobbes posted on The Daily Mail and "Bongo bongoland" |
