|The News tells me ...
||[Jun. 11th, 2008|08:32 pm]
... that the public is in favour of the change to 42 days.|
*looks* No, I'm not living under a stone.
So I repeat:
I must admit that I'm confused on this one - is this the final vote, or does it get to ping-pong between the two houses for a while?
Anyway, my local MP voted with the Government (or possibly didn't vote against). No vote for him in the future.
Edited at 2008-06-11 07:53 pm (UTC)
ping pong. According to the news I watched this evening (I'm sure some civil servants know the process better than I do and may correct me!) it now goes to the Lords, where it is more likely to be voted against. If so it then comes back to the commons (when it gets pushed through anyway). All this could take months. So it isn't actually law yet, but has got through the first part of the process.
as has been pointed out elsewhere, there is no "right" number of days, and there were ways to extend detention under the old rules, so all this does is make it easier to abuse people, and we'll have to see if more people are actually detained longer now the rules have changed (I suppose what it does is make it easier to shuffle papers and not chase up reports from other police forces etc. for a couple of weeks longer).
I realised we'd lost our civil liberties a long while ago, and I'm afraid I've decided to keep my energy for battles that I think are winnable :-( ... and so I'll put my energy into Climate Change, Iran and "Windmill (Tilting At) 2009".
Strange, isn't it. I've yet to unearth what question they asked but I'd bet it was phrased in a manner that highlighted safety more than liberty.
Relying on the DUP, that's a clear sign of a government destined to last long...
Isn't it obvious that the public support it?
I mean, we have a democratically elected House of MP's, each of whom represents his or her constituancy. So, if the House votes in favour of something, it stands to reason that the public does too...