This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/7323740.stm

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Brown defends terror limit plans Smith defends terror limit plans
(about 4 hours later)
Gordon Brown has said proposed changes to anti-terrorism laws will not mean a "blanket extension to 42 days" on the pre-charge limit for holding suspects. The home secretary has tried to calm MPs' fears over plans to let terror suspects be held longer without charge.
The PM said the proposal before MPs was different to previous plans, and would require Parliament's approval. In the Counter-Terrorism Bill debate Jacqui Smith said the law "cannot remain frozen" while the threat grows.
He said it would balance the rights of the individual with security needs. She said she was proposing a "reserve power" that was a "wholly different model" to the planned 90-day limit that was defeated in the Commons in 2005.
Some Labour backbenchers are set to rebel. Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs have said they will vote against it in later stages. Some Labour backbenchers are set to rebel. Tory and Lib Dem MPs have said they will oppose it in later stages.
'Multiple plots' Opening the second reading debate earlier, Ms Smith said the terrorist threat was of an "unprecedented scale" and the sheer weight and amount of material that had to be gone through - often of an international nature - presented a new challenge to investigators.
The current laws allow terrorism suspects to be detained for up to 28 days before they have to be charged. 'Clear need'
Mr Brown said all sides had agreed there was likely to be an occasion in the future where someone would have to be held beyond 28 days - for example in a situation where there are "multiple plots". "As the threat from terrorism evolves, so our laws must adapt to remain effective," she said.
There is no proposal for a blanket extension to 42 days. That is a myth and that is wrong Gordon Brown She said the government had moved a "considerable way" from the original option - in 2005 Tony Blair suffered his first Commons defeat as prime minister over plans to extend the limit to 90 days.
He said the proposal would mean no-one could be held beyond 28 days, without MPs' approval and without agreement from the Director of Public Prosecutions and a police chief. An independent reviewer will also go over the circumstances. There is no proposal for a blanket extension to 42 days - that is a myth and that is wrong Gordon Brown
"There is no proposal for a blanket extension to 42 days. That is a myth and that is wrong," said Mr Brown. Ms Smith said: "We are not now proposing a permanent, automatic or immediate extension to pre-charge detention beyond the current maximum limit of 28 days.
"There can only be a detention beyond 28 days if the home secretary comes to Parliament... during that period of detention and asks Parliament to approve the action that has been taken to declare this particular incident one that requires going beyond 28 days. "We are proposing a reserve power - not to be used lightly - that would mean that a higher limit could only become available if there was a clear and exceptional operational need, supported by the police and the CPS, and approved by the home secretary."
"And even then there will be full safeguards for the individual so that nobody is treated arbitrarily." She said it would be subject to Parliamentary approval within 30 days and whether someone was held would be a decision for a senior judge and she pledged to continue a "consensus building approach" as the Bill continues its Parliamentary progress.
Labour rebellion 'No evidence'
As debate got underway in the Commons, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said the 42-day detention would only be used temporarily and in exceptional circumstances. Earlier Gordon Brown said: "There is no proposal for a blanket extension to 42 days. That is a myth and that is wrong."
"Senior police officers are clear that the combination of the changing nature of investigations to pre-empt and prevent potential terrorist actions and the scope and complexity of many plots have the potential to impact on the ability to bring charges against terrorist suspects in the time available," she said.
There has been no evidence to show that we need more than 28 days David DavisShadow Home Secretary
"The amount and geographical location of the material they seize, locating this material from countries overseas, such as Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and combing through it, can pose particular challenges.
"Terrorists living and working in our society have learned how to use technology to cover their tracks - they travel and network and share their experiences, learning from mistakes."
Ms Smith said the "ferocity and complexity" of terrorist actions has led to the view "that it may be necessary in the future, in exceptional circumstances for terrorist suspects to be held for more than the current limit of 28 days before charge".
But some Labour backbenchers remain unconvinced by the arguments - and are expected to vote against the Counter-Terrorism Bill during the later stages of its passage through Parliament.But some Labour backbenchers remain unconvinced by the arguments - and are expected to vote against the Counter-Terrorism Bill during the later stages of its passage through Parliament.
'Drop it' We on these benches will fight tooth and nail against these provisions which we believe to prove to be a serious erosion of hard won freedoms Chris HuhneLiberal Democrats
David Winnick, deputy chairman of the home affairs select committee, predicted a sizeable rebellion. For the Conservatives, David Davis told MPs: "There is not one shred of evidence for extension beyond 28 days - full stop."
While he said ministers conjured up "nightmare scenarios" - but there was already a solution, to use the Civil Contingencies Act.
And he said while the Conservatives would support parts of the Bill - such as allowing post-charge questioning - extending the pre-charge detention period up to 42 days could act as a "recruiting sergeant" for terrorists.
Police support
He added that Australian citizens could be held for up to 12 days without charge, US citizens for two and if Britain was to go to 42, it would be in the same league as countries like Zimbabwe and China.
For the Liberal Democrats, Chris Huhne said aspects of the Bill were deeply intrusive to "hard won civil liberties".
He praised proposals such as the limited use of intercept evidence but attacked the proposal to allow pre-charge detention to be extended.
"We on these benches will fight tooth and nail against these provisions which we believe to prove to be a serious erosion of hard won freedoms, just as crucially it will prove to be counter productive," he said.
Earlier Labour MP David Winnick predicted a sizeable rebellion on the issue of pre-charge detention, arguing there was no compelling evidence the extension was needed.
He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It doesn't give us any joy to try to get the government defeated - far from it - but they're absolutely wrong on this issue.He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It doesn't give us any joy to try to get the government defeated - far from it - but they're absolutely wrong on this issue.
He said there was no compelling evidence it was necessary to go beyond 28 days adding: "Bearing in mind it's the longest period of detention without charge anywhere in Europe, I would say to the government, quite clearly, drop it." Senior police officers, including Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, have continued to call for an extension beyond 28 days.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis, said he supported some aspects of the Bill but was confident the government would be defeated on the issue of 42 day detention. But Lord Dear - formerly Geoffrey Dear, the chief constable of West Midlands Police - told the BBC earlier: "We don't need an extension. The ex-attorney general has said so, many senior police officers I know and speak to privately say so."
'Indefensible'
He told Today: "There is already a consensus in the House of Commons for 28 days and not a day longer.
"There has been no evidence to show that we need more than 28 days."
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said he supported some parts of the Counter-Terrorism Bill, such as post-charge questioning and allowing use of intercept evidence in court in limited cases.
But he said extending the detention of suspects without charge beyond 28 days was "indefensible", threatening not only civil liberties but "the trust that exists between minority communities and the security services".
Terror plots
Plans to extend terror detention to 90 days were defeated by MPs in November 2005 by 31 votes, with 49 Labour MPs rebelling against the government.
But senior police officers, including Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, have continued to call for an extension beyond 28 days.
But Lord Dear - formerly Geoffrey Dear, the chief constable of West Midlands Police - told Today earlier: "We don't need an extension. The ex-attorney general has said so, many senior police officers I know and speak to privately say so.
"We have not lost any cases at all by going past the 28 day barrier at the moment."
Racial equality
A series of safeguards have been proposed by Ms Smith as ministers seek to win over enough Labour opponents to allow the proposals to go through.
They include giving MPs a debate within 30 days about any case of a suspect being held beyond 28 days.
The plans to extend the limit could also face an Equality and Human Rights Commission court challenge.The plans to extend the limit could also face an Equality and Human Rights Commission court challenge.
The commission says the Bill could contravene race equality legislation, as it is being established to deal with a particular religious and racial minority.