Herbaholic00
03-09-2005, 06:34 PM
http://www.channel4.com/news/2005/03/week_2/09_terror.html
The home secretary has offered concessions to the new anti-terrorism bill that suffered a crushing defeat in the Lords.
However he and the Prime Minister have insisted their anti-terrorism bill will be passed into law.
Tony Blair admitted: ??You get a battering in this job? but Clarke has now offered a number of concessions to allow more judges to be more involved in deciding 'control orders'.
However none have managed to win Conservative backing -and the legislation is expected to get a rough ride in the Commons.
The morning after a second slap-down by the House of Lords on the controversial terror bill the Prime Minister looked indignant out and about in South London at the suggestion that they would not win the rebels round.
The home secretary had come up with yet another set of concessions that met his detractors somewhere in the middle.
These new concessions to be put to the Commons this afternoon include a judge now being involved in all stages and levels of control orders being sought.
But that the home secretary would have the power to detain suspects who might flee subject to a judge's confirmation within seven days.
And the new legislation would be reviewed annually rather than expiring in November as laid out by the sunset clause.
There were 30 Labour MPs voted against the third reading of the bill, one backbencher today was not sure if Clarke's concessions would win them over either.
Clarke said: ??We are putting forward four a set of proposals. We have got five different means of dealing with it, one of which is an annuable renewable order for the bill and I believe that parliament will regard that as acceptable.
Civil liberties groups took their opposition to the bill to Parliament Square this morning. But the government is relying on the amendments to keep its anti-terror bill afloat. These include:
Judge now being involved in all stages of control orders
home secretary to have power to detain subject to judge??s confirmation
Parliament would review legislation annually
Shadow home secretary David Davis told Channel 4 news: ??The lords had a record vote against the government in favour of a sunset clause. What they are saying we will give it to you for eight or nine months but then in the meantime you have got to rewrite it because it is fundamentally flawed.?
Clare Short said: ??It??s a question of whether the Labour revolt holds up. Isn??t it funny that the liberties of Britain are being protected by the appointed house not the elected house.?
It continues to spark controversy among libertarians.
Shami Chakrabati of Liberty said: ??No concessions would go far enough, this is a thoroughly bad bill from start to finish. To some extent these are deck chairs being rearranged on the Titanic.?
Peace
The home secretary has offered concessions to the new anti-terrorism bill that suffered a crushing defeat in the Lords.
However he and the Prime Minister have insisted their anti-terrorism bill will be passed into law.
Tony Blair admitted: ??You get a battering in this job? but Clarke has now offered a number of concessions to allow more judges to be more involved in deciding 'control orders'.
However none have managed to win Conservative backing -and the legislation is expected to get a rough ride in the Commons.
The morning after a second slap-down by the House of Lords on the controversial terror bill the Prime Minister looked indignant out and about in South London at the suggestion that they would not win the rebels round.
The home secretary had come up with yet another set of concessions that met his detractors somewhere in the middle.
These new concessions to be put to the Commons this afternoon include a judge now being involved in all stages and levels of control orders being sought.
But that the home secretary would have the power to detain suspects who might flee subject to a judge's confirmation within seven days.
And the new legislation would be reviewed annually rather than expiring in November as laid out by the sunset clause.
There were 30 Labour MPs voted against the third reading of the bill, one backbencher today was not sure if Clarke's concessions would win them over either.
Clarke said: ??We are putting forward four a set of proposals. We have got five different means of dealing with it, one of which is an annuable renewable order for the bill and I believe that parliament will regard that as acceptable.
Civil liberties groups took their opposition to the bill to Parliament Square this morning. But the government is relying on the amendments to keep its anti-terror bill afloat. These include:
Judge now being involved in all stages of control orders
home secretary to have power to detain subject to judge??s confirmation
Parliament would review legislation annually
Shadow home secretary David Davis told Channel 4 news: ??The lords had a record vote against the government in favour of a sunset clause. What they are saying we will give it to you for eight or nine months but then in the meantime you have got to rewrite it because it is fundamentally flawed.?
Clare Short said: ??It??s a question of whether the Labour revolt holds up. Isn??t it funny that the liberties of Britain are being protected by the appointed house not the elected house.?
It continues to spark controversy among libertarians.
Shami Chakrabati of Liberty said: ??No concessions would go far enough, this is a thoroughly bad bill from start to finish. To some extent these are deck chairs being rearranged on the Titanic.?
Peace