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/7360823.stm

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Police 'pushing at' terror limit Goldsmith 'can't back' terror law
(about 2 hours later)
Britain's most senior police officer has told MPs that forces are "pushing at" the limit on holding terror suspects without charge. Former Attorney General Lord Goldsmith has said "the case has not been made" to extend the limit on holding terror suspects, and he could not support it.
MPs examining plans to extend it to 42 days were told 15 plots had been foiled since the 7 July bombings. Lord Goldsmith told MPs scrutinising plans to extend the pre-charge limit to 42 days that it would send a message to Muslims "that we are down on them".
He said "sooner or later, and maybe sooner" the 28-day limit was going to prove "insufficient." Earlier police chief Sir Ian Blair said officers were "pushing at" the current limit and would need longer in future.
Ministers have been talking to Labour MPs concerned about the plans in an effort to head off a backbench revolt. Ministers have been talking to Labour MPs to try to stop a backbench revolt.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, Home Office minister Tony McNulty and security minister Lord West have been meeting potential rebels to try to win them over.Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, Home Office minister Tony McNulty and security minister Lord West have been meeting potential rebels to try to win them over.
Multiple attacksMultiple attacks
The BBC understands a vote on the plans has been put back several weeks until mid June. The BBC understands a vote on the plans has been put back several weeks until mid-June.
Speaking to MPs on the Counter-Terrorism Bill committee earlier, Sir Ian said the plots were becoming increasingly complex - including multiple attack sites and computer evidence. Speaking to MPs on the Counter-Terrorism Bill committee earlier, Lord Goldsmith - who stepped down as attorney general last year - said he did not understand how the government's promise that MPs and peers would get to vote on any extension would work.
I feel it is totally unnecessary and probably it will alienate the Muslim community in this country Mohammad Sarwar MP We have reached a point with 28 days where we are pushing at that Sir Ian Blair
He said they would not be told anything prejudicial to the prosecution, adding: "How are you going to give Parliament enough information to make a decision?
"Are you going to ask Parliament to simply trust the secretary of state? That doesn't really give you a great deal of a safeguard."
Lord Goldsmith, who was the legal adviser to Tony Blair's government, said the measure could alienate Muslims who would think "we are down on them", and could be used as justification for "misguided young men" to launch attacks.
He added: "The case has not been made for that extension and I can't personally support it."
'Pushing at limit'
Earlier, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair said the plots were becoming increasingly complex, including multiple attack sites and computer evidence. MPs were told there had been 15 plots foiled since the 7 July 2005 bombings in London.
"We have reached a point where at 28 days we feel sooner or later - and maybe sooner - something is going to happen to make that insufficient," he said."We have reached a point where at 28 days we feel sooner or later - and maybe sooner - something is going to happen to make that insufficient," he said.
"We have reached a point with 28 days where we are pushing at that.""We have reached a point with 28 days where we are pushing at that."
However, Sue Hemming, head of the Crown Prosecution Service's counter-terrorism division, said the need to hold suspected terrorists for longer than 14 days had only been necessary on three occasions since the introduction of the 28 day limit in 2005. Anything is possible - the question is whether it's remotely likely Sir Ken Macdonald Director of Public Prosecutions
However, Sue Hemming, head of the Crown Prosecution Service's counter-terrorism division, said there had only been three occasions since 2005 when suspects were held longer than 14 days.
And Sir Ken Macdonald, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said while it was up to Parliament to set the time limit of detention without charge, he believed 28 days was "sufficient".And Sir Ken Macdonald, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said while it was up to Parliament to set the time limit of detention without charge, he believed 28 days was "sufficient".
"For our part as prosecutors, we don't perceive any need for the period of 28 days to be increased," he said. "Our experience has been that we have managed comfortably with 28 days. We have therefore not asked for an increase in 28 days," he said.
Significant plots
"Our experience has been that we have managed comfortably with 28 days. We have therefore not asked for an increase in 28 days.
"Anything is possible - the question is whether it's remotely likely.""Anything is possible - the question is whether it's remotely likely."
How crazy is it to actually get to the point that we don't legislate until we have actually exceeded the limit Martin SalterLabour MP
Former attorney general Lord Goldsmith reiterated his opposition to an extension of the current limit.
"We have had and the police have had, significant plots and indeed concurrent plots they have had to investigate," he said.
"But in none of those cases, and I looked personally hard at them when I was in government, would it have been of help to have a period of longer than 28 days."
The bill has been given an unopposed second reading but Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and some Labour MPs have said they will fight parts of it later on.The bill has been given an unopposed second reading but Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and some Labour MPs have said they will fight parts of it later on.
Under the current proposals, the home secretary could immediately extend the limit on pre-charge detention from 28 to 42 days, if supported by a chief constable and the director of public prosecutions.Under the current proposals, the home secretary could immediately extend the limit on pre-charge detention from 28 to 42 days, if supported by a chief constable and the director of public prosecutions.
Blair defeat
MPs and the House of Lords would then vote to approve it within 30 days, if they rejected it the extension would end at midnight on the day of the debate.MPs and the House of Lords would then vote to approve it within 30 days, if they rejected it the extension would end at midnight on the day of the debate.
Attempts to extend it to 90 days in 2005 ended in Tony Blair's first Commons defeat as prime minister and some MPs that backed the 90-day detention, now say they will vote against the 42-days plan.Attempts to extend it to 90 days in 2005 ended in Tony Blair's first Commons defeat as prime minister and some MPs that backed the 90-day detention, now say they will vote against the 42-days plan.
Among them is Mohammad Sarwar, MP for Glasgow Central. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the case had not been made for the extension and he felt it was "totally unnecessary and probably it will alienate the Muslim community in this country".
'Temporary measure'
Another Labour MP, Mark Todd, said he might be persuaded if new evidence is brought forward.
But he wanted to see how other changes - including a limited use of intercept evidence in trials and allowing suspects to be questioned after they are charged - work, before voting through "a substantial reduction in an individual's liberties".
However Labour MP Martin Salter told the BBC it "defied logic" that anyone who supported the "blanket extension" of 90-days, should vote against the "temporary measure" in "exceptional circumstances" now put forward.
He dismissed the argument that 28 days had not been exceeded so far: "How crazy is it to actually get to the point that we don't legislate until we have actually exceeded the limit, we have let someone go who then goes on to commit a terrorist outrage?... When Parliament seeks to legislate in a panic and a rush, it gets it wrong."