Last chance for terror laws

Analysis
By Nick Assinder
Political Correspondent, BBC News website

High noon has arrived for the government's anti-terror laws and it remains impossible to predict who, if anyone, will blink first.

The clock is ticking on anti-terror laws

After seeing his radically re-drawn proposals passed by the Commons, Tony Blair has again insisted it is time for the Lords to drop their opposition and approve it, in the interests of national security.

He has denied he is playing politics with the issue and, in another robust defence of the planned laws, he insisted he was not going to budge any further over demands for a sunset clause to review the legislation in November, or to strengthen the burden of proof element of the bill.

But while some Peers, led by Labour's Lord Haskins, seemed ready to back the laws, others were standing firm, threatening a day of parliamentary ping pong and the possible fall of the entire bill.

The Liberal Democrats also appear determined to press on with their key demand for the burden of proof to be strengthened when judges are considering the imposition of control orders.

And, if neither side gives, the death of the bill remains a distinct possibility.

That would spark a major political row, with the opposing sides accusing each other of provoking the crisis and even allowing suspected terrorists to walk free.

Playing politics

There was a dramatic example of just how that would play out during question time on Wednesday as the two leaders traded attacks over the policy.

Observers were left in no doubt that the prime minister is out to portray the Tories as soft on terrorism for flying in the face of advice from the police and security services.

And Mr Howard is claiming the prime minister is playing politics with the issue by attempting to use it to suggest only Labour is tough on terrorists.

Clarke making concessions in Commons

But before the final breakdown of the policy comes, there is one more chance for the two sides to compromise and push a gutted version of the laws through parliament.

If that fails, and the prime minister carries through his implied threat, the existing laws will have to be extended to allow a re-think.

And it then seems likely - as the prime minister also suggested - that the whole affair will become a central part of the looming election campaign.

That would inevitably see bitter allegations over who had been responsible for the crisis and which party can be most trusted with Britain's national security.

And, while the government believes it has the voters on its side, it is far too early to tell how it would eventually play out.