Ministers 'using fear of terror'

"BBC NEWS | UK | Ministers 'using fear of terror'
A former head of MI5 has accused the government of exploiting the fear of terrorism to restrict civil liberties. Dame Stella Rimington, 73, said people in Britain felt as if they were living 'under a police state' because of the fear being spread by ministers. 'It would be better that the government recognised that there are risks, rather than frightening people in order to be able to pass laws which restrict civil liberties, precisely one of the objects of terrorism - that we live in fear and under a police state,' she said."

She has been critical of Government policy before; this is quite outspoken - but she's right on the money.

BBC NEWS | UK | Ministers 'using fear of terror'

Ex-MI5 chief attacks 42-day plan

"Ex-MI5 chief attacks 42-day plan
The former head of MI5 has dismissed government plans to extend the time terror suspects can be held to 42 days as not 'workable'.

Lord Goldsmith, who was attorney general when Tony Blair was prime minister, also opposed the plan, saying it risked "giving away the very freedoms that terrorists are trying to take from us'.

He told peers: 'We don't take away freedoms that people, and our ancestors, have fought for without very good cause...'

Former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer said he would oppose the plans 'root and branch'.

Baroness Neville-Jones said of the 42-days plan: 'It represents yet another attack, on the part of the government, without justification, on fundamental democratic rights and freedoms that have underpinned our society for centuries.'"

I am so relieved that there are some in Government willing to speak out against all this new so-called anti-terror legislation, pressured onto us by the politics of fear. Why is it that Brown and his cronies can't see that every liberty we surrender is considered a victory by the terrorists?

BBC NEWS | Politics | Ex-MI5 chief attacks 42-day plan

Brown under fire

"BBC NEWS | Politics | Brown under fire over 42-day plan
David Cameron accused Gordon Brown of making 'so many concessions' in his bid to win the terror detention limit vote the legislation was now 'unworkable'. Mr Brown accused Mr Cameron of leading 'opposition for opposition's sake'."

Legislation for legislation's sake, Gordon?

"It would only be used with the support of the director of public prosecutions, the backing of Parliament in a vote, with judicial safeguards and only for a temporary period."

And how, exactly, would Parliament be able to vote without knowing the facts behind the case - which the Police and Security Services would almost certainly not want known?

"Home Secretary Jacqui Smith confirmed that suspects held beyond 28 days but then released without charge would be eligible for an "ex gratia" compensation payment."

I suppose the Police might be tempted to charge the suspect with something like littering just to avoid paying the compensation.

"Jonathan Evans, head of MI5, said the organisation was not best placed to advise because it was not responsible for prosecutions or criminal investigations."

If MI5 were at all in support of this, there's no way he would have made a statement like this.

BBC NEWS | Politics | Brown under fire over 42-day plan

MI5 chief clarifies 42-day stance

"MI5 chief clarifies 42-day stance
The head of the security service MI5 has clarified its position on government plans to seek powers to detain terror suspects for 42 days. Following controversy over MI5's failure to back the plans, Jonathan Evans said MI5 was not the appropriate body to advise on detention limits."

Or he could have stuck his head in the sand and shouted "LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING". But then that's Gordon's Brown's line.

BBC NEWS | Politics | MI5 chief clarifies 42-day stance