Away from the ongoing financial crisis, Labour’s long-drawn out attempt to increase the number of days terrorist suspects can be held to 42 days finally hit the buffers last night.
Their Lordships rejected the proposals by a majority of almost 200 votes, the Government’s biggest defeat in the Upper House since the removal of hereditary peers almost 10 years ago.
This was a battle that should never have been fought and was born out of the Government’s shallow wish to look tough on terror.
But looking tough and being effective in the fight against terrorism are two very different things and the 42-day measure would simply not have worked.
Their Lordships rejected the proposals by a majority of almost 200 votes, the Government’s biggest defeat in the Upper House since the removal of hereditary peers almost 10 years ago.
This was a battle that should never have been fought and was born out of the Government’s shallow wish to look tough on terror.
But looking tough and being effective in the fight against terrorism are two very different things and the 42-day measure would simply not have worked.
Leaving party politics to one side, I only need to quote the words of Lord Dear, a former West Midlands chief constable and crossbench peer, who spoke in last night’s debate.
"This attempt to appear tough on terrorism is a shabby charade which is unworthy of a democratic nation,” he argued.
"This legislation is fatally flawed, is ill thought through and is unnecessary. Perhaps worst of all, it seeks to further erode the fundamental legal and civil rights that have been the pride of this country for centuries.''
His words provoked the traditional response of their Lordships when they’ve heard a speech they like – “hear, hear.”
It is a response I am happy to echo.
No comments:
Post a Comment