A Sailor's Lament
Leader: The public deserves to hear a better debate on terrorism - which is, perhaps, what Admiral Lord Alan West wanted to start
But for a simple sailor, Gordon Brown would have had a good day. His Commons statement on terrorism struck a measured but resolute tone. The prime minister's proposals ranged from designing public buildings to withstand bomb blasts to countering the extremist message inside Pakistan. Some ideas raised more questions than they settled - how, for example, will the government influence mosques without compromising on religious freedom? But the plans came together to suggest that ministers were sensibly balancing action against the Islamists across all the relevant fronts.
Unfortunately, earlier events had revealed the prime minister retains an unhealthy obsession with one issue: namely, the period for which suspects can be detained before facing charge. Admiral Lord Alan West, who is now a security minister, said on BBC Radio4 at 8.20am that he was not yet "fully convinced" that the current 28-day limit needed extending. An hour later - half of which was spent in Downing Street with Mr Brown - the former first sea lord told the media he was, after all, "personally convinced" that an extension was necessary. The admiral suggested that political inexperience had led him to mangle his words. But the self-deprecation could not conceal the reality that his hand had been forced.
Even in narrow political terms, leaning on the admiral was an extraordinary blunder. Having - quite reasonably - made a virtue of appointing unconventional ministers such as Lord West, Mr Brown needed to show that he would run a regime where these non-partisan figures could dare to be difficult. Yesterday suggested instead that he is doing the opposite. And stifling dissent on this particular question will do very particular damage. The official position is that ministers are looking at the evidence with "an open mind" before designing a proposal intended to attract consensus. That posture is important to winning over the labor rebels who previously defeated Tony Blair's plans for extended pre-trial detention. It ceases to be credible, though, when ministers are slapped down by the prime minister himself for speaking freely.
The Guardian reported on Monday that Britain has the longest pre-charge detention in the free world. Yesterday's events suggest that Mr Brown's real intention in extending the limit is not security, but to make the opposition appear soft on terror. David Cameron provided a reminder that the Conservatives could be just as cynical, proposing ripping up the human rights protection which ensures suspects will not be deported and tortured. The public deserves to hear a better debate - which is, perhaps, what the Admiral wanted to start.
Unfortunately, earlier events had revealed the prime minister retains an unhealthy obsession with one issue: namely, the period for which suspects can be detained before facing charge. Admiral Lord Alan West, who is now a security minister, said on BBC Radio4 at 8.20am that he was not yet "fully convinced" that the current 28-day limit needed extending. An hour later - half of which was spent in Downing Street with Mr Brown - the former first sea lord told the media he was, after all, "personally convinced" that an extension was necessary. The admiral suggested that political inexperience had led him to mangle his words. But the self-deprecation could not conceal the reality that his hand had been forced.
Even in narrow political terms, leaning on the admiral was an extraordinary blunder. Having - quite reasonably - made a virtue of appointing unconventional ministers such as Lord West, Mr Brown needed to show that he would run a regime where these non-partisan figures could dare to be difficult. Yesterday suggested instead that he is doing the opposite. And stifling dissent on this particular question will do very particular damage. The official position is that ministers are looking at the evidence with "an open mind" before designing a proposal intended to attract consensus. That posture is important to winning over the labor rebels who previously defeated Tony Blair's plans for extended pre-trial detention. It ceases to be credible, though, when ministers are slapped down by the prime minister himself for speaking freely.
The Guardian reported on Monday that Britain has the longest pre-charge detention in the free world. Yesterday's events suggest that Mr Brown's real intention in extending the limit is not security, but to make the opposition appear soft on terror. David Cameron provided a reminder that the Conservatives could be just as cynical, proposing ripping up the human rights protection which ensures suspects will not be deported and tortured. The public deserves to hear a better debate - which is, perhaps, what the Admiral wanted to start.

Use the feedback form below to submit your comments.

Use the form below to email this article to your friends.

- Labour's Handling of Legal Aid Makes a Mockery of Its Rhetoric on Fairness
- Diary
- Security or Defence: Why the Military Feels Misunderstood
- Duty Calls
- In Praise of ... Martin Amis
- Diary
- Haider Abdel-shafi
- Ineffectual, Not Tough
- Q&A: Pakistan Mosque Siege
- Amateurishness of the Attacks is Scant Consolation
- Wine Militants Threaten Action
- Q&A: Eta and Basque Separatism in Spain
- To Understand Political Violence, We Must First Recognise Its Potency
- To Fry the Smallest Fish
- Morocco Plays on Terror Fears in Sahara Peace Bid
- Is "Second Life" a Virtual Training Ground for Terrorists?
- Feds Rate Travelers on How Likely They Are to be Terrorists
- Feds Agree to Pay Oregon Man $2 Million for Wrongly Arresting Him
- Innocent Man Killed By Police in London Subway, Not a Terrorist



