Comparison of Divisions: Terrorism Bill — Extension Of Period Of Detention to 90 Days — 9 Nov 2005 at 16:30 with Division No. 219 on 11 Jun 2008 at 17:45
(Swap the two divisions around).
Vote (a) : Terrorism Bill — Extension Of Period Of Detention to 90 Days - 9 Nov 2005 at 16:30 - Division No. 84
The majority of MPs voted against extending the period of police detention of a terrorist suspects without presenting charges of a crime to 90 days.
They did this by voting against the restatement from "3 months" to "ninety days"[1] of the time limit proposed in the bill.[2]
Had this restatement been allowed, then all further amendments to revise this proposal downwards (to 28 days in the case of the next vote)[3] would have been blocked.[4]
Note to readers: This is the first Government defeat in a whipped vote since 1997, managing to overturn their majority of 66.
- [1] Amendment No. 55, House of Commons, 9 November 2005
- [2] Extension of period of detention by judicial authority, Clause 23, Subsection (5) : (3)(b)(ii), Terrorism Bill
- [3] Terrorism Bill - Extension Of Period Of Detention to 28 Days, House of Commons Division, 8 November 2005
- [4] David Heath MP, House of Commons, 9 November 2005
Vote (b) : Counter-Terrorism Bill — Extension of Maximim Period of Police Detention Without Charge in Terror Cases from 28 to 42 Days - 11 Jun 2008 at 17:45 - Division No. 219
The majority of MPs voted to extend the period of police detention without making any criminal charges of terrorist suspects from 28 days[1] to 42 days, subject to a complex series of bureaucratic procedures. See also the next vote which outlined the powers themselves.
The procedures include:
- Statement - The Home Secretary must make a statement that a grave exceptional terrorist threat has occurred or is occurring for which this power to detain suspects without charge beyond 28 days is necessary for the purposes of investigation and bringing to justice those responsible.[2]
- Legal advice - Independent legal advice (from a lawyer not employed by the Government) must be obtained as to whether the Home Secretary can be properly satisfied by his or her statement.[3]
- DPP report - A report must be made by the Director of Public Prosecutions and the chief police officer which states that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the detention of one or more persons beyond 28 days will be necessary to obtain or preserve evidence that relates to the commission by the detained person or persons of a serious terrorist offence.[4]
- Committee chairs - A copy of the legal advice and the report must be provided in confidence to the chairmen of the Home Affairs Committee, Joint Committee on Human Rights, and the Intelligence and Security Committee.[5]
Although this threatened to be the largest Labour Party rebellion for Gordon Brown,[6] a bigger one occurred six weeks earlier.[7]
A comparison between MPs' votes on the 90 day detention and this 42 day detention is here or reported in the Guardian here. The list of related Parliamentary votes on detaining persons without charge is here.
- [1] Terrorism Bill — Extension Of Period Of Detention to 28 Days, House of Commons Division, 9 November 2005
- [2] Statement to be laid before Parliament, New Clause
- [3] Independent legal advice, New Clause
- [4] Report of operational need for further extension of maximum period of detention, New Clause, 11 June 2008
- [5] Notification of chairmen of certain committees, New Clause
- [6] Blacklist of MPs in terror bill rebellion, The Times, 20 April 2008
- [7] Energy Bill - Renewable energy feed-in tariff - rejected, House of Commons Division, 30 April 2008
Difference in Votes - sorted by party
MPs for which their vote on Motion (a) differed from their vote on Motion (b). You can also see just opposite votes between these two divisions, or simply all the votes.
Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote (a) | Vote (b)
Division Similarity Ratio
The measure of similarity between these two divisions is a calculation based on a comparison of their votes.
There were 646 MPs who could have voted in both of these divisions, and 572 voted the same way, with 30 voting in opposite ways. There were 14 MPs who didn't vote in either division, and 30 who voted in only one of them.
We invert the vote on the second division if it makes the distance closer (since the meaning of 'Aye' and 'No' are often interchangeable depending on how the question was put). In this case, they line up the same way. An 's vote in in only one of the divisions contributes a factor of 0.2 to the distance. The calculation runs as follows:
([same-votes] + [differing-votes] + 0.2x[abstain-in-one])
(572 + 30 + 0.2x30)
608