Leading article: The Coalition's new tune on security

Wednesday 04 April 2012 19:38 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

It could be concluded from developments over the past 48 hours that the Government was engaging in a major rethink on two pieces of security-related legislation it had seemed wedded to. The first is the long-mooted plan for trials and inquests to be held behind closed doors where there are national security implications. The second concerns proposals, revealed last weekend, to extend the surveillance of those using the internet and social media.

Both measures had, quite rightly, come in for ferocious criticism – from campaigners, from most of the media, and from not a few Coalition MPs – as imposing potentially serious curbs on civil liberties. The plan for "secret" trials was additionally condemned yesterday in a report by the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, which described such closed hearings as "inherently unfair". All this was doubly disappointing, given that the Coalition had come to office promising to repeal the repressive anti-terrorism measures passed by the previous government.

Now, though, the Government is singing a different tune. The Justice Secretary, Ken Clarke, seems to accept that the proposals for closed trials go too far, while the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, has said that extending surveillance of the internet will appear in the Queen's Speech only as a "draft". The impression is being given, if not of a comprehensive government U-turn, at least of a readiness to renew consultation.

If this is so, it would be extremely welcome – for while the threat presented by terrorism should not be underestimated, nor should the lobbying skills of the intelligence services. And both sets of proposals threatened to tip the necessary balance far too far away from civil liberties and towards security. Yet the actual words used by ministers yesterday fell short of a complete rethink, and the desire of Mr Clegg, in particular, to present his party as exerting a seriously liberalising influence on policy must also be borne in mind. A close watch needs to be kept on what comes next, including what features in the Queen's Speech. Only then will it be clear whether the Government has had a change of heart, or has merely changed its words.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in