» Wednesday, November 2, 2005

Terror Bill

Asked for a reaction to the vote on the terror bill, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister’s view remained as he stated at PMQs that 90 days was the police’s operational advice. As they had made clear yesterday 90 days was necessary. Deputy Commissioner, Andy Hayman had made it clear that their stated view was not as a negotiating bid but based on the need for time to carry out such things as de-encrypting computers, tracing DNA evidence and tracing international mobiles. The Prime Minister’s view was that that remained a compelling case and that nobody had yet put forward a compelling alternative to the police’s case for 90 days.

Briefing took place at 14:00 | Search for related news


  1. Now if I were to take these comments by the PMOS as the ‘official line’ I would conclude that – Its 90 days or nothing.

    This would mean that anything that the government now passes which is less than 90 days is of no use to the police and therefore of no use to the Country.

    I wonder if we are going to see the introduction of more useless legislation in the form of a compromise. If we do it will form a documented case of the government passing legislation for the sake of saving ‘face’ rather than for the good of the country.

    The compelling case that Andy Hayman seeks is called the ‘status quo’ and works very well.

    Comment by Roger Huffadine — 3 Nov 2005 on 8:23 am | Link
  2. If you track back here, I think you’ll find the PMOS claiming at some point that 90 days was already a "compromise". A fair bit of rowing back to be done from there, IMO.

    Comment by John Lettice — 3 Nov 2005 on 9:26 am | Link
  3. Why should the Police be allowed to put up a ‘case’ anyway? There’s no evidence that a lack of a 90 day detention period has in any way hampered their investigations. If there is then let’s hear it and give examples.

    If they can’t get the evidence together within 14 days – bearing in mind the huge resources (i.e. taxpayers’ money) poured into their ‘operations’ they ought to be sacked as incompetent anyway.

    There are plenty of police powers and laws already. What is lacking is the will to apply them.

    This will just turn into the usual wrangles and blame casting to hide their continuing professional failures, idleness and self-interest. They should put up or shut up.

    Comment by Chuck Unsworth — 3 Nov 2005 on 12:51 pm | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)


This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Downing Street Says...

The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...


November 2005
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Oct   Dec »

Supported by


Disruptive Proactivity

Recent Briefings



Syndicate (RSS/XML)



Contact Sam Smith.

This site is powered by WordPress. Theme by Jag Singh