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 6 Version 7
Detention plan 'a charade' - MPs Detention plan 'a charade' - MP
(about 1 hour later)
Plans to make a new 42-day limit on holding terror suspects subject to Parliamentary approval have been dubbed a "charade" by MPs. The home secretary has been told the Parliamentary oversight proposed as part of efforts to extend detention limits to 42 days is a "charade".
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.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said it meant the "spectre of Parliament" would hang over anyone making the decision. But Jacqui Smith told a committe of MPs the "spectre" of future scrutiny would hang over any detention decisions.
But Tory MP James Clappison said any vote would be "meaningless". It also emerged she is to brief Labour MPs opposed to longer detention.
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 allow a terror suspect to be held without charge for up to 42-days - 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 it would need to be approved by Parliament within 30 days.
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 confirmed, during a home affairs committee session, that this meant it would be possible that someone could be held for 42 days before Parliament even voted on the matter.
There may be a spectre there, but whether that amounts to scrutiny and a safeguard is a different matter James Clappison MPThere may be a spectre there, but whether that amounts to scrutiny and a safeguard is a different matter James Clappison MP
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". But, she said, having to answer to Parliament would "act as a safeguard" as it would put pressure on the home secretary making the decision, who would know they had to be "accountable to Parliament".
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 detention longer than 28 days, there would have to be an application to a judge, an adversarial hearing and a judicial agreement.
'Battles to come''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". Mr Clappison said he agreed "there may be a spectre there", but he added "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".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 SmithIt'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. Mr Winnick suggested that the 42-day figure had been chosen as it was "the most likely" to gather sufficient Labour backbench support.
'Number crunching''Number crunching'
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 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."
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.
But she said the "reasonableness of the proposals" meant they were "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. 'Only voices'
And she acknowledged that there had not yet been a case which had required someone be held for longer than 28 days. Ms Smith is due to discuss the government's proposals with Labour MPs who voted against the 90-day limit on Tuesday evening.
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. And the Home Affairs Committee will publish its own report on Thursday. Committee chairman Keith Vaz said Ms Smith had delivered an "impressive" performance and was clearly convinced that she had found a solution.
But he pointed out that 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 he said the "only voices" in favour of an extension were the police and the government, as the director of public prosecutions, Sir Ken Macdonald, had indicated that he was happy with the 28 day limit.
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.
Ms Smith 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.