Police are not allowed to take fingerprints or DNA samples from terrorism suspects held under control orders because of a loophole in antiterrorism laws, it emerged yesterday.

The Home Office said the failure was the result of an oversight because the relevant legislation was rushed through Parliament in an emergency.

More than two years after the control order regime came into operation, John Reid, the Home Secretary, disclosed the blunder as he outlined plans for new antiterror laws.

He told MPs: “We are proposing a number of changes to control orders including measures relating to fingerprinting, DNA and powers of entry.”

Mr Reid outlined a series of measures to tighten antiterrorism measures, including proposals to give the police powers to seize the passports of people they suspect are heading abroad for terrorism-related purposes.

He published the proposals as Lord Carlile of Berriew, QC, the Government’s antiterrorism watchdog, gave warning that he was “pessimistic about the future of international terrorism”.

“The risk of a terrorist attack on places of public congregation are real,” Lord Carlile said in his annual review of antiterrorism law. “There is no justification for the slightest complacency.” His report pointed out that some ports are left open to potential terrorists.

Under Mr Reid’s plans, courts could be given the power to seize the assets of anyone convicted of a terrorist or terrorist-related offence where it is believed the assets may support further terrorist offences. At present this applies only to someone convicted of a terrorist offence linked to finance.

Mr Reid also told MPs that increased policing is to be provided at key gas supply sites in to counter potential terrorist attacks.

He signalled a difficult parliamentary battle for Gordon Brown by backing an increase to the 28 days that a terrorism suspect can be held for questioning. Mr Reid said he hoped to reach cross-party consensus on an increase and suggested that extension could be weekly, which would be subject to judicial approval.

Other proposals include a review by Privy Counsellors as to whether telephone tap evidence should be admissible in the courts.

However, GCHQ has so far been unable to find a way of intercepting telephone calls made over the internet. And the technicians involved in interception work fear that if they have to give evidence in court they and their families could be attacked.

Mr Reid is also proposing giving judges the power to extend jail sentences for those convicted in criminal courts who have links with terrorism.

In his annual review, Lord Carlile recommends an extra five years.

Lord Carlile also calls for the creation of a national Special Branch squad to combat terrorism because the branches in some forces are small and have little expertise in terrorist activity. “A national equivalent of Special Branches could prove more efficient,” he says.

His report highlights continuing problems over the sharing of information between police, airlines and Revenue & Customs because of computer systems that cannot be accessed.

He repeats his concerns about potential security threats involving the hijacking of hired high-speed private jets and about ports left without Customs staff on duty at times because of the “intelligence-led” deployment of officers.

“Probably they simply do not have enough officers to provide the sort of cover that could be regarded as best practice in the effort against terrorism,” he says.

David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, said: “The public are becoming increasingly aware that it is not the lack of powers that are the problem, but the Government’s lack of ability to use them properly.”

Liberty, the human rights group, expressed concern that proposals to detain terrorism suspects for more than 28 days would amount to internment and could act as a recruiting force for terrorists.

Times Recommends

• Charles blazes trail as sun king
• Thalidomiders win payout 50 years on
• Libel gag on talk of 'medical hurricane'