The Times Parliamentary office keeps you up-to-date with developments from Westminster after a turning point for Tony Blair and his Government.
4pm
Don Foster, the Liberal Democrat MP, has just made a bold prediction. "I bet Blair will never lose a vote again. You name a Conservative MP who will vote against him."
1pm
Gordon Brown ruminates on his failure to bring his side into line. "We convinced a very large number of people about the need for a big change in the law. But we didn’t convince everyone and that is what we accept."
12pm
Eerily quiet around Westminster this morning, after yesterday's high drama. Which means it's time to start The Blame Game.
Thursday, 10am – the papers
The past...
Charles Clarke on BBC’s Radio 4’s Today programme blamed himself: "It was my judgment, I regret that I got the judgment wrong in terms of the House and the ability to get that position through, and there are lots of issues to be looked at from that point of view."
A "friend of the Prime Minister", quoted in Philip Webster's Times splash: "Here you have a Labour Prime Minister being beaten because he supports the police and is in tune with public opinion and the Conservatives winning while being against the police and out of touch with public opinion. Is the world going mad?"
Trevor Kavanagh on the Sun front page: "Treacherous MPs betrayed the British people last night by rejecting new laws to combat terror. They IGNORED the wishes of the vast majority of Britons and HUMILIATED Tony Blair by inflicting his first Commons defeat."
Peter Riddell, in The Times: "The new terrorist threat, particularly from suicide bombers, requires the police to intervene earlier and arrest suspects, obviously affecting the time needed to analyse evidence. But the Government presented its case poorly...
Guardian leading article: "The government can have no excuses. It knew what it was trying to do. It put everything it had into the effort. And it got stuffed. Good."
The Daily Mail editorial: "This paper for one doesn't have total faith in many chief constables, not least the Met's Sir Ian Blair, who on other occasions has shown a lamentable lack of judgment."
Julian Glover and Patrick Wintour in the Guardian: "The roots lie in the way the government handled the Commons a week ago.... Labour MPs who had expected a deal were faced with a choice: tough it out, or surrender."
The future....
Simon Hoggart, the Guardian: "As Tony Blair returned to Downing Street, you could hear the champagne corks popping all over the parliament he has so long ignored."
Philip Webster, Political Editor, The Times: "In many ways Mr Blair has been a prisoner since the election. His 66 majority can be wiped out easily on any day of the week because the far-left Socialist group of about 33 MPs tends to vote against him on any issue that matters."
Peter Riddell: "There is now a serious danger of further defeats on these Bills. Moreover, the weakening of Mr Blair's authority in the Commons is likely to embolden Conservative and Liberal Democrat life peers, who, between them, can easily outvote Labour...
Polly Toynbee in the Guardian: "Tony Blair needs to be sufficiently in command to hand over at a time of his own choosing with dignity and there needs to be an intact crown to pass on."
Sir Christopher Meyer on the Today programme at 8.30am: "You have got to be careful about [comparing it to the end of the Major government]. History very rarely repeats itself. We will just have to wait and see. But there is a smell, yeah."
Stephen Pollard, the Daily Mail: "The unpleasant truth for someone such as myself, who has long been proud to be called a Blairite, is that Mr Blair has failed.... Rather than clinging to office Tony Blair should resign with dignity. He has given it his best shot, but after 11 years as leader he has done all that can be done. The truth is that he was only ever tolerated by the Labour Party for what he could bring: power."
Trevor Kavanagh in the Sun: "As far as the newly-rampant rebel left are concerned, [Tony Blair] can forget about all those grand designs. They have tasted blood and won't stop snapping at his heals now.
Wednesday, 8.15pm
The unanswered questions:
1. Tony Blair declared: "The country will think that Parliament has behaved in a deeply irresponsible way today." Was this an irresponsible thing to say?
2. What will be the consequences of Gordon Brown's failure to persuade all his troops to back the Government?
3. Where has the Prime Minister's humility gone... is this Mr Blair going down with all guns blazing?
4. Which will be the first flagship Bill to be gutted? Schools, incapacity benefit or health?
5. Would Mr Brown have been able to control Labour MPs any better than Mr Blair? Would he really want to?
6. How will this rebound on the Tory leadership? Will David Davis now take credit for causing Mr Blair's first Commons defeat? Should David Cameron have seized the moment during yesterday's Shadow Cabinet and gone with 90?
7. Tony Baldry, Eric Forth, Michael Mates, Nicholas Soames, Sir John Stanley and Ann Widdecombe all abstained. Heroes or headache?
8. What on earth did the Chinese President make of all of it?
9. How important to Mr Blair is it that he is still popular in the outside world? And with the possibility of future defeats, how long will that last?
10. Who will get the blame if a terrorist outrage hits Britain in the next few months?
6.15pm
The official division lists have been published
- 49 Labour MPs voted against the Government
- Five Brownites revolted, with George Mudie voting against and the former Paymaster General Geoffrey Robinson abstaining. This could be bad news for Gordon Brown, who has failed to bring his side into line.
- The Government failed to do the deal with the DUP, who voted against the Government .
5.40
The Labour Left clearly feel vindicated. They have managed to bag the first media interviews, even before the Tories. Clare Short has just appeared on Sky to declare how "proud" she is.
Meanwhile John McDonnell, chair of the left-wing Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs, said that more than 45 backbenchers had voted against the Government.
"New Labour’s whole political agenda on the privatisation of health, schools, prisons and probation, and the threat to welfare benefits is now in question," he said. Is Tony Blair's reform agenda truly in trouble?
5.15
MPs have now voted for a 28-day detention period, by 323 votes to 290. It looks like it has been a wasted week for the Government, with a humiliating outcome for the Prime Minister.
The bookmakers William Hill shortened the odds against Mr Blair leaving office before the end of next year from 3-1 to 7-4.
5pm
Mr Blair was in the chamber and sat grim faced and shook his head as the result was announced. The question everyone is asking now: will Charles Clarke resign?
4.55
Tony Blair has lost his first Commons vote since coming to power, by a sizeable majority, 322 to 291. The Prime Minister's words from PMQs will be ringing in their ears. "Sometimes its better to lose and to do the right thing than win and do the wrong thing." Now they are voting on a 28-day detention limit.
4.40pm
MPs are just leaving the chamber to vote on Government Amendment 55 - the 90-day proposal. We will know the result in 13 minutes.
4.30pm
Peter Hain is looking pretty happy after his meeting with the DUP. Does this mean a Blair-saving deal has been done?
4pm
Terrorism Bill debate awards:
Significant intervention of the debate: Chris Mullin. When Charles Clarke referenced the ricin suspects, the Sunderland South MP pointed out they were released after two days
Quote of the day: "How long did the Prime Minister have to detain him for before he decided not to proceed with that amendment?" - Michael Howard on Tony Blair and Charles Clarke
Most bizarrely over-talked about subject: Scotland
Most over-energetic performer: David Winnick who was waving his hands so vigorously onlookers thought he might take off
Award for dedication: Ian McCartney, the Labour chairman, has returned to the Commons for the first time since undergoing heart surgery to take part in the vote. A spokesman said his attendance was voluntary
3.15pm
It's not looking good for the Government. But this latest tip could change everything. In the last few minutes, members of the Democratic Unionist Party have been seen going into a huddle with Peter Hain, Northern Ireland Secretary. Could a deal be on the cards?
2.55pm
Charles Clarke is having a difficult time in the Commons. There were interventions from all sides, he dealt testily with some senior Labour MPs who were expressing doubts.
But David Davis is doing his side no favours either. He has just made a very partisan speech that may alienate some Labour MPs.
With the whips briefing of likely defeat, will they withdraw the 90 day amendment?
2.30pm
As the debate gets under way, the Government whips are desperately playing down expectations. They are currently briefing they did not expect to have enough votes to pass the 90-day detention proposal.
12.25pm
Tony Blair at Prime Minister's Questions: "Sometimes it's better to lose and do the right thing than win and do the wrong thing."
Midday
Bizarre. On Friday, Charles Clarke and Labour headquarters sent out a poll to Labour members which ruffled some feathers.
"Hello. I want your views on fighting terrorism. Do you think our laws should be updated to cope with the current security threat? Yes/No/Not Sure.
Do you think police should have the time and opportunity to complete their investigations into suspected terrorists. Yes/No/Not sure.
Do you think the Government should make sure there are new safeguards to protect innocence people? Yes/No/ Not sure."
The survey was then used to brief Sunday newspapers about support for the Bill. Alice Miles of The Times this morning reported the views of Labour members, who said it was "rigged, skewed, a sham" and worse.
Well, last night Mr Clarke has sent a somewhat unexpected e-mail apologising for the way many people interpreted the poll.
He wrote: "Finally, I would like to apologise for the questionnaire which was attached to the message that I sent out to party supporters on Friday. It was not intended to gauge public opinion, but to start a political debate around the proposals currently being debated in Parliament. Many people have raised with me perfectly valid concerns about how the questions were drafted. I can only say that I share those concerns and give my assurance that questions of this type will not used in the future."
Wednesday 11.30am
Five hours to go, and still everything to play for. The votes -- up to four of them -- are expected to take place at 4.40pm. The tectonic plates have been shifting over the last 36 hours, and the confidence showed by the Government on Monday night when it tabled the vote for 90 days has waned. Here are two developments so far today that might have an impact on today's vote.
1. Gordon Brown suddenly announces he is returning from Israel, apparently after a conversation with Labour whips. Buckle your seatbelts, folks, it's conspiracy theory time. Was the Chancellor really ordered to return to Britain by the Chief Whip? Why did his pairing arrangement collapse? (Note the Chancellor’s comment to the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "I want not only to cast my vote, but I want everybody who can cast their vote to cast their vote on the Government's position.") But if there was no direct order to return, why is Jack Straw also coming home? Nick Robinson, the BBC Political Editor, mischievously suggested that far from being forced to return, Mr Brown is very happy to be seen flying to the rescue of the Prime Minister. Grandstanding, selfless gesture or somewhere in between -- you decide.
2. The Times poll and The Sun front page. Our Populus poll today suggests that David Davis has surged ahead of David Cameron among Tory voters. Meanwhile The Sun front page labels DD and DC "Dumb and Dumber" for failing to back the 90 day limit. It's a lose-lose situation for both candidates and for the Tories more widely, as Alice Miles eloquently argues on the Times op-ed page today. Vote with the Government, and win the enduring support of The Sun and the party's law and order base. But if either candidate decided to break the Tory party line of voting only for 28 days, and the Government wins by one or two votes, they could be accused of propping up a wounded Mr Blair. With neither side now decisively ahead, why would DC or DD risk everything?
So who is going to win this afternoon? As of 11.30am, nobody knows.
Tuesday, 5.15pm
The Conservatives are spoiling for a fight. After a Shadow Cabinet meeting this afternoon, Michael Howard announced that the party would be sticking firmly to their existing line: that terror suspects should not be held for more than 28 days. No compromise on 40, 60 and certainly not 90 days.
In an interview on BBC Radio, he said: "I think that would be wholly unacceptable. There has been no justification whatever of 90 days. We don’t believe 90 days can be justified."
The Tory leader took the bold step of challenging the thinking of the police, in spite of today's robust intervention by Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner.
"If you actually look at what the police are saying, the logic of what they are saying is that there shouldn’t be any limit at all and that we should have quite unlimited detention without charge."
This is a stark contrast to the Tory's usual law 'n'order message. And already Ann Widdecombe, now a Tory backbencher, has said that she will vote for the Government's 90-day proposal. Nobody knows how many Tory abstentions or votes with the Government there could be tomorrow.
3.45pm
A forthright performance from Sir Ian Blair to the Parliamentary Press Gallery this lunchtime. In an unusually full gathering, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner pushed hard for the 90 day limit. "There is no magic in 90 days, we are not saying it is 90 rather than 89, but in 90 versus 60 or 90 versus 30, we are at 90. We are sticking at 90 because our experience, in a number of trials, a number of investigations, is this is the length of time it is taking to actually get a coherent picture of what we have in front of us."
While Sir Ian accepted some might still object to the proposals, he insisted that the terror threat was real and the measures were justified. "I do accept what we are putting forward is unknown in peacetime. This is a fundamental derogation of the judicial process of the United Kingdom. I have been in the police service 30 years, I have been a top cop for 10 years. I have never seen anything like what is happening at the moment. There are people out there in this country plotting mass atrocities without warning. Under these circumstances we do believe that the state has a duty on behalf of its citizens to give the greatest level of protection it possibly can. This is different. It is chilling, what we are seeing, and we are very, very worried and alarmed about it."
3.15pm
Bookmakers are confident that Mr Blair will get his way on the 90-day detention period for terrorist suspects. William Hill are offering odds of 1-2 that the measure will become law and 6-4 that it will not make it on to the statute book at this attempt.
3pm
Tony Blair may not have impressed everyone at the Parliamentary Labour Party meeting last night (such as Mark Fisher, MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central, who said the PM was over-emotional), but he certainly worked his magic with some Labour MPs.
Last week, Clive Betts (Sheffield Attercliffe) believed that terror suspects should not be held for more than 14 days. At lunchtime today, he announced he was persuaded the police should be given the power to hold them for 90 days. The reason for the big jump? "In the end I am persuaded that I have to accept those arguments and to go along with what [the police] are asking for," he told the BBC Radio 4's World At One.
On another note, little word from the Conservatives on terror so far today… are they worried they might see more than a few abstentions?
12.45pm
Gordon Brown has finally broken his long silence on the Terrorism Bill and come out fighting for the Prime Minister. "When you have advice from the Association of Chief Police Officers, the head of the Metropolitan Police and those specialists concerned in the detailed work of interviewing and dealing with terrorist suspects, and they are all saying the same thing about the need for the extra time, then you ought to, and will, take that very seriously indeed, as we have done," he said during a visit to Brussels.
No surprises really -- but why did it take so long? Last week a spokeswoman for the Treasury said that the Chancellor was enjoying "a quiet period". Mr Brown is off travelling again tonight: he is visiting Israel to underline his commitment to the Middle East peace process.
12pm
At this morning's lobby briefing, the Prime Minister's spokesman told journalists that the Terrorism Bill was high on the PM's agenda.
He was asked repeatedly whether the Government could yet be forced to compromise on the 90 day figure.
"We believe that anything less would not be good, anything else would be second best for the security of the country. If people can provide a better way to meet the needs of the police, we would be open to that. So far they have not," he replied.
So it still appears that No 10 are still leaving the door slightly ajar, in case they need to make last-minute changes...
Tuesday, 11.30am
The consensus around Westminster seems to be that the Prime Minister did a very good job wooing Labour MPs at a meeting last night. But has he convinced enough of them to back the centrepiece of the Terrorism Bill, his plan to allow police to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days?
Buoyed by this morning's Times / Populus poll, which shows that 64 per cent of the public back the plans, Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme that MPs who disagree are out of touch.
"The reason why I think the people of the country, as manifested in poll after poll, support what the police are proposing in these areas is they see that reality, they understand it, and some others don’t."
The arm twisting won’t stop there. This lunchtime, Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, is addressing 44 members of Westminster press gallery. The timing could not be more fortuitous, especially given that the lunch was arranged months ago, before the summer recess. Expect vigorous backing for his namesake's plans...
