Liberal Democrat response to HM Government's Anti-Terrorism Proposals

7.00.00pm UTC (GMT +0000) Mon 24th Oct 2005

Mark Oaten, Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesman

Following the attacks of 7th July the Home Office entered into close consultation with the main opposition parties on a series of proposals for new legislation to close loopholes in the existing anti-terrorism laws. This followed statements by both the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister to the effect that any legislative changes should be pursued if possible with cross-party agreement.

This cross-party consensus over a number of proposals was cemented at a meeting between the Home Secretary, Mark Oaten and David Davis on 18th July. Agreement was reached on provisions for a new Anti-Terrorism Bill. In the interests of speedy legislation, the issue of whether and how to amend the legislation on control orders (the subject of the Prevention of Terrorism Bill in March 2005) was de-coupled from the Bill and will be considered in separate legislation in spring 2006.

However when draft legislation was published in September, in addition to the measures on which cross-party agreement had been reached, there were a number of additional measures inserted by the Government, including a new offence of glorification of terrorism and an attempt to extend the period for which a terrorist suspect could be held without charge to 90 days.

The Terrorism Bill was published on Wednesday 12th October. The only significant change since draft legislation was published in September was the amendment of the clause on the glorification of terrorism from the Bill. The full text of the Bill (total length - 47 pages) and the Home Office's explanatory notes on it can be read by following this link - http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/055/2006055.htm.

The Bill receives its second reading debate in the House of Commons on 26th October, and is scheduled to complete its Commons stages by 10th November.

Second Reading vote

The Liberal Democrats are proposing a 'reasoned amendment' to the Bill at second reading, setting out the main flaws we see in the Bill -

Mr Charles Kennedy

Sir Menzies Campbell

Mr Mark Oaten

Mr David Heath

Mr Alistair Carmichael

Andrew Stunell

That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Terrorism Bill because, whereas it is essential to the protection of the public that the police and security services are given the support necessary to do their job effectively, and notwithstanding the proposals in the Bill which command general support, the Government has failed to justify the proposal to hold suspects for three months without charge; believes that such a measure represents a substantial and unacceptable erosion of the principles underlying British justice; and further believes that the objective of providing powers to hold suspects for periods sufficient to obtain further evidence can best be achieved by a combination of charging with lower order offences within fourteen days, changing guidelines on interview after charge and the use of control orders.

The decision to vote against the Bill at second reading was taken to send a clear message to the Government that the central proposal in the Bill is unacceptable. That does not mean that we will not work constructively with the Government to amend the Bill and ensure the best possible protection for the British people.