| Blunkett takes aim at crime to outflank the Tories
|
David Blunkett has won places for at least six separate Bills in the final Queen’s Speech before the election in a move agreed by the Cabinet to prevent Labour being outflanked by the Conservatives over law and order during the election campaign. At the same time he has put security from outside threats at the heart of the next campaign by suggesting tough new anti-terror laws if Labour wins again. Yesterday he revealed several measures — from juryless anti-terror courts to allowing wiretap evidence in major trials — which could be implemented in a third term.
He suggested yesterday that compulsory cards could come in sooner than expected — in the years 2010 to 2012 — but the voluntary use of ID cards will be up and running long before then. He expects that the Bill will have a second reading soon and be progressing through a Commons committee before the Christmas recess. By announcing so many different measures tomorrow, Mr Blunkett is clearly trying to stop the Conservatives reclaiming crime and the response to it as their territory when the election comes. More than 20 Bills will be trailed as the new Parliament opens tomorrow in a speech which will have safety and opportunity as the key themes in the session before Tony Blair tries to win a third term. Mr Blunkett believes that for people to feel reassured that the Government is doing all it can to protect them against the external threat of terrorism they must also feel safe in their own environments. In an interview with the ITV1 Jonathan Dimbleby programme Mr Blunkett denied yesterday that he was creating a climate of fear. He said: “I am trying to overcome fears, acknowledging them, understanding people’s worries and then dealing with those worries. It is not to exacerbate, not to enhance, but to lay aside those fears that is the really big challenge for us.” However, sweeping new anti-terror laws will not be included in the new session but will await a third Labour term, Mr Blunkett signalled. Proposals will be included in a draft Bill over the next few weeks but there will be no time for them to go through before May. He said that civil orders, similar to antisocial behaviour orders, could be imposed against individuals who had not committed an offence but were suspected of “acts preparatory to terrorism”. Breach of such orders would be a criminal offence which could result in imprisonment. “We’d be able to use civil (orders), like antisocial behaviour orders, to say, ‘If you step outside what we’ve precluded you from doing, if you actually, for instance, use this particular banking network, if you, for instance, use the internet and we can identify you’ve done it, then we can move you from the civil into the criminal law’, and then we can use the normal criminal justice process.” Mr Blunkett added that the introduction of special terrorism trials with judges sitting alone without a jury was also being considered. “I think there’s a very strong case for translating what we have in the special immigrations appeals tribunal, that is the superior court of record, into the criminal justice system and there’s widespread support for looking at that,” he said. He said that he was also considering allowing wiretap evidence in criminal trials — a move previously opposed by the security services, who feared that they could be forced to disclose secret operations in court. “Minds keep changing in the security service, in the intelligence services; other enforcement bodies go hot and cold on this issue,” he said. “I’ve been investigating on behalf of the Prime Minister and will be presenting to him the findings so far. There is no easy way forward on this. It’s a very, very difficult technical question as to how much you expose.” |
