The Terror Bill
Andy Reed MP reacted today to the Terror Bill vote in the Commons yesterday.
He said "Clearly the House has spoken and made a decision. The media is now full of speculation about a whole series of questions - but the vote yesterday was about how we best deal with countering the threat of suicide bombers in our country and how we protect ourselves from such threats. I know many colleagues had difficulties with the 90 days detention. However, I would accept that there is a point of principle of being opposed to all forms of detention without trial - but having a difference of opinion over the number of days is a pragmatic view not a point of principle. For anybody who hides behind that fact only fools themselves.
I thought carefully about the vote. As a member of the government I am bound by collective responsibility and have to consider whether I need to resign each time a contentious issue comes up. I proved I am willing to do that when I resigned over Iraq. As this was an issue of pragmatism I felt it was right to give the police the powers in exceptional circumstances. I believe the fact that there was judicial review every 7 days - a sunset clause and the fact that the power currently for 14 days is hardly ever used made it worth at least testing the 90 days. People ask me if I was uncomfortable with 90 days and of course I say yes. I am uncomfortable with 1 day detention without trial - but I am equally uncomfortable about not doing enough to prevent another terrorist attack. If the police didn't have the extra powers we have already given could they have thwarted another 2 attacks since July? The problem is that we will never know because its not a science we are dealing with. In politics sometimes you have to take very tough decisions. I wish Tony Blair and Charles Clarke had tried harder to find a compromise number of days - and I wished the opposition had tried too - rather than looking for pure short term opportunism of inflicting a defeat on the government. I had many opposition MPs also telling me how unhappy they were about the positions they were being forced to vote for!
November 2005
Andy Reed said today that he hoped a consensus could be reached on the Terror Bill going through Parliament this week. Andy said: "I fully understand the concerns of those who express doubts about the need for 90 days of detention without charge. I don't think anybody in their right minds would have no concerns about this. However, I also fully understand why 80% of people back the 90 days. The task this week is to get that delicate balance right between our basic civil liberties and the need to protect the ultimate liberty - the right to life - from suicide bombers.
I am somewhat reassured by a number of concessions. We will have a sunset clause, judicial review every 7 days and the fact that this is limit which we will go up to. It is not automatic. On the basis that the power to detain for 14 days has only be used in about 20 cases we know the 90 days will be used in a very small number of cases. From discussions I have had with senior Ministers, opponents and supporters the figures being banded around between 14, 28 and 90 days are fairly arbitrary anyway. Therefore, it comes down to a matter of judgement between the needs of our security services to prevent terrorist attacks and the danger that there will be wrongful arrests in the future. It is a really tough choice as I Know who will get he blame if the police don't have the powers to detain an individual that turns out to be a bomber. It is a shame that the political posturing on all sides seems to obscure the genuine need for a detailed debate on the implications. I will be supporting a new upper limit and will make a judgement based on the evidence, and debate as well as listening to the variety of views from my constituents