Home Office offers comedy response on terrorism legislation

By Iain Roberts | Thu 25th March 2010 - 9:10 am

We are pleased that the committee recognises our commitment to human rights, which are at the heart of our counter- terrorism legislation.

That’s the Home Office response to a cross-party parliamentary committee which has criticised the Government’s terror legislation and the nearly-nine-year public emergency we are still in. Who said satire was dead?

The question is, and has always been, how best to balance the need to keep society safe against the human rights of those who, whether innocent or guilty, may be caught up in those efforts.

The Lib Dem view, and now the view of the joint committee on human rights, is that the Government has failed badly.

Remember when we were told ninety day detention without charge was essential to keep us safe? That dangerous terrorists would walk free without it?

How many terrorists have walked free? Has it even made us any safer to have 28 days rather than the previous 14?

Real terrorist plots have proven to be fairly rare, and many of the ones that do exist seem to be hopelessly incompetent.

We’re a nation that’s lived through decades of terrorism, not least from the IRA. Do we really need to give up more of our freedoms to protect ourselves from idiots setting fire to their genitals?

Labour have got the balance hopelessly wrong between protected our freedoms and stopping the terrorists. The Lib Dems have been saying it for years; it’s good to see this cross-party committee now saying it too.

Read more by Iain Roberts .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.

One Comment

Dave Page 25th Mar '10 - 6:30pm

Let’s not fall into the false argument that there is a balance to be struck between security and liberty. A 9pm curfew would be a big curtailment of liberty, but offer little security benefit. Contrariwise, locking my front door doesn’t curtail my liberty but increases my security. Airport body scanners are intrusive and abused, but offer no security benefits.

Security, liberty, privacy – all concepts which can relate to each other, but the relationship between them is subtle. Studies have shown that countries with more liberty have less of a problem with terrorism, overall. It’s perfectly possible to argue that liberty is security – depencing on how you define security.

I should, as usual, mention the wonderful Bruce Schneier and his book Beyond Fear which is well worth referring to in any discussion about security 😉

Vince Cable writes: Drill, baby, drill…or not

Lib Dems must do better on Burnham

Britain should be proud, but never afraid of the stranger

Lib Dem Women: Amplifying women’s voices at Conference