WIDE-ranging proposals to fight terrorists are set to be dropped from next month’s Queen’s speech and may be put on hold for at least a year.

The plans to create a new offence of “acts associated with terrorism” and for courts to be given secret telephone tapping evidence were expected to be among a raft of security and safety bills shaping Labour’s election manifesto.

But uncertainty in Whitehall about human rights implications and questions about the immediate necessity of the security measures mean ministers may delay their introduction until at least 2006.

The delay contradicts repeated claims by Tony Blair and David Blunkett, the home secretary, that the threat from Al-Qaeda was so serious that draconian new counter-terrorism laws were urgently needed.

Only last week Blair said: “Security must be our legislative priority.” In an interview this year, Blunkett said he wanted to address the need for improved security by the election.

Blunkett has been considering new powers allowing British terror suspects to be locked up without charge. New “anti-terrorism behaviour orders” to curb the activities of those linked to terrorism by tagging them even if they had not been charged have been examined.

The Home Office has considered a law to try some suspects in secret before special security-cleared judges. The idea was to keep sensitive MI5 and police evidence secret.

These proposals had drawn harsh criticism from the civil liberties lobby. They have now been dropped, while other, less controversial, plans have been put on hold. Officials say one reason behind the delay is uncertainty over a landmark legal case before the Lords.

The Law Lords will rule next month on the legality of Blunkett’s powers to detain 11 foreign terrorist suspects without trial in Belmarsh high-security prison, south-east London.

Lawyers for the detainees argue that the powers, introduced under the 2001 Anti- Terrorism Crime and Security Act, wrongly suspend the detainees’ rights under the Human Rights Convention.

Officials say a government defeat could throw the centrepiece of its counter-terrorism strategy into disarray.

If it wins the case, the government has until late 2006 before parliament decides whether to renew temporary powers in the 2001 act.

Another factor is a wide-ranging “scoping” study being carried out by intelligence officials into the future strategic threat posed by Al-Qaeda.

In a speech to the Confederation of British Industry next week, Eliza Manningham- Buller, the director-general of MI5, is expected to repeat her previous statements that Al-Qaeda remains a “serious and current” threat. Manningham- Buller has said that it is only a matter of time before Al-Qaeda attacks Britain.

But senior law enforcement officials no longer say an attack is inevitable. Sir Ian Blair, named last week as the next Metropolitan police commissioner, says that he does not accept Al-Qaeda will succeed in carrying out a “spectacular” attack on London.

Those comments mark a change in tone. His predecessor, Sir John Stevens, said it was not a matter of “if” but “when” an attack happens.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• What makes the perfect mum?
• To keep me stress-free, no more awareness days, please
• What do lottery winners buy?