(BBC)

Monday, 19 November, 2001, 23:15 GMT
Anti-terror bill clears
first hurdle

Blunkett: 'proposals could have been more Draconian'
MPs have voted overwhelmingly in favour of
sweeping new anti-terrorism laws, including
the power to imprison suspects without trial.

The proposals were given a second reading by
a margin of 458 votes to five.

But the bill is expected
to face strong criticism
when it goes into
committee stage later
this week.

It will also face
opposition in the House
of Lords.

Commenting on Monday night's result, the
BBC's Political Editor Andrew Marr said: "The
government has won the vote very easily but
it has not necessarily won the argument."

He said the government could expect further
opposition from its own benches before the bill
becomes law.

Controversial proposals

Earlier, the Home Secretary David Blunkett
came under fire from all sides in the Commons
over the bill's proposals.

MPs lined up to accuse
the Home Secretary of
rushing through a raft
of ill-conceived
measures in response to
the attacks of 11
September.

They also accused him
of using terrorism as an
excuse to bring in
powerful new
restrictions on civil
liberties.

Brian Sedgemore, one of four Labour MPs to
vote against the government, said the
legislation was "a ragbag of the most coercive
measures that the best mandarin minds from
the Home Office can produce".

In an impassioned speech, Mr Sedgemore said:
"Not since the panic and hysteria that
overcame the British establishment in the
aftermath of the French Revolution has this
House seen such draconian legislation."

Unrepentant

But Mr Blunkett was unrepentant.

Reminding MPs of the thousands who died on
11 September, he said even more Draconian
measures could have been put forward by
ministers.

But, he added, "It would have been wrong to
do so."

"It was appropriate for us to be more
circumspect and bring forward proportionate
and reasonable measures," he said.

The terrorists had not only destroyed the
World Trade Centre but had also "declared
open season on all of us," he added.

Possible reprisals

In addition to the measures on detaining
suspects, the 128 paragraph bill also includes
proposals to tighten airport security, freeze
suspected terrorists' funds and create a new
offence of incitement to religious hatred.

Shadow home secretary
Oliver Letwin said he
supported some of the
measures contained in
the bill but he thought
it was being pushed
through parliament too
quickly.

He said the
Conservatives planned
to table a number of
amendments with the
Liberal Democrats aimed
at "improving" the bill.

Mr Letwin repeatedly
urged the government
to think again on the "internment" of terrorist
suspects.

He warned this could lead to possible reprisals
against British citizens abroad.

He said he would prefer Mr Blunkett to exclude
or deport foreign undesirables rather than
jailing them.

'New demands'

Beverley Hughes, Home Office parliamentary
secretary, said she understood concerns that
the legislation was being hurried through.

But she said it was
necessary to act
quickly and decisively
because "the lengths
these terrorists will go
to, including their own
death, makes new
demands on our ability
to anticipate their
plans and therefore
protect our people."

Under the
government's proposals
the law on detention of suspects will fall after
five years and "there will be a debate every
year for three hours" on the issue, she added.

Incitement ban 'wrong'

The Lib Dems and Conservatives also hit out at
plans to include new laws banning incitement
to religious hatred in the anti-terror legislation.

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman
Simon Hughes urged the Home Secretary to
"consult more widely and relatively quickly on
the religious incitement matters and legislate
separately."

Mr Letwin said dealing with the threat of
terrorism and the persecution of Muslim
communities in the same legislation sent out
the wrong message.

Former Labour minister and chairman of the
Commons Home Affairs select committee, Chris
Mullin, said such a ban had no place in
emergency legislation and should be considered
elsewhere.

'No time for scrutiny'

MPs are angry at the lack of time they have
been given to scrutinize a bill that will have
serious implications for civil liberties.

In total, the Commons has been given just
three days to look at the legislation, a process
that would normally take several weeks.

Mr Blunkett is determined to see the Bill on the
statute books by the Christmas recess.

Earlier, the Lords passed legislation allowing to
opt out of the section of the European
Convention on Human Rights preventing
detention without trial.