The Government intends to rush its controversial Prevention of Terrorism Bill through the Commons in less than a week, it announced tonight.
Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, will publish the controversial Bill for the first time tomorrow, setting out publicly the details of the Government’s plans for ‘control orders’ to hold British and foreign terrorist suspects under indefinite house arrest without trial.
Peter Hain, the Leader of the House, said that the Bill will be given its second reading the day after, on Wednesday. Its committee and remaining stages will be taken in the Commons next Monday.
The Government was determined to have the new law on the statute books by March 14, when existing powers to hold terror suspects without trial in Belmarsh prison are due to lapse, Mr Hain added.
Advertisement
The announcement provoked a furious row in the Commons. Oliver Heald, the Shadow Leader of the House, accused ministers of planning to bludgeon the measure through without proper debate.
He said: “We are angry that this measure is to be rammed through the House with our time for debate ruthlessly curtailed. This is a Bill that should not be guillotined. It should have a proper committee stage.
“The Government says this is urgent. They’ve had three years since 9/11 to make the decisions necessary. They’ve had two months since the court case which prompted these changes, and now is the House really just to have two days to consider these important matters?”
The Government’s measures to combat terror threats at home were thrown into chaos when the House of Lords ruled in December that the detention of 12 foreign suspects in Belmarsh prison without trial was discriminatory, disproportionate and thus illegal under human rights law.
Mr Clarke announced earlier this month that he intended to get round the ruling with his plans for house arrest, which would apply to British as well as foreign terror suspects to overcome objections about discriminating against foreigners.
Advertisement
But Mr Clarke’s hopes of achieving all-party agreement foundered last week after talks between the Prime Minister and the Tory and Liberal Democrat leaders failed to produce agreement.
Michael Howard described the plans as “fundamentally flawed”, and suggested Labour wanted to paint the Conservatives as being soft on terrorism in the run-up to the general election.
Philip Webster, Times political editor, described Mr Hain’s announcement that this week’s Commons business was being changed to rush the Bill through as a significant raising of the stakes.
The Government hopes to get the Bill through the Commons without difficulty thanks to its large majority, but faces significant opposition in the House of Lords.
“They are basically saying to the House of Lords: if you don’t pass this by March 14, the Belmarsh boys walk free,” said Mr Webster.
Advertisement
“What they have said before is that if they don’t get control orders through by mid-March, they would renew the old law as a stop gap. What is new today is that they are abandoning that as a fallback. This is a serious raising of the stakes.”
There was a furious response in the Commons. Mr Heald said: “Just this morning I received an e-mail from a solicitor saying ‘imprisonment without trial on the say-so of the Executive is completely contrary to our way of life and obviously open to abuse’.”
In a reference to Mr Hain’s firebrand past as an anti-apartheid activist, Mr Heald added: “At one time you would not have defended these proposals which are redolent of the sort of measures you fought so fiercely against in South Africa. Will you think again about this measure ... and about the time allowed for debate?”
Mr Hain retorted that he was “not going to take any lessons from you about civil liberties”, and accused the Tories of irresponsibility in the face of a terrorist threat.
“There is no plan to ram this through the House of Commons,” he said. “It is the job of the Government to balance civil liberties and the continued protection of civil liberties with making sure that we fight terrorism in every opportunity we can.”
Advertisement
Crispin Blunt, the Tory MP for Reigate, said that people were “absolutely incredulous” that there were six days between first reading and third reading to allow for the imposition of powers on the “recommendation of the nation’s secret police”.
Mr Hain said that something had to be done before the powers lapsed on March 14.
In a sign of unease on the Labour backbenches, Andrew Mackinlay, the Labour MP for Thurrock, said he was not willing to support legislation that kept people in their homes on the “decision of a politician”.
Mr Hain said he thought Mr Mackinlay would be encouraged by the contents of the Bill and some of the worst fears reflected in the House and the media would not be “well founded”.
Mr Clarke will make a statement on the issue tomorrow. Meanwhile the fate of the remaining Belmarsh detainees remains unclear. Several have been released to house arrest, but the rest remain in prison under the discredited Section 4 of the 2001 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act.