Blair loses vote on Terror legislation

[Peter]

Just breaking. No links yet.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The 90 day proposal has been rejected by MP's 322 to 291. Votes on compromise measures (60 days and 28 days) are either about to begin or have begun.

Nice bit of misreporting by the BBC here; "...as MPs reject his proposed anti-terror laws..."

Not so. The anti-terror laws have not been rejected; only one part has.
And the same article also contains this weird line: "...but it does not mean he will have to stand down as prime minister..."
Well, duh. Have a look at this: http://www.election.demon.co.uk/defeats.html

[minionofmidas]

And the same article also contains this weird line: "...but it does not mean he will have to stand down as prime minister..."

You mean that line is untruthful? You just made my day!

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The article has just changed to: "as MPs reject a key part of his proposed anti-terror laws" which is accurate

[Filuwaúrdjan]

28 day limit is approved. No figures yet.

[minionofmidas]

This page records all occasions since 1918 that a division of the House of Commons has resulted in the defeat of the Government. It includes all divisions in which a whip was imposed and the government was defeated. This category includes, in practice, most divisions in the House. Divisions on Private Members’ Bills, Private Bills, and internal regulation of the House of Commons are not subject to a whip and are not therefore included, even if the line urged by the government was defeated.

There have been 119 divisions since the first world war in which the government has been defeated. As the table shows they were concentrated in the period 1974-79 when the government had either no majority or a very small majority.
(...)The closest any division has come to defeating the government was when the government had a majority of 5 in a division on the second reading of the Higher Education Bill. (...)
(explaining where that BBC line is coming from:) During the period 1945-70, when the government was only very rarely defeated, the impression grew up that a government which was defeated must either reverse the decision, seek a vote of confidence or resign. The occasional minor defeats in 1950-51 were accepted, but soon after the government called a general election. Only when Edward Heath’s government was defeated was there a realization that the government need only resign if it loses a vote of confidence. In 1993, John Major resorted to a vote of confidence to reverse his defeat on the social chapter of the Maastricht Treaty; a defeat by 8 votes turned into a victory by 40.

1918-22 Parliament - 5
1922-23 Parliament - 1
1924 Parliament - 14 (Labour minority government)
1924-29 Parliament - 0
1929-31 Parliament - 5 (Labour minority government)
1931-35 Parliament - 0
1935-45 Parliament - 5 (including 2 under Churchill)
1945-50 Parliament - 0
1950-51 Parliament - 5
1951-55 Parliament - 1
1955-59 Parliament - 0
1959-64 Parliament - 0
1964-66 Parliament - 5
1966-70 Parliament - 1
1970-74 Parliament - 6
1974 Parliament - 18 (Labour minority government)
1974-79 Parliament - 42
1979-83 Parliament - 1
1983-87 Parliament - 2
1987-92 Parliament - 1
1992-97 Parliament - 9 (including 4 on the same day)
1997-2001 Parliament - 0
2001-05 Parliament - 0

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The BBC is still living in the '60's

They still haven't put up the figures for the 28 day vote

[minionofmidas]

The BBC is still living in the '60's

Indeed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What's going on?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What's going on?

The ticker says it's passed. It links you to the main article which doesn't mention by what majority passed.
The main article is just the one they wrote up before the vote with the vote figures and (for some reason) a comment by Simon Hughes on it.

I want my license fee back dammit!

[minionofmidas]

What's going on?

The ticker says it's passed. It links you to the main article which doesn't mention by what majority passed.

Yeah, I noticed that. I also noticed the Parliament's own website doesn't have anything on today yet, seems they update it daily after business hours.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That went to Simon Hughes as payment for his guest commentary.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Found figures for the 28 day vote (from SkyNews)...

Yes: 323
No: 290

[minionofmidas]

Found figures for the 28 day vote (from SkyNews)...

Yes: 323
No: 290

They just took the 90-day vote figures and reversed them, then changed them by one so they wouldn't look too suspicious.

[Peter]

Found figures for the 28 day vote (from SkyNews)...

Yes: 323
No: 290

News 24 is reporting a majority of 33 for the 28 day measure, so that appears correct.

[minionofmidas]

Sky also says they think sources tell them 41 Labour MPs voted against the 90 days. And that Dobbo was amongst them. Good for him.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Apparently Howard has said that Blair should resign

Will be interesting to see how this plays electorally; over 70% of the public support the 90 days proposal. Tories could get themselves seriously burned over this...

[Democratic Hawk]

I am f**ing livid

90 days? The bastards should be held indefinately. Bloody lefty Labour fruits aligning themselves with the feckless Tories and Lib Dims/Dums (whatever?) 28 days is not good enough

Had certain 'Lefties' toed the party line then this would have been the perfect occasion to beat the Tories about their bleeding heads with. How the hell do they expect me to do that, when some of them useless buggers can't even get their own bloody arses into to gear

Civil liberties? What about the rights and liberties of those who died on july 7 or do they not matter? There is a fine line between civil liberties and taking liberties, which is what terrorists do and worse. If the bastards didn't do what they do, then there would be no need for additional security. It's as simple as that

And before any airy-fairy, namby-pamby politically-correctee starts having a go by quoting Benjamin Franklin at me, with due respect to the great man but he never had Islamic militants, who threaten the very fabric of civilised society, to contend with

National security is the first duty of the Prime Minister and I'm disgusted at Blair's enemies (left, right and wherever the Dums and Dims sit) for playing politics with public safety

Dave

P.S. God help my MP if they didn't vote the right way

[minionofmidas]

I am ing livid :>)

90 days? The bastards should be held indefinately. Bloody lefty Labour fruits aligning themselves with the feckless Tories and Lib Dims/Dums (whatever?) 28 days is not good enough

Well, sentence them in that case.

[Democratic Hawk]

Apparently Howard has said that Blair should resign

Will be interesting to see how this plays electorally; over 70% of the public support the 90 days proposal. Tories could get themselves seriously burned over this...

Howard is a feckless bastard and he knows it

Yes, I do indeed, hope the Tories pay the price for their opportunistic folly at the ballot box

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

P.S. God help my MP if they didn't vote the right way

Does that translate as "deselect! deselect! deselect!" by any chance?

[Democratic Hawk]

I am ing livid :>)

90 days? The bastards should be held indefinately. Bloody lefty Labour fruits aligning themselves with the feckless Tories and Lib Dims/Dums (whatever?) 28 days is not good enough

Well, sentence them in that case.

It takes evidence to launch a prosecution and secure a conviction. Some suspects could be held for 28 days, then released and then embark on some murderous bombing spree

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Two thoughts:

1. What will the electoral implications of this be? As pointed out before the public isn't *exactly* opposed to the 90 day limit... and have a look at the Sun's headline this morning.
2. How many Tory M.P's supported Internment (even if they weren't M.P's at the time) but voted against the 90 day thing?

[afleitch]

I support 60 days. 90 days only with a court extension.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

FINALLY!

The BBC hath put the figures up:

"90 days' detention time limit: Defeated by 322 votes to 291, majority 31
Backbench compromise of 28 days' detention: Passed by 323 votes to 290, majority 33 "

Now then... it'd be nice if we could have a list of rebels (Labour and Tory; if any) on both votes...

[Democratic Hawk]

I support 60 days. 90 days only with a court extension.

Pretty reasonable, but, as you can gather, not my prefered option. You're out of sync with your party's MPs though. I don't know what the mood is among the Tory rank and file

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Now then... it'd be nice if we could have a list of rebels (Labour and Tory; if any) on both votes...

That would be nice. I'm sharpening my tongue in eager anticipation. Any Tory who voted for the defeated proposal gets my applause no matter how distasteful their other positions

Dave