Labour Condemn Lib Dem Crime Policy

Date published: 11/03/2005

Labour MP's have spoken about their "astonishment" recentley, after hearing the Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesperson on Radio Five talking about how the Labour Government are too harsh towards criminals and terrorists. In the wake of discussions on measures to reduce the risk of terrorism going through Parliament this week, David Rendell Lib Dem MP suggested that he thought current measures were enough to provide safety against terrorists, and represented an acceptable risk to the public. He said, ‘I personally believe and my party believe that it is worthwhile to have a marginal increase in the risk and there may be terror attacks in this country. The margins in each case are extremely small and I don’t think it’s likely.’

Lorna Fitzsimons MP, Jim Dobbin MP and Phil Woolas MP condemn the Lib Dem position as totally unacceptable. Lorna suggested that they are asking the public to pay too high a price, in terms of the risk to individuals and communities across Britain. All three local MP’s supported the Government on the new measures to safeguard the public against the very real threat of terrorism in the UK. Jim Dobbin commented:

‘What was said on BBC Radio yesterday by the Lib Dems is outrageous. I think that there is no risk worth taking when it comes to the lives and safety of the public. I am shocked that the Lib Dems think it is acceptable to increase the risk to the public of a terror attack to safe guard some people’s civil liberties. He also said that he didn’t think the loss of life would be huge from a terror attack – any loss of life is too much from any attack.’

Lorna Fitzsimons MP said:
‘This is just another example of the Lib Dems being soft on crime. This is yet another key issue on which they would rather not act to safeguard ordinary lives in Britain. In 2003 they voted against dispersal orders in the Anti-Social Behaviour Act, they have opposed fixed penalty notices for drunks, they want to end all jail sentences for those caught in possession of drugs and they want to make it unlawful to bring any teenager to a criminal court.’

Phil Woolas MP also said:
‘I am also hearing criticism of the Government’s actions on terrorism as being anti-Muslim. This is nonsense. Muslims died in the Twin Towers, in Bali, Madrid and Riyadh. Our response to the recent threats of terrorism has been measured and responsible. We are safeguarding all the people of Britain, whatever their creed, colour or race. We are the only party with credible plans for the new times in which we live.’

Cllr. Paul Rowen has responded on behalf of the Liberal Democrats:  "It's deeply disappointing that any politician might use this crucial and controversial issue to score party political points. The Liberal Democrat proposals on the Prevention of Terrorism Bill would safeguard vital liberties and provide as strong a basis to protect our security as the government’s proposals."

"As for the comments made by my colleague - David Rendell MP, I think you will find that the points he made are shared by Charles Clarke, the Labour Home Secretary. Labour claim that David Rendell said this Government are too harsh towards criminals and terrorists.  This is an outright lie, by a local set of desperate Labour MP's. David was clearly pointing out was that it is important for all responsible politicians to get the balance between liberty and security right. This is always a difficult balance to strike – as politicians as Charles Clarke have agreed.  I think that our local MP's should actually look at what Charles Clarke is saying before desperately trying to discredit the Lib Dems. Let me make one thing clear it is because of the illegal war in Iraq that our MP's led us into that the threat of terrorism is much higher."