Sir, Leaving aside Sir John Major’s disingenuous references to Magna Carta (Opinion, June 6), there are three main considerations as to why the threat we face today from al-Qaeda-inspired extremism is of a different order to that which he led the nation against in the 1990s — that of the IRA.

First, as the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the United States has once again shown, we are dealing today with individuals who do not aim just to end others’ lives, but also wish to martyr themselves. Their terrorist techniques are not predicated on their own survival, or any form of propaganda. Secondly, the level of sophisticated technology being employed is a world apart from the single computer and handful of floppy disks involved in the last IRA atrocity. Recent al-Qaeda plots have involved 400 computers, 8,000 disks and multiple identities, as well as crossing numerous jurisdictions across the world — not simply the two countries of the UK and Ireland relevant to the IRA. Thirdly, in three cases we have come close to needing every one of the 28 days currently permitted for pre-charge detention to be able to accuse suspected terrorists with a charge that would stick.

There is a degree of dishonesty from those who oppose extending pre-charge detention but who are at the same time quite happy to advocate holding the same individuals, without the additional safeguards offered in the new Counter-Terrorism Bill, by offering a lesser charge that would allow investigators to continue holding the suspect beyond 28 days. In other words, those who would happily find a way around the present cut-off but would rather not say so, or vote openly to do so.

Sir John argues that our liberties are worth “a certain amount of risk”. But the degree of risk today is an order of magnitude greater than it ever was with the IRA. It is not a “siege society” we should fear, but refusing to take the measures necessary for our security in the face of suicidal intent.

David Blunkett, MP
House of Commons

Explore Letters

• Feedback