The Government was warned during the passage of the anti-terrorism Bill in 2001 that the Bill was vulnerable to the European Convention on Human Rights, which the Government had adopted into United Kingdom law. In addition to a “sunset clause”, a review by a committee of Privy Counsellors was inserted into that Bill in the House of Lords. That committee reported towards the end of 2003 and recommended changes in the law. It did not require an adverse judgment by the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords to initiate change.

Prevarication has brought the Government to the point where proper consideration of a contentious Bill is no longer possible. Inevitably the cry is going out that the House of Lords is interfering with the superior rights of the House of Commons. That is misrepresentation.

This is a government Bill being inefficiently forced on Parliament. It raises a more important argument about the right of the executive over Parliament. This was the issue that gave rise to the Civil War and cost King Charles his head. With a possible election coming, perhaps we will manage a change of government in a more civilised manner.

Yours sincerely,
DIXON-SMITH,
House of Lords.
March 11.

From Dr Charles Bourne

Sir, I dispute the government claim of a right for the elected chamber to prevail. The maximum lifetime of the present House is four-fifths gone, and its popular mandate a distant memory. The constitutional absence of popular authority is underlined by the Prime Minister’s taunting reference to forthcoming elections and the opportunity to put the issue before the electorate.

The extent to which the Commons may presume to prevail is codified in the Parliament Act, and the constraints which prevent the Government from using it now are intentional and salutary: because of the Act the Commons may not force through new legislation immediately prior to calling an election unless the House of Lords approves.

Unless the anti-terrorist Act is time-limited there are no assurances whatsoever that a new government and a new House of Commons, not bound by the compromises of their predecessors, will ever reconsider it.

That the House of Lords is a reformed chamber, and that the Prime Minister had ample opportunity to reform it further but declined to do so, significantly enhances its constitutional authority. With the Commons entirely concerned with fighting the general election, I think it wholly right for the Lords to persist as long as necessary to prevail.

Yours sincerely,
CHARLES BOURNE,
36 Avenue Road,
Leamington Spa CV31 3PE.
March 11.

From Vice-Admiral Sir Louis Le Bailly

Sir, Some 65 years ago 16-year-old girls on ponies from the Dartmoor Hunt Patrol were watching Ringmoor Down for the arrival of German parachutists. Today, a demonstrably well-led and effective Security Service and the police anticipate horrific consequences from a nuclear bomb or biological or chemical attack.

Explore Letters

• Feedback