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/7137927.stm

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Detention plan 'a charade' - MPs Detention plan 'a charade' - MPs
(10 minutes later)
Plans to make a new 42-day limit on holding terror suspects subject to Parliamentary approval have been dubbed a "charade" by MPs.Plans to make a new 42-day limit on holding terror suspects subject to Parliamentary approval have been dubbed a "charade" by MPs.
Labour backbencher David Winnick said it was a "cosmetic exercise" as, by the time MPs voted, a suspect might already have been incarcerated for 42 days.Labour backbencher David Winnick said it was a "cosmetic exercise" as, by the time MPs voted, a suspect might already have been incarcerated for 42 days.
Jacqui Smith said it meant the "spectre of Parliament" would hover over any home secretary making the decision. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said it meant the "spectre of Parliament" would hang over anyone making the decision.
But Tory MP James Clappison said any vote would be "meaningless".But Tory MP James Clappison said any vote would be "meaningless".
Under the government's proposals, unveiled last week, the home secretary would be able to immediately set a 42-day limit - if a joint report by a chief constable and the Director of Public Prosecutions supported it.Under the government's proposals, unveiled last week, the home secretary would be able to immediately set a 42-day limit - if a joint report by a chief constable and the Director of Public Prosecutions supported it.
'Safeguard''Safeguard'
But Ms Smith said there would be an important safeguard, because it would need to be approved by Parliament within 30 days.But Ms Smith said there would be an important safeguard, because it would need to be approved by Parliament within 30 days.
However during a home affairs committee session, Mr Winnick asked Ms Smith to confirm that it was possible someone could be held for 42 days, before Parliament even voted on the matter. However during a home affairs committee session, she confirmed that it was possible someone could be held for 42 days, before Parliament even voted on the matter.
Ms Smith agreed, but said having to answer to Parliament would "act as a safeguard" as it would put pressure on the home secretary who would know they had to be "accountable to Parliament for a decision that had been taken". There may be a spectre there, but whether that amounts to scrutiny and a safeguard is a different matter James Clappison MP
It's being done, not to buy political support but to provide the police and those that we task with protecting us from terrorism with the tools that they need Jacqui Smith She said having to answer to Parliament would "act as a safeguard" as it would put pressure on the home secretary who would know they had to be "accountable to Parliament for a decision that had been taken".
And she said, for any extension beyond 28 days, there would have to be an application to a judge, an adversarial hearing and a judicial agreement.And she said, for any extension beyond 28 days, there would have to be an application to a judge, an adversarial hearing and a judicial agreement.
Mr Clappison said, from the perspective of the person being held, to describe it as a safeguard was "misleading". He described the proposals as a "flawed process" and a "charade". 'Battles to come'
Mr Clappison said he agreed "there may be a spectre there, but whether that amounts to scrutiny and a safeguard is a different matter".
He said, from the perspective of the person being held, to describe it as a safeguard was "misleading" and described it as a "flawed process" and a "charade". Mr Winnick remarked there were "battles to come".
It's being done, not to buy political support but to provide the police and those that we task with protecting us from terrorism with the tools that they need Jacqui Smith
Ministers face opposition from Tory, Lib Dem and some Labour MPs in any attempt to extend the detention limit.Ministers face opposition from Tory, Lib Dem and some Labour MPs in any attempt to extend the detention limit.
In 2005, Tony Blair suffered his first Commons defeat as prime minister after seeking to extend the detention without charge to 90 days.In 2005, Tony Blair suffered his first Commons defeat as prime minister after seeking to extend the detention without charge to 90 days.
And Mr Winnick suggested that the 42-day figure had only been chosen because it was "the most likely" to gather sufficient Labour backbench support.
'Number crunching''Number crunching'
Mr Winnick put it to the home secretary that the 42-day figure had been chosen because it was "the most likely" to "gather sufficient Labour backbenchers to support an extension beyond 28 days". Ms Smith disagreed, adding: "It's being done, not to buy political support but to provide the police and those that we task with protecting us from terrorism with the tools that they need to do the job."
Ms Smith said she "fundamentally disagreed" with that, adding: "It's being done, not to buy political support but to provide the police and those that we task with protecting us from terrorism with the tools that they need to do the job."
Asked whether she thought she would get enough Labour support for a maximum 42-day limit, she said she had left "number crunching" behind when she left her previous job as chief whip.Asked whether she thought she would get enough Labour support for a maximum 42-day limit, she said she had left "number crunching" behind when she left her previous job as chief whip.
"I haven't done it and I don't know what the answer to that question is, but I'm confident in the good sense and the reasonableness of the proposals I'm putting forward now of being the best chance of building the consensus necessary." But she said the "reasonableness of the proposals" meant they were "the best chance of building the consensus necessary".
She said of 71 responses to a Home Office consultation, only six had been "unequivocally" in favour of an extension on the current 28-day limit.She said of 71 responses to a Home Office consultation, only six had been "unequivocally" in favour of an extension on the current 28-day limit.
And she acknowledged that there had not yet been a case which had required someone be held for longer than 28 days.And she acknowledged that there had not yet been a case which had required someone be held for longer than 28 days.
But she said there was "at least a possibility" that in the future a terrorist suspect might have to be released and she wanted to legislate in a way that would allow the government to respond to that risk, should it happen.But she said there was "at least a possibility" that in the future a terrorist suspect might have to be released and she wanted to legislate in a way that would allow the government to respond to that risk, should it happen.
It has been argued that the increasing complexity of terrorist plots mean police will need to hold suspects for longer in future.It has been argued that the increasing complexity of terrorist plots mean police will need to hold suspects for longer in future.