---

Business of the House

I welcome the debate on police restructuring, but can we have an urgent debate on the Metropolitan police’s use of section 132 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005? It was sold to us on the basis that it was intended to prevent terrorist acts against the House, but it has now been used to convict a young lady, Maya Evans, for reading out by the cenotaph a list of British soldiers killed in action in Iraq. May we have an urgent debate on the landmark judgment by the House of Lords today that evidence obtained from torture anywhere in the world is not admissible in legal proceedings of any sort in this country? I note that the noble Lord Brown of Eaton-Under-Heywood said:"““Torture is an unqualified evil. It can never be justified. Rather it must always be punished. So much is not in doubt.””" I hope that the House agrees with those sentiments. That leads me to ask for an urgent debate on what is euphemistically called ““extraordinary rendition””. The Prime Minister, in an extraordinary response to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber (Mr. Kennedy), said:"““In respect of airports, I do not know what the right hon. Gentleman is referring to.””—[Official Report, 7 December 2005; Vol. 440, c. 863.]" I do not know whether he was surprised or being disingenuous, but the facts have been widely published and come from authoritative sources. May we have a debate in which we can ask how long we have acquiesced in the United States’ policy, for what reason there have been so many of these flights and why the Foreign Secretary has been busy writing to the US Administration asking what all this is about, given that it is clear that the Prime Minister has known all along?