Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
PC5: Terrorism Bill
#1
"Do you support it? And what on earth is going on?"

Closes 27th June 2020, 11:59pm

Bold your taglines.
Reply
#2
Before I comment on the perplexing developments of the past few days, let me first address the substance before getting into the gossip. The bill is clearly flawed. It's extent is to make a temporary bill that had to be extended every few years permanent. That enactment raised serious civil liberties questions when it was passed last year, that were justified to the House by reference to its temporary nature. One would hope that the government, barely a year later, had a solid reason to review that crucial detail. But all we get from the Home Secretary is vagueness and platitudes in terms of strengthening the police. Here's the thing: it really doesn't. This bill would end exclusion orders that can ban terrorists from parts of this country. It actually weakens the powers of arrest. In short, this bill makes a temporary intrusion upon civil liberties permanent for the vague reason of strengthening the police - and it fails even that test. It isn't worth the cost in civil liberties, and the Home Secretary should pull it while she still can.
Ruan Preston MP
Labour MP for Midlothian (1983-present)
Shadow Home Secretary (1990-present)
Progressive | Biography | 2 XP | Safe Pair of Hands

"The true purpose of democratic socialism and, therefore, the true aim of the Labour Party, is the creation of a genuinely free society, in which the fundamental objective of government is the protection and extension of individual liberty."
- Neil Kinnock and Roy Hattersley, Democratic Socialist Aims & Values
Reply
#3
I fully support the Terrorism Bill. These are dangerous times. We have to be aware of it and it is our duty as their elected representatives to guarantee that the British people can calmly sleep and are safe. It is definitely one of the priorities. And when I consider the global issues at hand but especially the painful problem of terrorism at home, in Northern Ireland, how can anyone claim the danger isn't there? How can anyone claim there's no need to do anything? It's not so long ago that I read the terrible news of the murderous attacks committed by the IRA! It is our duty to prevent such things from happening and it is our duty to dismantle this barbaric organisation.
Reply
#4
The leaks are rather disconcerting, to say the least. If it's all true, it paints an extremely sobering picture of the genesis of this flawed bill, and that's not the kind of impression we should want our government to be leaving when it comes to such important matters as national security and civil liberties. It appears, from those leaks, that the Home Secretary presented the Cabinet with a flawed bill and had to be forced by her colleagues to give the full advice of the civil service that said the same as we did - that making the temporary measures permanent isn't the best solution. I find it perplexing that after that, they still pushed on with it and didn't send her back to do her homework better. I think we should leave it up to the Home Secretary to enlighten us to her side of the story. However, national security and civil liberties are not to be used as playthings for boosting a senior minister's profile. If it turns out this error of judgment arose as a vain attempt to play tough while ignoring civil service advice, she has only one option and that is to resign.
Ruan Preston MP
Labour MP for Midlothian (1983-present)
Shadow Home Secretary (1990-present)
Progressive | Biography | 2 XP | Safe Pair of Hands

"The true purpose of democratic socialism and, therefore, the true aim of the Labour Party, is the creation of a genuinely free society, in which the fundamental objective of government is the protection and extension of individual liberty."
- Neil Kinnock and Roy Hattersley, Democratic Socialist Aims & Values
Reply
#5
The terrible bill endangers our very democracy. And civil liberties we are given in this country.  It's highly concerning in the first place that such a poorly written and such a flawed bill found its way into parliament if the tory party had its act together and was in the slightest bit competent it would never have allowed such a poorly constructed bill to be presented in the first place. Given the minister who presented and wrote the bill has now resigned in disgrace, the government needs to do the right thing and immediately withdraw it and throw it in the dust bin where it belongs!
Reply
#6
You'd think the litany of errors on this bill would end when its chief architect resigned. Sadly, you'd be wrong. The Education Secretary claimed that the bill introduced new powers, and named stop-and-search as an example. She is wrong, as the civil service would no doubt have advised the government. In fact, stop and search powers are already in the Temporary Provisions Act. Maybe if the government had taken an interest in the basic facts they wouldn't have presented the House with a bill that makes matters worse both on civil liberties and national security.
Ruan Preston MP
Labour MP for Midlothian (1983-present)
Shadow Home Secretary (1990-present)
Progressive | Biography | 2 XP | Safe Pair of Hands

"The true purpose of democratic socialism and, therefore, the true aim of the Labour Party, is the creation of a genuinely free society, in which the fundamental objective of government is the protection and extension of individual liberty."
- Neil Kinnock and Roy Hattersley, Democratic Socialist Aims & Values
Reply
#7
At this stage in the game, I think it is very clear that the Government should pull the Terrorism Bill from consideration. The former Home Secretary acted against the advice of his civil servants, lied to the Cabinet about it, and was subsequently fired for doing so. We pride ourselves on being a Government led by conservative principles, a Government that recognizes that all problems don't require legislation to be solved. There is no need to pass legislation for the sake of passing legislation, and this unnecessary bill is a key example of that. The new Home Secretary should use a Statutory Instrument to do what this bill is calling for, and be done with it.
Reply
#8
The terrorism bill allows our police to stop and search those who are suspected of being a terrorist. The now former health secretary has said that I acted against the advice of civil servants and lied to the cabinet, that is completely untrue, the civil service gave no advice on withdrawing the bill before it’s publication, the former health secretary is a pathological liar, he and the rest of the cabinet signed up to the terrorism bill without question. 
Reply
#9
There we have it - the new Home Secretary has admitted what we have known for a long time: the Terrorism Bill is flawed and should be withdrawn. The question remains why it was allowed to move forward to Second Reading in the first place, but for now, let's leave it aside congratulate the government on its willingness to own up to its blunders. This unmitigated fiasco makes it clear that when the time comes to extend the Temporary Provisions Act, we must review what is necessary in a rational way, not to score political points or win the toughness game. That isn't good policy, it isn't good politics. The government is on notice - this should not happen again. I look forward to debating the merits of these temporary measures when extension comes up. That, after all, is the reason they were temporary - so that Parliament can keep an eye on these extraordinary sacrifices of civil liberties made to keep people safe. If the measures aren't efficient or proportionate, only an honest review and a good debate will help protect people's safety and liberties in equal measure.
Ruan Preston MP
Labour MP for Midlothian (1983-present)
Shadow Home Secretary (1990-present)
Progressive | Biography | 2 XP | Safe Pair of Hands

"The true purpose of democratic socialism and, therefore, the true aim of the Labour Party, is the creation of a genuinely free society, in which the fundamental objective of government is the protection and extension of individual liberty."
- Neil Kinnock and Roy Hattersley, Democratic Socialist Aims & Values
Reply
#10
Having counter-terrorism measures expire annually benefits no-one. Indeed, it is a nonsense. The “Temporary Provisions” are clearly not that, having been on the statute book for almost 20 years, with the approval of both Labour and Conservative governments.

In that time, four MPs have been killed, most recently Ian Gow, assassinated in his driveway by Irish republican terrorists. And matters are worsening. Terror attacks have killed 14 people and injured 76 more in less than a year and a half. To block this legislation is to aid the expiry of these counter-terrorism powers. Labour may be willing to put up with one of our citizens, often military servicemen, being killed every month; I am not.

It is right to put these existing measures on a surer statutory footing, and applaud the Government for seeking to do so. While the cirmcumstances have been far from ideal, I look forward to the new Home Secretary bringing the Bill back, and all the stronger.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)