The interception of communications has to be authorised by a series of senior officers and with consent of the prison Service. There are 82,000 persons serving in the UK prisons and undoubtedly the intelligence to be gained from surveillance of a small proportion of these pays great dividends in preventing organised crime and terrorism. These people don't suddenly stop organising crime when they go to prison. Within hours of any serious crime happening, it is likely that someone in prison will know the identity of offenders. It is surely not beyond belief that the increasing numbers of terrorist prisoners will continue to plan and prepare terrorist attacks whilst in prison via their contacts with visitors or supporters outside the prisons.
Surely politicians, rather than baying for blood, should be endorsing and supporting the use of authorised intelligence-gathering to combat crime and terrorism.

JMC, London,

Judging by responses here it would appear Sadiq Khan and the labour party are going against public opinion by making a big thing of this.

Surely this will backfire on them.

KL, Bellshill,

This has nothing to do with terrorism. They bugged the conversation because they were discussing a civil law suit against Sir Ian Blair. Stop falling for the propaganda people.

Mr Hansen, Edinburgh, UK

As a terrorist suspect, the MI5 have a duty to gather intelligence on Mr Ahmad. The only ‘outrage’ is that this operation has been revealed. Justice would have been threatened if conversation with his lawyer was bugged, but justice is absolutely not threatened when bugging is of conversation with a politician. A busy prison visiting area is hardly the constituency office. This is an extraordinary case because it involves alleged terrorism. The public don’t care about Wilson Protocol. It is typical that politicians want to be treated as ‘elite’ from the public by being immune from bugging. Police were bugging Mr Ahmad and the MP is most likely incidental to this. Police should not end bugging activities when politicians communicate with terrorist suspects. In a week when the public are reminded elsewhere of MP corruption, politicians rallying around each expecting immunity from bugging in anti-terrorism policing makes our politicians look even more elitist, outwith scrutiny.

A MacKinnon, GLASGOW, UK,

Isn't it bad enough that MPs vote for their own pay rises, use our money to employ family members and take advantage of who knows how many other perks, now there's an outcry that an MP's been bugged. I'm sorry I've no sympathy. Politician's shouldn't be above suspicion, in fact they should be scrutinised even more than the rest of us!

AH, London,

What I want to know is: has a security operation been put at risk because of Davis's mole breaking the Official Secrets Act. National security is too important to let Davis play politics with it.

Benji, London,

Why is Jack Straw being asked to comment on this rather than the Home Secretary who presumably authorised the bugging to take place? Is it because she did know about it and the Government dont want her to go on record?

Jamie Devlin, Maidstone,

It is disturbing that a man elected as one of our law makers has a dear friend who is wanted by the Americans for alleged support of the Taliban and others regarded as enemies of the State. How can we be assured of this lawmaker's impartiality without listening in to his conversations when it is possible that he is advising his friend how to escape deportation and therefore fair trial?

SH , London,

Counter terrorism ought to be high on the agenda, not protecting potential terror suspects so, I fully endorse the bugging of this MP and his constituent.

Julie Hurley, Preston, England

The bugging was of a terror suspect, in a prison. End of story. MPs have no more legal rights than anyone else in such circumstances. Well done the Met - may we please know what was said?

Tom, Witney, UK

Why are MP's (Muslim or otherwise) exempt from being bugged anyway? If the Police have good reasons to monitor someone, then so be it. Members of Parliament should be subject to the same scrutiny as the rest of us.

Rob James, Brixham, Devon

I think Ian Blair is generally shown himself as unfit for his job- but this time he got it right!
MP's should indeed be treated as special cases- if ever a group needed watching carefully it is them. Hain, Conway and on and on.

Tim, Devon, UK

At last a news item which will help restore public confidence faith in Sir Ian Blair!

Martin, Swindon,

"During the conversation the two men discussed the latest developments in the campaign against extradition."

I trust that the MP who is also reported to be a lawyer and friend of the man in jail , was allegedly discussing the man's case. Surely an MP who is a lawyer and friend of a person held in HMP would not use (abuse) their position to influence the outcome of a legal process would they?

I hope the inquiry is truly independent and asks the MP the right questions as well as the Commissioner.

S Carter, Lincs,

This report is confusing. Was khan his lawyer at the time? The report suggests not. Was he his MP at the time? The report suggest not. Was he his friend at the time? The report says they were lifelong childhood friends. Was Khan advising him of his rights in law as a friend? Maybe but that does not make him his lawyer or his MP.

In other words, was it khan who was being bugged or was it ahmed?

The report says that Ahmed had been bugged on previous occasions and I say thank god! He is a terror suspect and therefore any survelience on him is in our interests.

And thanks to the times on sunday, the survelience used by the 'talking tables' is out in the open. Well done!

Kim, London,

James Hazan has got it spot on ---and thanks for the clear thinking ---sadly lacking these days

Douglas Graham, Glasgow, UK

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act dictates that this sort of police or security services activity is subject to authorisation by the Home Secretary. So for the police to bug this private conversation they would have had to obtain the written authorisation of the Home Secretary at the time. Jack Straw is either not aware of his own legislation or he is being economical with the truth. If, for arguments sake, an MP is in league with a suspect terrorist & is involved in a criminal enterprise with him, then surely the public would expect the police & security services to use all means of investigation available to them to gather evidence. Why should MPs be treated any differently than any other member of the public in this regard. MPs are not above the law. If its right that police can investigate the wrongdoings of any MP then they should be allowed to use whatever means is lawfully available to them to help the investigation. MPs need to wake up & live in the real world

Billie Nomates, Southampton, england

The government are there to serve and protect the citizens of the UK. But, It is a thin line that can be crossed and when that line is crossed it would be prudent to have a functional and absolute independent police complaints panel backed up by a non means-tested legal services bureau and access to law advice. With respect,- Citizens Advice call-in centers can't cope nor have the powers to help in such matters.
At this time we have neither a proper police complaints nor public legal service system for balance. It is very worrying and a dis-service to justice. The media should investigate this and begin by speaking to legal aid solicitors who are dispairing of the latest cut backs and by speaking with the CAB.

Andyf, hertfordshire, england

It is a pitiful state of affairs as the country mindlessly walks into a 1984 style police state.
Wake up Britons! Your privacy has never been under such serious attack under the guise of all things terrorist.

Rajiv, London,

It is not so much the alleged dodgy surveillance of
an MP talking to a suspected terrorist that we should
be too much worried about, but the unlawful oppressive,
intimidating surveillance of nulabor activists that use
government and council resources to spy upon those they
have arbitrarily deemed to be a potential threat to
nulabor by virtue of their whistleblowing that exposes
the institutionalised corruption of the nulabor party
and this government.

martin brighton, sheffield,

If he was just visiting a boyhood friend and talking about conkers and when they stole Miss Smiths blackboard rubber during 3rd year chemistry , why so outraged? I would be happy for any of my conversations to be bugged - it would probably bore them to death, but then I don't go visiting terrorist suspects. Why should MP's be exempt from bugging? The higher up you are in Society, the more danger there is to the rest of us if that individual turns out to be a 'rogue'. There should be more scrutiny not less when in such positions of power and trust

carol, Leicester, UK

The bugging of the labour M.P. Sadiq Khan was purely coincidental to an ongoing inquiry regarding this country's
security.The person that was bugged was Babar Ahmad,who is alledged to have helped the taliban and the chechen terrorists.The bugging was or is an ongoing situation and cannot stop or change because some M.P.was taped amongts the hours of various conversations.
When dealing with Islamists who use innocent downs syndrome women to blow up pet markets it becomes high time to use every mean available to protect this land ,the indirect bugging of an M.P.pales into insignificense when compared to missing the placing of a bomb in YOUR backyard.

james hazan, huuddersfield, U.K

You refer to a government edict. Do you mean a law? My wife issues edicts, but fortunately I have the hoice of obedience or otherwise. If the bugging was against the law, then the issues are fairly clear.

Steve Evans, Hong Kong,

Politicians and lawyers are amongst the most contemptible, corrupt and morally bankrupt people in the land. Sadiq Khan is both an MP and a lawyer who is defending a childhood friend wanted in the US on terrorism charges. I think I would be far more concerned if he wasn't being bugged.

Draxx, London, UK

Looking back over the last 40 years I should have thought that one obvious pool of traitors could be found in our Houses of Parliament. It would be surprising if the security services did not pay that body very close attention.

Anthony Back, Wellington, Telford, England

Undoubtedly collatoral intrusion on the MP's part, but most likely justifiable on prisoners part. Security of the nation is paramount. The Glasgow bombers were apparently respectable Doctors," the threat is real and enduring".

S Carter, Lincs,

your very own stasi on your doorstep , well who would ever have guessed that we are being bugged, our email is read our online comments are read so why not bug everyone and be done with it ... they already seem to be doing so .. , so why not be honest about it ?

Keith, Hull ,

You see the Labour Government allowed the Country to become a police state run by arrogant incompetents like Ian Blair and then it turns around and bites the creator. Labour deserve whatever they get.

Simon, London, UK

I just cannot feel sorry that an MP, who helped create the UK Governments assault on privacy & civil rights, has had his conversation with a terror financier bugged. This is even truer after reading that local councils are bugging telephone conversations in their search for petty infractions.
Basically you reap what you sow, while politicians are normally excluded from this truism I find it healthy that in this case they have not.
I had thought that conversations with lawyers were private; I guess this is now only true in movies.

Anthony, London,

'It was done for the protection of the state?' -
Well then, let the Met. have to answer to an inquiry committee over the matter.
Meanwhile the damage it has done is enormous and should be considered very carfully by the Met. and the government.

I feel that Sir Ian Blair will never operate with integrity or proficiency and everytime I hear a liberty breaking operation by them under his authority, I think of the John De Menzes killing.

Julie , Manchester, UK.

While breaches of civil liberties of this manner are most likely occuring every day, that doesn't make it acceptable. And if this is deemed to be an 'exceptional situation' which allows the bugging of priviledged conversations, who decides what is an exceptional situation? The Metropolitan Police?

Louise, Liverpool,

I would question his right not to be bugged, police have their hands tied by not being able to carry out under cover operations. Its the disosal of non security information that should be tightened up, the same with laptops with secure information on.
Give the police better and simpler powers to protect us, only the criminals complain about being watched and they involve others.
I can watch my neighbours from my secutity cameras in an open public area perfectly legally. They got caught dealing in Drugs and raided after 7 years of reporting it. When will it end?

nemesis, Hastings, UK

Extradition hearings for suspect terrorist Babar Ahmad has been held & so far it has been found that there is sufficient evidence to justify his extradition to the USA. Why, therefore, is an MP trying to undermine this lawful judicial process of our law & actively try to overturn the decision to extradite this man. Is it really as simple as the MP trying to help his childhood friend or is there a more sinister reason. An MP should surely be acting in the interests of the British people, not just a childhood friend who shares his religious beliefs. Surely our security services have a duty to investigate anyone whom they believe is involved in terrorist activity. If a sitting MP wants to visit a suspect terrorist constituent in prison then surely the security services are entitled to wonder why, particularly as the MP is trying to block his extradition. Why should MPs be exempt from police scrutiny. If any non muslim member of the public acted in the way then would this MP complain - no

D. Izzard, London, england

MP's should not be exempt from bugging (regardless of their ethnic background or skin colour) - in fact I believe it should be required for their conversations with constituents to be recorded! They are publically elected individuals who are being paid by public fund to protect and work for the public - therefore they are more accountable to the public than private individuals in the first place. They specifically should not be above the laws we, their employers, are subject to!

Melissa, London, UK

Cups of tea and chocolate with his 'childhood friend', the friend in prison and accused of funding terrorists by the USA.

Its good to know they were being bugged. Keep up the good work.

They say 'would a white middle class MP be bugged?', well if their childhood friend was a suspected terrorist fundraiser and in prison possible. However, the services aren't likely to bug a conversation with Mrs Hartley-Jones about the plight of the local village green.

Jon, Northumberland, UK

There is nothing remarkable about this. The abuse of civil liberties and ancient rights is constant, egregious and unaccountable. Every time a minister says 'this power would only be used in dire emergency' you can be confident that it will immediately be used for anything at all. Are there other MPs the police would like to bug? I'm sure they already have.

This perversion of principle will continue until Labour is booted out and Tories warned to reverse course. Hopefully the Conservative anti-ID card platform is representative policy, not an exceptional piece of common sense and integrity.

Enough is enough. Ministers must be accountable and take responsibility for their departments' behaviour.

R Heybroek, Horley, UK

It is the responsibility of our security services to protect us....by all lawful means and sometimes by unlawful ones....i say this because our law is based on reason and so our law officers should be allowed a little leeway.....under exceptional circumstances.
However, i wonder under what authority do local councils have the right to bug people?!
If the locally elected bodies are being given investigative powers, then surely we have built a police state.
Does this mean then that soon enough they will be given the right to detain at will?
My rights are protected under the common law and i hope that this fragile protection is not allowed to be discarded because it has worked for some time now.
Maybe its time we get a constitution together, along with a bill of inalienable rights.
Pazz

pazz, london, uk

I believe Khan’s visit was undertaken as a private citizen visiting his boyhood friend who happens to be a terrorist awaiting deportation. This does not accord him the typical egomaniacal MP’s self claimed sacrosanct rights, (I know, I know, an oxymoronic choice of words for a muslim) but when anyone goes to visit a terrorist the visitor should expect an elevated level of scrutiny and supervision. (Body search, video and voice recording).

Peter, Vancouver, Canada

I agree.
Are MP's not capable of committing wrongdoing? They are not above the law.
The Police have a duty to investigate all criminal matters whoever maybe responsible.

Victor Burns, Ilkley, West Yorks

Key question: Were the police bugging the MP or the terror suspect?

Both of course, in the sense that both sides of the conversations were recorded, but it'd be interesting to know whether or not Mr Ahmad's other conversations were also being monitored and the police specifically went back to their masters and requested additional permission to bug a conversation that would normally be privileged.


On completely different notes, when will a party commit to (a) restoring the old rule of not extraditing a person without reasonable suspicion being shown and (b) restricting bugging to the police and the spooks? I can live with law enforcement having the capability, but I'm not at all happy with the idea of some council jobsworth having the power...

T Barton, Perth, UK

The Police had their reasons for bugging this MP. The higher in the land you are, the more bent you can be. When lives are at stake, as in a case of terrorism, it is good law that a breach of privilege may be justified.

Jon , Oxford,

why wouldn't you

john, sydney, aus

It would seem that in the great "War against terrorism" British authorities are taking a page from the Bush/Cheney playbook. Screw your rights.

Bruce L. Northwood, Washington, D.C., USA

If the law doesn't allow bugging of politicians, then it should be changed. Or are there politicians who have something to hide? - Good work by the police!

Peter, Brussels,

no to racist police sack mr ian blair.

andrew, leeds,

Like P Robinson, I say good work by the police. Their duty is to protect our society and they have done no more than that.

John, Kenilworth,

Good job by the Met! I fully support their actions.

Malcolm Watson, Manchester, UK

"The bugging of MPs is a breach of a government edict"

The Law breaking the Law?
Not a good example set to the law abiding citizens. No wonder there is so much crime in UK.

Mohammed, London, UK

"No one shoud be above the law."

Including the police. The Met is looking increasingly like a rogue organization that is out of democratic control. It is time Blair went and there was a commissioner installed who can clean up the service.

Kay Tie, York,

Members of Parliament and newspaper journalists and reporters et al are not above the law!

Weaver, Hong Kong,

Sounds to me it was Ahmad that was being bugged, not Kahn.

Is the suggestion now that no prisoner conversations can be recorded on the off-chance that a visitor happens to be a politician?

Tony Cox, Las Vegas, Nevada

Good work by the police. No one shoud be above the law.
Harold Wilson introduced his doctrine because he himself was being watched by the security services.
There must be other MPs who the police suspect and would like to bug.

P.Robinson, Northants, UK