Clarke’s concessions on secret courts will not satisfy Liberal Democrat campaigners

Ken ClarkeIsabel Hardman has written a piece on the Spectator’s Coffee House blog which essentially says that Liberal Democrat MPs and campaigners are on a bit of a collision course over Part II of the Justice and Security Bill. Liberal Democrat conference voted overwhelmingly in favour of this measure being withdrawn because of its provisions on secret courts.

The article suggests that Liberal Democrat MPs are likely to support the measures now that Ken Clarke has accepted an amendment from the House of Lords guaranteeing judges, not ministers would authorise secret courts. Liberal Democrat Voice’s Nick Thornsby explains why this is not acceptable opponents of this measure within the Party.

It is of course welcome that Ken Clarke has recognised some of the flaws contained in the original bill. But even the amendments made in the House of Lords don’t go far enough. The bill, establishing the principle of court cases where one side can’t hear the evidence from the other, is fundamentally illiberal. It is difficult to see how Part II can remain intact and be acceptable to Liberal Democrats.

Hardman suggests that “this could be as big a problem for the party as the Health and Social Care Bill was”. I think she’s under-estimating the situation. The NHS debate did split the party along social and economic liberal lines. That is not the case with this measure. There is nothing like civil liberties being threatened to unite people across the party. It is unlikely, in any debate that may take place in the future, that you’d see the result turn on tens of votes.

You can read the whole article here.

If you wish to take part in the Liberal Democrat campaign against secret courts, you can do so here.

* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings

Read more by or more about , , , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/32265 for Twitter and emails.
Advert

One Comment

  • Just to observe that the lack of any comments on this item is a possible indicator that the concessions that Ken Clarke is minded to make in the light of the Lords’ amendments to this Bill may have taken some of the steam out of Lib Dem opposition to it.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarDavid-1 28th Mar - 5:35pm
    Of course, Wilson's "merry men" (and women) included some who would go on to help form the Social & Liberal Democrats.
  • User AvatarDavid-1 28th Mar - 5:30pm
    What is our electoral strategy here? Do we have a plan?
  • User AvatarPhilip Thomas 28th Mar - 5:26pm
    Nick's apology was for making a bad promise, not for failing to deliver on that promise. It is a funding question- where do you get...
  • User AvatarPBBrown 28th Mar - 5:14pm
    Electoral Calculus have S & F down as a Conservative gain, 72% chance of a Tory win, only 23% for the party keeping it.
  • User AvatarJudy Abel 28th Mar - 5:00pm
    If we start supporting £9,000 fees now (Ed Davey recently said Labour were 'stupid' to promise to reduce fees even to £6,000), how did we...
  • User AvatarNick Collins 28th Mar - 4:55pm
    The collection of valedictory speeches from MPs who will not be returning after the election, reminds me of a Christmas "do" in my old firm...
Sat 28th Mar 2015
Tue 31st Mar 2015
Sun 5th Apr 2015
Sat 11th Apr 2015
Sun 12th Apr 2015