Site Meter

Friday, July 20, 2007

If...


Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world. But if we did, Lord Levy would be behind prison bars.

UPDATE: Lord Levy's statement in full

Last Updated: 1:30pm BST 20/07/2007

# Cash for honours: 'No charges brought'

Lord Levy has said he was "sincerely delighted and relieved" that he would not face any charges over cash-for-honours allegations. His statement in full read:

"I would like to start by thanking my family, particularly my wife Gilda, our children, my friends and colleagues for their unwavering support, and of course my legal team for their guidance, throughout the duration of this police inquiry, which has been incredibly long and really stressful.

For the last 16 months the people closest to me have had to endure the intensity and pressure of this long investigation. We are all relieved it is over.

Since the investigation began I have had every confidence that no charges would be brought against me.

Nevertheless it comes as a great relief that after a complete and thorough investigation which has been assessed by the country's leading legal experts I have been exonerated as we expected.

I do not intend to comment on the police's handling of this inquiry.

I am sure that if there are any issues which need to be looked at, others who are much more experienced and better qualified will do so.

However, I have been disappointed by the constant leaks to the media which have been misleading, factually inaccurate and personally damaging to me.

I have always believed in the importance of public service and in the duty of individuals to be willing to serve our country.

I really do hope that the way that this inquiry has been played out, over these last 16 months, will not deter people from feeling that politics and the political debate is an area where people can play their full part.

I am sincerely delighted and relieved to put this all behind me and once again my heartfelt thanks to my wife, children, family and friends for their fantastic love and support."

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Angus McNeil MP guilty of false allegations over cash for honours


According to BBC1 10 O' Clock and BBC2 Newsnight, the BBC has learned that tomorrow the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will not be prosecuting anybody involved in the cash for honours scandal. There will be no charges for illegally selling honours, no charges for perverting the course of justice, and no charges for obstructing the police in the course of their duty. The witch-hunt has already begun, the devil of the piece is Angus McNeil MP, according to Denis McShane MP, who came across as a complete prat on Newsnight. I only hope that the police will now charge him with wasting their time.

Michael Crick claimed that the Defence would argue that they had not been properly advised what they could and couldn't do under the law by the Election Commission and the House of Lords Appointments Commission. So, the legal maxim "ignorance of the law" has been overturned by a politician appointed to head the CPS.

Also overturned is the legal principle, established since Charles The First lost his head, that nobody is above the law. A politician has now decided that politicians are above the law. Lord Levy can do no wrong. I suspect that Charles The First is turning in his grave at the injustice he suffered at the hands of the executioner under orders from Parliament. At the very least he should be given a posthumous Royal pardon.

There is another principle of law that has suffered, nobody should be a judge in his own cause. The Labour Party has judged the Labour Party to be not guilty.

Angus McNeil MP raised a good question, he would like to know what advice the police gave the CPS in relation to whether anybody should be charged.

BBC story here.

Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, smoking a spliff




The Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, admits to smoking cannabis. Because there is a no smoking policy in force in the Home Office, she has to pop outside for a quick spliff. The above photo was taken by a security camera outside the Home Office.



Photomanip: Ron.

Iain Dale loses the political plot when it comes to Tory skullduggery

This is the big story in politics right now. And, this and this is what Iain Dale is blogging about today. Of course it is his blog and he has editorial control of its content. But, why put a description of the content in his banner which does not match the content of the posts?

Cartoons


Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Tories break Electoral law in Ealing and Southall by-election



UPDATE: The Guardian claims that the postal votes had Labour and Conservative neck and neck with the LibDems trailing 5 points behind. Story here.

Tories break Electoral Law in Ealing and Southall by-election by announcing the result of the postal vote to the Telegraph which published them. Story here.

UPDATE: Story not covered on BBC1 10 O' Clock, nor on Newsnight BBC2 (at least until I walked out, then I discover that it was briefly covered as breaking news). However, I have just been informed that News 24 have picked the story up. And, that there is now a police investigation being conducted.

Police begin Southall vote probe

An investigation has been launched after a complaint from the Labour Party about alleged electoral offences in the Ealing Southall by-election.

The complaint relates to an internet blog entry which claimed to show how many postal votes each candidate had won ahead of Thursday's ballot.

The article on the Daily Telegraph website quoted "a source inside the Tory campaign".

The Metropolitan Police said the matter is being "thoroughly investigated".

The complaint was made in writing by Labour's election agent Ken Clarke, who told police the publication of purported postal voting results appeared to be a "clear breach" of electoral law.

A Met spokesman said: "I can confirm the Metropolitan Police Service has today received an allegation of possible electoral offences in relation to the Southall by-election.

"The allegation will be thoroughly investigated and appropriate action taken."

UPDATE: Story in today's Independent here.

Neighbours but strangers

Taking Rocky for his morning walk we passed an ederly woman pushing a three-wheeled walking frame. "You won't be seeing him anymore. He died. We had the funeral last Friday. It's better that he was put out of his misery". So matter of fact. Apparently devoid of emotion. Her husband and she would make such a fuss of Rocky each time our paths crossed. Then one day she said "I had to put him in a home. He was going up here" she tapped her head. I saw him being pushed in a wheelchair by her a few times, and he did appear to be physically and mentally deteriorating before my eyes. Nearly every day she would visit him in the nursing home. I don't even know their names, or how long they had been married. I only knew where they lived because Rocky had a habit of jumping over their garden wall and having a sniff in their garden. This is how we first met. Near neighbours and yet strangers. We go about our separate lives.

Tory Party accused of trying to steal £8.2M inheritance

The Tory Party took advantage of a mentally ill man, and used a firm of solicitors which is instructed by the Tory Party, to redraw his will to disinherit his family out of £8.2M in favour of the Tory Party. Branislav Kostic - known to his friends as Bane - was suffering from "insane delusions" when he made his will. His son Zoran argues that the change in the will - which deprived him of an inheritance - was made because "Bane was mentally ill".

I am no psychiatrist, however, anyone who leaves the Tory Party this amount of money in their will cannot be right in the head.

In this particular case, it can be seen from Bane's contact with the Tory Party that he was obviously mentally ill, and the Tory Party was morally wrong not to call in an independent assessor even if it meant that they were depriving themselves out of the £8.2M. If the Tory Party can rob someone in this position, it is a good indication of what they are capable of doing to the rest of us if we ever let them get back into power.

Ealing and Southall by-election result

Virendra Sharma will become the Labour MP for Ealing and Southall on Thursday 19th of July, simply because neither the efforts of Nigel Bakhai for the LibDems, nor the antics of Tony Lit aka Surinderpal Singh Lit for the Dave Cameron's Tories have been enough to sway the voters away from Labour since the death of Labour MP Piara Khabra.

As Virendra Sharma the odds on favourite crosses the line, it's the race for second and third place which has become the real race within this race. Some punters believe that Nigel Bakhai's horse Ming has lost it's zing and may fall at the last fence to come in a poor third. This being the case, it may be that a vet will have to be called to put the old horse out of his misery.

You would think that David Cameron would prefer Ming to Nick Clegg, and pull the Play Boy up instead and let Nigel Bakhai come in second. The odds favour the LibDems coming in second, but ex-Labour supporter Surinderpal Singh Lit who as Tony Lit was poached by David Cameron before he realised that Sunrise Radio had financially supported the Labour Party, might just pull out another surprise and come in second place. The trouble is, Virendra Sharma horse the Brown Bounce has kicked up a lot of mud and much of it has stuck like shit on Tony Lit and weighs him down. David Cameron came off second best with Michael Crick for Newsnight, and appeared to be bodyguarding Tony Lit as though he was a soft target.

1. Labour
2. LibDems
3. David Cameron's Tories

UPDATE: "Anyone who indulges in byelection predictions usually lives to regret it".

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Campbell faces byelection leadership test

Campbell faces byelection leadership test


Matthew Tempest and agencies
Monday July 16, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

A poor showing in this week's Ealing Southall byelection could prompt calls for Sir Menzies Campbell's resignation, the party's former campaign manager admitted today.

Tim Razzall, who masterminded the 2001 and 2005 elections for then party leader Charles Kennedy, warned that are "clearly some people in the party" who would use Friday's result as a "catalyst to bring things to a head".

The Liberal Democrats are facing a tight squeeze in Thursday's byelection, where they came second in 2005.

However, the Tories and Labour are both throwing resources and manpower at the contest.

Lord Razzall today told BBC Radio 4's World at One: "There are clearly some people in the party who are complaining about Ming as leader and I think a lot of them are using the Ealing byelection as a sort of catalyst to bring things to a head.

"My own view is that would be a serious mistake. We would look silly if we were to attempt to change the leader and a lot of the criticisms of Ming are unfair."

And Sir Menzies' former communications chief, Mark Littlewood, told the programme: "The truth of the matter is that over the last year or so, the Liberal Democrats' electoral performance has been somewhat underwhelming.

"Ealing Southall is by no means home turf for the Liberal Democrats, but if you wanted the sort of electoral test in which you would expect the party to do well, surely this is it."

If the result on Thursday was poor, people in the party would start to get "a little nervous", said Mr Littlewood.

And he added: "The truth is, if you believe the opinion polls, the party's lost perhaps 4% or 5% of the vote since the last election.

"If that dropped much further or if Liberal MPs with majorities of one or two thousand started to think that their future prospects could be in danger, then I think that you would see change."

But Sir Menzies' chief of staff, Ed Davey, dismissed suggestions that his position was under threat, insisting he was "absolutely" certain he would lead the Lib Dems into the next general election.

Mr Davey said any discontent in the party came only from a handful of "noises off".

He told World at One: "The future of the party and the leadership doesn't depend on one byelection. That would be absurd.

"What it depends on is clear policies and clear principles, and Ming has ensured that the party has a clear, distinctive and principled position."

Sir Menzies made clear only last week that he fully intended to lead his party into the next general election.

Ordinarily, Ealing Southall would be a safe Labour seat, with a majority of 11,440 at the last election. However, byelections outside the usual parliamentary cycle receive more attention and resources, not to mention fringe candidates.

In 2005 the Lib Dems benefited from a swing of more than 14% - largely due to opposition to the Iraq war among the largely ethnic minority constituents.

However, the Tories only came 1,300 votes behind in third place and are believed to be fighting a strong campaign this time.

Their candidate, Tony Lit, will be the guest of honour at a "Cocktails with Cameron" party at Ealing town hall tonight, despite revelations that he previously donated money to the Labour party as part of his role at Sunrise Radio.

Minister unable to say if Britain will hand BAE evidence to US

Minister unable to say if Britain will hand BAE evidence to US


David Leigh
Tuesday July 17, 2007
The Guardian

Ministers admitted yesterday that the US department of justice has served a request on them to hand over evidence about BAE's alleged secret arms deal payments to Saudi officials.

But the government has refused to say whether it will cooperate, and gave no sign that it intends to take a fresh approach to the corruption allegations against Britain's biggest arms company.

Challenged by the Liberal Democrat deputy leader, Vince Cable, in a fresh debate called by the opposition party, the solicitor general, Vera Baird, said the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, would take the decision: "I cannot comment further."

Mr Cable said the US was "a close ally which has strict laws regarding corruption ... It is necessary the British government give an absolute commitment to maximum cooperation".

But the only offer made by Ms Baird to defuse the continuing BAE controversy was a suggestion that security-vetted MPs on the backbench intelligence and security committee could in future look at the intelligence information were a similar decision made to drop a sensitive investigation.

She said the role of the attorney general in such cases was under review, and promised that the Law Commission would "prioritise" a reform of Britain's corruption laws, with a consultation paper out this autumn.

Tony Blair, when he was prime minister, forced the Serious Fraud Office to halt the British investigation into allegations that £1bn was paid to Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia, and another £1bn to Swiss bank accounts of intermediaries, to secure the al-Yamamah arms deal.

The al-Yamamah programme, which has provided BAE with £43bn in revenue, was launched by the Conservatives under Margaret Thatcher. Mr Cable read out detailed extracts from the Guardian's disclosures about the Bandar payments in the Commons yesterday, despite interruptions from both Labour and Tory backbenchers concerned over what one said were "tens of thousands of jobs".

Labour backbencher David Borrow, whose South Ribble constituency contains BAE workers from its Preston factory, claimed that comments he had made to his local newspaper had been wrongly interpreted in the Guardian.

The Guardian reported yesterday that Mr Borrow had lobbied the arms sales minister, Lord Drayson, over the US request last week, and had told his constituency paper that he expected the government would refuse to disclose information to the authorities in Washington.

It emerged during the debate that the cabinet secretary, Gus O'Donnell, had sent a letter last September calling for the SFO to drop its Saudi inquiry because it allegedly threatened the government's counter-terrorism strategy.

When that pressure failed, Tony Blair sent a letter several pages long, attaching a dossier from Sir Richard Mottram, Downing Street's intelligence coordinator, claiming the Saudis would threaten British lives by cutting intelligence links if corruption investigations were pursued.

Ms Baird disclosed that in his letter, the then prime minister said "he felt he would fail in his duty if he did not bring his views to the attention of the head of the SFO".

Australia criticised over detention of 'bailed' terror suspect

Australia criticised over detention of 'bailed' terror suspect


Barbara McMahon in Sydney
Tuesday July 17, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

Lawyers for Mohammed Haneef, the Indian doctor charged in Australia over the failed UK bombings, are to go back to court tomorrow to appeal against the government's decision to keep him behind bars.

The 27-year-old remains in custody, despite a magistrate's ruling that he should be freed on bail, after immigration minister Kevin Andrew revoked his visa on character grounds, keeping him in detention pending an immigration hearing. Civil rights groups and lawyers have described his continued detention as "deplorable".

The appeal comes as fresh information about the Gold Coast registrar's links to the alleged UK terror suspects was revealed. Documents served on Dr Haneef, outlining why his visa was cancelled, were released by his lawyer Peter Russo.

The documents allege Dr Haneef kept in regular online contact with his cousin Sabeel Ahmed, who is accused of withholding information on terrorism, and communicated with him as recently as June 26, three days before the car bombs which failed to detonate were found outside London nightclubs.

The papers also reveal Dr Haneef told police that another cousin Kafeel Ahmed, the driver of the flaming jeep that crashed into Glasgow Airport, lent him £300 to sit medical exams in 2004. Mr Ahmed remains critically ill in hospital with burns.

Mr Russo said that his client was also told that revoking his visa would deter others from committing similar offences.

The lawyer also said he was told that significant pieces of information have been withheld "for security reasons".

Dr Haneef, an Indian national who came to Australia from Britain last year, was arrested after the failed bombings as he tried to leave the country on a one-way ticket to India. He has claimed he was on his way back home to see his wife and newborn child.

After being kept in custody for 12 days under Australia's new anti-terror laws, he was charged with recklessly providing support to a terrorist organisation by giving his mobile phone Sim card to Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed when he moved to Australia. The doctor said he gave the Sim card to the two men so that they could benefit from free phone calls.

Yesterday Brisbane magistrate Jacqui Payne granted Mr Dr Haneef A$10,000 (£4,200) bail, a nominal sum of money, saying the authorities had failed to prove a clear link between him and the terror plot.

But within hours, Mr Andrews outraged civil rights groups by cancelling his visa on character grounds because he "reasonably suspected" that Dr Haneef had an association with people involved in terrorism and effectively keeping him behind bars.

The minister has since said Dr Haneef will be deported to India once criminal proceedings have been heard.

The Australian Lawyers Alliance, which represents more than 1,500 lawyers, has called Mr Haneef's treatment "deplorable", saying that government was riding roughshod over the justice system.

"The minister's decision is a grave departure from the standards of justice you would expect to see in any civilised society and we are appalled that this is happening in Australia," President Ian Brown said.

"The Australian Lawyers Alliance believes the decision by the Howard government to cancel Dr Haneef's visa is little more than reactive and political.

"The ALA calls on the government and the opposition to immediately review their position on Dr Haneef and to let his matter be determined by law."

Other civil rights organisations have protested that it will now be impossible for Dr Haneef to get a fair trial.

Mr Russo said his client was being used as a political pawn by the Australian government, which wants to portray itself as tough on national security. He said immigration lawyers would be present at the appeal hearing tomorrow.

Oxford University engaged in witch-hunt

Oxford University has been accused of engaging in a witch-hunt by Cambridge University. The claim comes in a Telegraph article reporting that staff at Oxford University have been spying on students engaged in post-examination celebrations. I don't agree with the Oxford Student Union's claim that it is an invasion of students privacy for University staff to look at Facebook, because this is available on the internet. However, I believe that it is unlawful to hold secret trials in the absence of students and find them guilty and issue a fine. The University does allow the students an opportunity to appeal against this decision. Perhaps, I can draw Oxford University's attention to the decision in Hirst v Home Secretary [2001] EWCA CIV 378, Court of Appeal, 8 March 2001. Lord Woolf (MR), held that it is natural justice to allow someone to challenge a decision before it is made and not simply allow them to appeal afterwards.

UPDATE: Oxford University Students Union accuses the Oxford University of operating a disciplinary system that is neither fair nor transparent: "While the Student Union does not condone unruly, violent or disorderly behaviour, we believe that the privacy of our members should be protected and that disciplinary procedures at all levels within the University should be fair and transparent".

Man avoids jail for website 'sick jokes'

Man avoids jail for website 'sick jokes'

By Kate Devlin
Last Updated: 2:57am BST 17/07/2007

An economics graduate was sentenced to 160 hours of community service yesterday for making "sick jokes" about ethnic groups and people with disabilities on a website.

Andrew Love, 22, who was working as a shelf stacker at the time of the offences, mocked blacks, Muslims, homosexuals, disabled people, and other minority groups on the site intended "to shock".

Falkirk Sheriff Court heard that he was working in a supermarket when he set up the website, which he invited colleagues to view.

At first it contained harmless jokes but when the tone changed a staff member became concerned and contacted the police.

Alistair McSporran, prosecuting, said officers found "numerous" items on the website "that had gone beyond the realms of bad taste". These included a phoney Islamic jihad group and a picture which showed an American police officer being offensive to a young black child in a toy car.

Love, who lives with his parents in Falkirk, in central Scotland, also made fun of Simon Weston, the Falklands War veteran.

The site contained a picture of Mr Weston published next to a photograph of someone throwing a bomb.

Love pleaded guilty to committing a racially aggravated breach of the peace by producing and managing the website, between June 2005 and January 16 last year.

His not guilty pleas to two charges that he had published information about bomb making and explosives and two of downloading and possessing child porn were accepted.

David McLeod, defending, said the views on the site were not Love's own, but had been intended to shock.

His client had shown "gross misjudgment" and was now "remorseful", he said.

Sentencing Love to carry out 160 hours of community service and forfeit more than a dozen items of computer equipment. Sheriff William Gallacher said the offence was "disgraceful conduct, very serious and unpleasant" and that he had "reached the stage of considering a custodial sentence".

He said he was only swayed by the fact that Love had no previous convictions, had pleaded guilty at an early opportunity and had a positive background at work and at home.

"It was racially aggravated and the impact was very distressing. There was no doubt in my mind that I could have considered a custodial sentence would have been appropriate. But balancing all the facts I proceed to the direct alternative which is community service."

Love has also apologised to a former work colleague who was featured on the site.

Cutting the pain away


Cutting the pain away


Marc Leverton reports on moves to prevent prisoners self-harming or committing suicide

Tuesday July 17, 2007
SocietyGuardian.co.uk


"We have seen scratching, head banging, people setting fire to themselves, severe lacerations, pulling out of tendons, people sewing their own lips up, even cutting parts of their bodies off," says Jez Spencer, describing a less typical day in his role managing the safer custody team in 14 regional prisons.

"Prisoners are regularly saved by prison staff who cut them down in the nick of time. In the women's prison, cutting prisoners down happens on a daily basis," he says.

The team is responsible for trying to reduce the number of prisoners self-harming or attempting suicide across the 14 prisons in south-west England and Wales. "The majority of cases are cutting, though," Mr Spencer says, matter of factly.

After a review of the unacceptable numbers of high prison deaths at the turn of the decade, the safer custody team was set up to help 'at risk' prisoners.

Mr Spencer co-ordinates the staff, prison officers, mental health workers and the voluntary groups that work alongside prisoners, "Prevention only works if there is a team effort to spot danger signs," he says.

Once a prisoner is earmarked as being in danger, they are put on an ACCT Plan (Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork), enabling them to access specialist help.

The reasons leading to the drastic behaviour Mr Spencer describes are varied. "A lot of prisoners had problems as children; self-harm is often a way of coping with physical, mental or sexual abuse," he says. "It is a release: blood-letting is a way of releasing tension or it can be a way to feel alive as prisoners can feel so dead inside."

Other prisoners may have mental health needs. "They often don't know how to ask for help and self-harming gets them the attention that they crave," he says.

The average population in the 14 prisons is close to 6,000. Highest levels of harm are seen at the local prisons, Bristol, Exeter and Cardiff, and the young offenders' institute, HMYOI Portland. Their combined population is near to 2,700 and about 110 prisoners (4%) are subject to ACCT procedures at any one time.

But the greatest problems involve female prisoners. Mr Spencer's team had 24,000 recorded incidents last year and 49% involved women - even though they only comprise 400 (6.6%) of the 6,000 inmates, making them by far the more prolific self-harmers.

"Women are more likely to have been a victim of abuse," he says. "A significant number come from the sex industry and many are using drugs. They may also have had their children taken away from them. There is the emotional pressure that comes from that, and the society pressure to be the carer. Put all that into a prison setting and it is a potent mix."

He cites the case of a young woman sentenced for drug-related offences. She had a long history of abuse and had worked in the sex industry. When she came to prison she started to self-harm, making lacerations to her arms and legs. She made several trips to A&E for stitches and, on several occasions, she lost large amounts of blood and lost consciousness.

"Quick staff intervention saved her life on these occasions," Mr Spencer says. "Her ACCT care plan involved art therapy, use of a relaxation room and employment within the prison. Alongside one-to-one counselling sessions, she was able to reduce her self-harm and eventually stop." She left prison last year and at that time was not self-harming.

Listening to prisoners is often the most effective way of helping them through their sentence. "Our work is a lot to do with things like building self-esteem," he says. "Instead of self-harming or bullying others, we help prisoners to talk about their problems. They are not used to that. Quite often we ask 'how are you feeling?' and it will be the first time they will have ever been asked that question. Basically we are helping them to manage their feelings."

Research shows that prisoners are most susceptible to self-harming and suicide in the early stage of a sentence. The risk rises again if it is a first offence or if the prisoner has committed a crime against a member of their own family. Another key factor is if the prisoner has been using drugs on the outside and is going through detox.

A key part of the project is a prisoner mentoring scheme. Mr Spencer says: "We have 'listeners' who are prisoners trained by the Samaritans. They are there to give new inmates advice, like when they will get canteen [weekly supplies] or phone calls and basically show them the ropes. Prisoners sometimes prefer to talk to other prisoners rather than uniformed staff and it helps them to integrate."

Monday, July 16, 2007

Muslim terrorist Dhiren Barot attacked in prison



Hat-Tip to Druss 40.

More than 1,000 prisoners released early

More than 1,700 prisoners have been freed from jail early, the Ministry of Justice has announced.

Of those released, 344 were convicted of violence, 65 people were sentenced for drug offences, 37 for fraud and forgery and 219 for motoring offences.

Prisons minister David Hanson said 30 of those freed were recalled to jail within the first few days of new emergency measures, for reasons such as failing to keep in touch with their probation officer.

Most of the total had been sentenced to six months imprisonment or less - numbering 1,227 - but 289 had been jailed for between one and four years.

If the first week's total was repeated every week over the course of a year it would mean nearly 88,500 offenders being freed early.

Shadow justice secretary Nick Herbert said: "It is totally unacceptable that over 1,700 prisoners have been released early on to the streets, including violent offenders, those who have committed theft and drugs-related offences and a fifth of whom have committed crimes sufficiently serious that they were originally sentenced to longer than a year in prison."

He added:"The public is being placed at risk and the blame lies squarely with ministers who ten years ago ignored future projections of the prison population and failed to build adequate capacity."

Silver Ring Thing carries no weight upon the scales of justice

The High Court has rejected a school girl's claim that a ban on wearing jewellery breached her human rights. The girl had claimed that the ring she wore was a religious symbol. However, the judge, Michael Supperstone, rejected that the ring had any Christian significance, therefore the school had not breached her human rights by its policy of no jewellery on the grounds of health and safety.

Secret prisons, secret courts, secret 'charges'

The obvious flaw in the Security Minister Lord West of Spithead's call for leaving the length of terror suspects detention to the courts, on the basis that they have a great deal of experience in analysing evidence, is that if there was evidence in the first place then the suspects would be charged and then remanded in custody legally.

What the police are seeking is the power to arrest first, then detain the suspect whilst they seek the evidence necessary to form a charge and then prosecute the suspect.

Intelligence is often not the same as evidence. Whilst the Security Services can act on the former to prevent a terrorist attack, it would be improper to expect judges to analyse intelligence as though it was evidence which would justify internment.

Another problem with the proposed model, is that the suspected terrorist would not be able to answer the 'charge' and prove his or her innocence, because only the judge and the prosecution will have access to the intelligence. Everybody is entitled to know the nature of the charge to be able to refute the charge.

Secret prisons, secret courts, secret 'charges'.

This is not open government. Only a government with something to hide demands this amount of secrecy.

Tony Lit sells Tory Leader a load of old crock