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/7666022.stm

The article has changed 17 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Peers to vote on anti-terror plan Peers debating anti-terror plan
(about 8 hours later)
The House of Lords is expected to vote against government plans to extend the terror detention limit to 42 days. The House of Lords is debating controversial moves to extend the terror detention limit to 42 days.
Opponents say extending pre-charge detentions from the current 28 days is pointless and will damage civil rights. It is widely predicted that peers will defeat the government proposal, which was backed by MPs in June.
But ministers say the increasing complexity of terror plots means police need more time to deal with suspects. Crossbencher Lord Dear, who has tabled an amendment to keep the pre-charge detention limit at 28 days, called ministers' plan "shabby" and "flawed".
Gordon Brown declined to "presume" how the vote would go, saying: "The House of Lords should take the advice of the House of Commons in this matter." But Lib Dem Lord Carlile, the official reviewer of terror laws, said it was an "appropriate" attempt to save lives.
'Considerable opposition' The House of Commons backed the extension in terror detentions by just nine votes in June, with 36 Labour MPs rebelling against the government.
Peers began debating the Counter-Terrorism Bill's detailed committee stage last week and are expected to vote on the 42-days plan later on Monday. 'Unworthy'
It passed through the House of Commons by nine votes in June, with 36 Labour MPs rebelling. The Conservative and Liberal Democrat leaderships both oppose the plan.
Conservative peer and shadow security minister, Baroness Neville Jones, told the BBC there was concerted opposition to the proposal in the Lords. Supporting Lord Dear's amendment are the Conservative frontbencher Baroness Neville-Jones, a former Joint Intelligence Committee chairwoman, Lib Dem frontbencher Lord Thomas and Labour QC Baroness Mallalieu.
"I think there will be a very considerable opposition in the House of Lords. And it will come from right across the spectrum. Opening the debate, Lord Dear said: "This attempt to appear tough on terrorism, I believe, is a shabby charade which is unworthy of a democratic process and we should reject it."
"We don't want it." He said there was "no proven case" for changing the limit, that the legislation was "fatally flawed, ill thought-through and unnecessary" and would "further erode fundamental and legal rights that have been the pride of this country for centuries".
We have got to stand up for our basic freedoms Kate Allen, Amnesty International Q&A: Terror plans I see no thin end of the wedge argument here Lord CarlileTerrorism law reviewer Q&A: Terror plans
Baroness Neville Jones, the shadow security minister, warned peers the legislation could hinder efforts to work with Muslim communities and said the number of safeguards introduced "not only make it unworkable, they also make it constitutionally worrying".
She said letting Parliament vote on whether to allow detention beyond 28 days was asking it to act in a "quasi-judicial manner".
For the Lib Dems, Lord Thomas said such a vote, based on a statement from the home secretary, could prejudice a suspect's trial adding: "That is not only unconstitutional; it is contemptible."
However, Lord Carlile told peers he would not take part in the vote as he did not want to take advantage of his position, but supported the 42-day limit.
'Heavy heart'
He said he dreaded a major terrorist attack, such as a plane or bomb being driven into a crowd of thousands, and did not want to have to make changes to the law in the aftermath.
"I see no thin end of the wedge argument here. What I see is finality in the law of detention with appropriate detention," he said.
He said he believed the extension would effect adversely a "maximum maybe of five or six people in the next four or five years".
HAVE YOUR SAY It is necessary to protect the country from terrorism but not at the cost of human rights Helen Toalster, Manchester Send us your comments
"This is not the end of civil liberties as we know it. And it could have a consequence of saving many lives at home and abroad, including people in those humanitarian camps with the UN and others keep abroad."
Former lord chancellor Lord Falconer has said he will vote against the government "with a heavy heart", while the former Conservative chairman Lord Tebbit has said he will vote with the government.
Lord Tebbit warned his own party they may "rue this day" if they won the vote, then won the next general election and found they needed the powers.
90 days
David Davis, the Tory MP who resigned in protest at the Commons vote to fight for his seat on a civil liberties platform, is watching the debate from the steps of the throne.
Peers began debating the Counter-Terrorism Bill's detailed committee stage last week and are expected to vote on the 42-days plan within the next two hours.
Last week, the government insisted the 42-days plan would return to the Commons, with Commons Leader Harriet Harman saying it would be dealt with in the "usual way".Last week, the government insisted the 42-days plan would return to the Commons, with Commons Leader Harriet Harman saying it would be dealt with in the "usual way".
If peers reject the plan, ministers can use the Parliament Act to force it into legislation.If peers reject the plan, ministers can use the Parliament Act to force it into legislation.
But BBC political editor Nick Robinson reported last week that the government had decided against this, as it would be time-consuming and controversial.But BBC political editor Nick Robinson reported last week that the government had decided against this, as it would be time-consuming and controversial.
90 days
A Home Office spokesman said it would continue to press for the 42-day limit.
HAVE YOUR SAY It is necessary to protect the country from terrorism but not at the cost of human rights Helen Toalster, Manchester Send us your comments
"The government is determined to give the police the powers they need to tackle terrorism.
"That is why it is right and proper to legislate now to put in place the reserve power to go beyond 28 days if in future there is a clear operational need for it."
Meanwhile, the human rights group Amnesty International is to run a "mass sleepwalk" through Leeds, to coincide with the launch of its film Sleepwalk aimed at highlighting what it says is a largely unnoticed erosion of liberties.
UK director Kate Allen said: "There's a real danger that people in Britain are sleepwalking into an assault on our human rights."
The government failed in 2006 to extend pre-charge terror detentions to a maximum of 90 days. Instead, the current 28-day limit was agreed as a compromise.The government failed in 2006 to extend pre-charge terror detentions to a maximum of 90 days. Instead, the current 28-day limit was agreed as a compromise.
* BBC Parliament will be broadcasting the House of Lords live on Monday from 2.30pm. You can watch it on Freeview, cable and satellite television. You can watch proceedings in both the Commons and Lords live on the BBC website. * BBC Parliament is broadcasting the House of Lords live . You can watch it on Freeview, cable and satellite television. You can watch proceedings in both the Commons and Lords live on the BBC website.