Rebel with a cause - for serious concern

8:38am Friday 13th June 2008

Comments (2)   Have your say »

So it looks like Gordon Brown's recent bout of drunk-dialling paid off.

Inebriated with fear and anxiety, the big G apparently spent the past few days glued to his handpiece, desperately trying to convince friends and foes alike that 42 days is an acceptable amount of time to imprison someone without charge.

It was worth it, it seems. Despite stringent opposition to the measure, our struggling leader has retained his place on the podium... just.

But the gossamer margin of the win – a miniscule nine votes – was hardly a rousing applause for his leadership. More a lone, feeble whoop drowned in a sea of boos and rotten vegetables.

Throwing a truckload of mouldy marrows was Labour MP for Hendon, Andrew Dismore. As the Joint Committee for Human Rights (JCHR) chairman, he was right up against the barricades, leading his guerrilla troops by example.

Mr Dismore's proposed alternatives to the bill included a lower burden of proof for bringing charges against suspects and defining terrorism offences in broader terms to reduce the risk of suspects slipping through the net.

I am with Mr Dismore on this one. The UK already has a far longer pre-charge detention period, at 28 days, than any comparable democracy. Even the Al-Qaeda-obsessed, Guantanamo Bay-tainted, "Bring-‘em-on"-bombasting United States allows a mere 48 hours - barely enough time for their boss or wife to realise their absence (though perhaps this reveals more about my personal life than the ethical ramifications of extended detention).

The sliver of light between Mr B and crushing defeat shows I’m not the only one feeling a certain level of discomfort about this bill. In the end it was saved not by Labourites, who turned out in droves to defy their three-line whip, but by a rather disjointed coalition between Tory rebel Ann Widdecombe and nine Democratic Unionists.

And even these votes seems to have been garnered less by principle than pay cheque. Rumours have it - fiercely denied by all, of course, as the juiciest and most convincing rumours generally are - that they were offered up to £1 billion from the sale of army bases, plus another £200 million from the proceeds of new water charges.

One potential Labour dissenter was told that Britain would revise its policy on EU sanctions against Cuba, and another that osteoarthritis would be formally recognised as an industrial injury to help miners claim damages.

I think a couple of free holidays to Mauritius, a complimentary washer-drier and a cuddly toy were also on the cards.

It all reminds me a little of my old Fascist nanny, who used to bribe me to eat my beans with gradually more excessive offers of encouragement. At the age of four I was content with a bedtime story and sherbert dip, but I quickly learnt better. By seven I had surround sound and a new wardrobe; by 12 I’d invested shares in Microsoft and moved into a Mayfair studio.

The trick was holding out as long as possible before giving in: just long enough so you get maximum return for your investment, but not so long as to put your opponent off the whole endeavour. Which, it seems, is the tactic so expertly used (and even more expertly denied) by the DUP.

Let’s just hope Tory council leader Mike Freer never feels the need to try such techniques here - or we might find Brian Coleman darting around town in a new diesel-fuelled turbo jet (complete with specially adapted cupholders for his bling), John Hart converting downtown Mill Hill into a woodland burial site, and Suzette Palmer replacing Childs Hill with a 2,000-unit estate knitted completely from wool.

Which, actually, might just be worth it.