Counter-Terrorism Bill

I do not think that I even got the full list of points down. I have not got anywhere near to replying, courteously, to all those who made points in the debate. I should say to my hon. Friend the Member for Foyle (Mark Durkan) that whatever the circumstances of this legislation and whatever struggle we face now, the one struggle to which the issues are not comparable is Northern Ireland in the '70s. However, I take great care over this; I fully note what my hon. Friend said about that struggle's impact on the Irish community—because I am part of that. I was part of it then, and I am part of it now. I remember—I have said this to Muslim audiences as well—feeling ever so slightly troubled in 1974 when the Prevention of Terrorism Act came in. I remember my father going upstairs and checking my books to see which ones he should throw out just in case, because I was Irish and because of my interest in politics. I take my hon. Friend's point very seriously, but say profoundly in the next breath: this is not in any way comparable with the failed experiment of internment in the early '70s, when people by the thousand were rounded up, with no intelligence, no evidence, no suspicion—no nothing. Anyone who refers to any of this as internment is entirely off the mark. We start, as I think everybody here does, knowing and understanding the battle and struggle against terrorism. In relation to what my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) said, I do not challenge or traduce anybody's motives as regards where they stand on the Bill or their genuine understanding of the threat that we face. If we disagree, let us disagree with some degree of honesty. I may be the only optimist left in this place, but I still think that, across the elements of the Bill, not least the ones that I have already identified—post-charge questioning and coroners and inquests—we can get to real deliberation, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East (Keith Vaz) and others suggested, on the model that is before us in relation to the nature of the emergency, the trigger in terms of the DPP and the police, and when there should be parliamentary oversight. It is quite extraordinary how so many Members have been utterly dismissive of this place having any role in introducing a law—not getting involved in an individual case but introducing the commencement of a law, which I thought was the role of this place. It is not our role to deal with individuals and individual cases—that is a matter for the judiciary. When people talk about the weak and flaccid nature of this place in terms of oversight, they then have a go at the judiciary and judicial oversight, which is as strong as anything comparable anywhere in the world, and in most cases far more so. I think that on everything to do with pre-charge detention and moving from 28 to 42 days, everybody starts from the premise that the hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) alluded to—that the norm for terrorist cases is, very strongly, 14 days, not 28 days, which is renewed yearly because of the circumstances that we face. Most, if not all senior policemen—I will have a word with the hon. and learned Gentleman afterwards about the one whom he traduced—and people in the security services are clear that they can foresee circumstances in which we will need this sort of reserve power and provision, not to be introduced overnight or on a whim in the face of where we start from in terms of British traditions, but in very specific and unique circumstances. That is why it is not internment. Fourteen days is the norm, 28 days is the exception, and going beyond 28 days is utterly exceptional. In response to the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Carmichael), the Lord Advocate and the Lord Advocate's office are fully aware of and have been fully alongside the development of and consultation on these matters. I have spoken at length to Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Minister, and we have had extensive correspondence about very serious matters such as jurisdiction. Those deliberations are ongoing. If that does not answer the hon. Gentleman's point, I will come back to him after the debate.