![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
You are in: Talking Point | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
Thursday, 20 December, 2001, 15:23 GMT
New terror bill: Will it work?
![]() New emergency anti-terror legislation has been passed by MPs after Home Secretary David Blunkett compromised on one of the key issues.
In a major policy U-turn, Mr Blunkett agreed to drop proposals making incitement to religious hatred a criminal offence. Mr Blunkett's concessions were designed to clear the way for the controversial Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill to be on the statute book by Christmas, as he had pledged. Despite the concessions, the bill gives police and security services significantly more powers. It allows foreign terror suspects to be detained without trial where they cannot be deported - those arrested will have a right to appeal although not to a full court of law. What do you think? Is Mr Blunkett right to compromise? Will the new legislation work? This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
Your reaction
Viv, UK
Just another step closer to 1984
If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about but where there is smoke there is fire.
What we need are fewer laws that curtail our personal freedoms and more for corporations that deal with situations where public safety is concerned (like airlines) to ensure that their security is stepped up to the best they can.
Stop constricting public freedoms and protect the public.
Well it'll never affect me and it will stop terrorists for good?
If you're stupid enough to believe that then you'll agree with this legislation. Take away the rights of one man and you take away the rights of humanity.
The Bill appears to discriminate against foreigners; secondly it ought to be reviewed after 6 months of operation; it could result in Muslims or others who use strong verbal attacks on Britain or America being hauled in for questioning or investigated even when they have no connection with terror or violence. That is pretty much what George W Bush implied in his McCarthyite statement about those who did not support his "anti-terror" measures also being the enemy. So is America still a democratic state with its secret military tribunals and dilution of Congressional powers? And could Britain go down the same illiberal slippery slope?
Steve McCoull, England
Every step towards a safer future is affordable. I don't think this legislation will affect ordinary people in the UK.
Now if I criticise the Greeks over their treatment of the plane-spotters I can, in theory, get extradited to Greece on charges of xenophobia. The UK courts will be able to do nothing to stop this extradition. Welcome to the EUSSR!
John Harding, Wales, UK
I think the new laws will tighten up the extraordinarily lax situation in Britain and will no doubt contribute to greater security here. I'm extremely pleased that David Blunkett was brave enough and flexible enough to drop the "incitement to religious hatred" bill. The idea that our freedom of speech with regards to any ideology - whether religious or otherwise - could be taken away was terrifying. As an atheist who respects other people's beliefs while absolutely rejecting any attempt to impose them on others or society as a whole, I was deeply worried about the implications of religious protectionism. Thankfully, common sense has prevailed in this matter. People are free to think and believe what they like, with no belief system gaining legislative priority.
I believe that it is an erosion of our civil rights. Yes, civil rights are a hindrance to national security, but they are a necessity for a democratic society. I am still waiting for the introduction of identity cards for the control of terrorism.
Edwin Thornber, UK It depends what you mean by asking if it will work. If you mean "will it prevent terrorist attacks?" then I strongly doubt it. If instead you mean "does it give the security forces the power to round up anyone they don't like?" - then yes, it will.
With the newfound, albeit tentative, peace in Northern Ireland, I say Mr Blunkett is more than 25 years out of step with terrorist threats to this country.
I agree with comments that have stated that a law against incitement to religious hatred would be a good thing, but not in the context of the current bill, or brought about by way of the New Labour railroad approach. I still think that if a proper trial is the accepted method of proving guilt or innocence then detainment on suspicion mocks the rest of the legal system.
|
![]() |
See also:
![]()
Other Talking Points:
![]() |
![]() |
Links to more Talking Point stories
|
![]() |
![]() |
^^ Back to top News Front Page | World | UK | UK Politics | Business | Sci/Tech | Health | Education | Entertainment | Talking Point | In Depth | AudioVideo ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © MMIII | News Sources | Privacy |