Tony Blair is locked in a battle of wills with the House of Lords tonight over the future of the Government’s proposed anti-terror legislation.

He declared he would not compromise over peers’ demands that a sunset clause be inserted into the law allowing those against whom there was a "reasonable suspicion" that they were somehow linked to terrorism to have their liberties restricted.

Peers today again voted for such a clause, although extending the time limit of the laws to 12 months before they lapse, from the eight months they had voted for previously.

The Lords also voted to reinstate a clause insisting the burden of proof should be those accused should only be subject to control orders if the "balance of probability" said they were linked to terrorism, rather than the "reasonable suspicion" clause approved last night by MPs.

Mr Blair said of his opponents in the Lords: "They have simply got to understand: to continue to water down and dilute this legislation is not responsible. It is wrong. They should stop it."

He went on: "It is time to get serious. We are talking about an issue where the advice is clear. We need these powers."

He was speaking as a judge granted bail to ten foreign suspects who are detained at Belmarsh high security jail and Broadmoor special hospital under the present powers. The emergency laws expire on March 14

Mr Blair’s official spokesman insisted the police and security services had said giving any kind of "wrong signal" to terrorists would be dangerous, and the spokesman said that could include a sunset clause.

The spokesman said that the Government’s advice was that "uncertainty is taken as a sign of weakness".

Michael Howard, the Tory leader, said: "We all recognise the need to fight terrorism. The question is, how. This Bill is full of imperfections - you don’t need to take it from me. That’s what Mr Blair’s own minister said this afternoon in the House of Lords.

"I don’t think it’s in Britain’s best interests for this Bill to become law permanently. If Mr Blair thinks it is necessary today, he can have it for a year.

"That would give everyone the chance to think hard about how best to tackle terrorism. "If he’s serious about fighting terrorism, he’ll accept that. If he’s not, he’s playing politics and he will be responsible for the consequences."

Mark Oaten, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: "What the intelligence services and police are saying is yes, they want a form of control order.

"I have always accepted that. But it is for the politicians to ensure that when we have those control orders, we have them to the highest quality of the judicial process and that is what today is all about."

MPs were tonight beginning their consideration of the Lords’ amendments to the Bill, and have been warned to expect a long night. The Commons is expected to delete the Lords’ amendments incorporating a sunset clause and switching the burden of proof before sending the Bill back to the upper house.

Peers can then simply vote to re-insert those clauses and send it back to the Commons. This "ping-pong" will go on until a concession is made by one side or the other.

The existing anti-terror legislation expires on Monday, and though to renew it would be lawful, it would be open to immediate challenge in the courts if used to detain foreign nationals, and it does not apply to British terror suspects.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Oh no, Mr Darling: you have failed
• BBC survives dogfight over Kennel Club expose
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone