The politics of terror laws

Analysis
By Nick Assinder
Political Correspondent, BBC News website

Tony Blair always had two objectives in relation to his plans to outlaw the glorification of terrorism.

The Terror Bill has had a rough passage through Parliament

The first was to win the crunch Commons vote to introduce a new law he believed was essential in the fight against terrorism.

And he managed that with a perfectly healthy majority of 38 - more than twice the size of the majority the first time it came before MPs.

The second, probably just as important from his point of view, was to try and paint the opposition parties, particularly the Tories who were once seen as the party of law and order, as soft on terrorists and their supporters.

And he will undoubtedly believe he has secured that aim as well, despite widespread concerns outside Westminster that the new law will be ineffective, confusing and a threat to civil liberties.

On the first, the prime minister was confident he had the support of enough of his backbenchers to reverse the House of Lords decision to remove the glorification section of the law.

He had the vocal support of Gordon Brown whose supporters appear to believe that, as the chancellor seems to be adopting an increasingly prime ministerial role, it is the wrong time to try and undermine Mr Blair.

United signal

In a passionate defence of the proposal, he had earlier told MPs the law was needed to close a gaping loophole in existing laws to arrest people openly encouraging terrorism.

The recent cartoon demonstrations and the conviction of cleric Abu Hamza were cited as evidence of the need for such a law.

Brown has supported new laws

Turning specifically on the Tories, he declared: "I find it incredible that at this moment, after what has happened in the last few weeks, that we are going to dilute the law proposed in this way."

He told MPs they had to understand that, if they removed the glorification element of the proposed law, they would be watering down the law "at the very moment when we should be strengthening it and sending a united signal that we are not going to tolerate those who would glorify terrorism in our country".

The Tories saw the trap and attempted to claim the prime minister was playing politics by deliberately picking a row in order to suggest, spuriously, that they were soft on terrorists.

Existing law was already sufficient and glorification would be unworkable and, as William Hague declared, "ineffective authoritarianism".

That message will continue to be heard as the law continues through its parliamentary stages.

The only real worry for Mr Blair, however, must have been that rebellious backbenchers might have staged another ambush similar to the one they managed over his plans to outlaw religious hatred the other day.

But with some of the rebels apparently eager not to undermine the prime minister at this time, even that prospect retreated.

[e-mail]