---

Counter-Terrorism Bill

In one way that is a fair question, but it is totally unfair in another way. Any survey is based on a question that can be formulated in all sorts of ways to favour one answer over another. I can tell my hon. Friend that I have not conducted a survey, but I am telling the House about the nature of the e-mails and letters that I have received. There has been only one exception to the trend, and I have reported that as well. We are talking about the reaction among constituents, and I had better clear up a misunderstanding caused by one of my earlier interventions. I have frequently referred to the reservoir of resentment that will likely be created by the adoption of the proposed measures. Indeed, that reservoir of resentment has been created already, as is shown by the increasing incidence of suspect plots that has been described already. My fear is that extending detention without trial even further will cause that reservoir of resentment to increase in size. The impact will be felt as a result of what we do tonight, not before. I turn now to some of the pressures that have been brought to bear on me in the past week. The suggestion has come from certain quarters that I have adopted the approach that I have set out because I want to take ““revenge”” for my ““treatment””—both words are precise quotations—since 1997. Anyone who thinks that must have a mind so small as to be barely visible with a microscope. It has also been suggested that I wish to bring down the Government. However, I have been deselected already, so for me to try to bring the Government down now would mean that I was trying to declare myself redundant two years ahead of time. The pressure that has been applied to me shows the desperation that the Government have been feeling, but I see that the Whips are smiling and so I assume that the pressure that they have exerted in other quarters has been effective. The Jesuits taught me that there could be no compromise with error. I think what we are considering tonight could become an error. I entered the House 25 years ago this week, and at that time I decided to reject the use of the word ““right””, because of its connotations with the phrase ““right wing””. I did not want to be referred to as right wing when I was correct, so I rejected that word in favour of the term ““proper””. I shall, however, have to break that resolution this evening, because we are talking about rights; we are talking about the right of the individual—of a man or a woman, old or young, black or white—to be innocent until proven guilty. When we make our decision tonight, we must let right be done.