42

The House of Lords rejected the proposal to introduce a 42 day without trial clause for the Counter Terrorism bill.

However, Home Secretary Jaqui Smith has written it into a one-page bill which she will push through using the Parliament Act in case of a 'National Emergency'. What WOULD that emergency be I wonder?

She told Today she hoped the government could still "count on people's support" if such a measure had to be introduced.

She told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "My priority is we need to find a way through this, even if other political parties won't engage with it."

Ms Smith said: "The thing about opposition is you don't have to cover off those risks but government, quite rightly, does and that's why I brought forward the proposals I did."

However, former Labour attorney general Lord Goldsmith said the detentions of up to 42 days were "not only unnecessary but also dangerous".

(from BBC.co.uk)

Other parties suggest that the Home Secretaries words are merely trying to scrabble some respect from this defeat.

MPs passed the proposal by a majority of just nine votes in June, with 39 Labour backbenchers rebelling.

Plans to extend the pre-charge terror detention limit to 90 days were rejected by MPs in 2006.

(from bbc.co.uk)

I recall that majority of 9 was extremely shaky at the time, with all sorts of talk of backroom deals being made. Still it was rejected and rightly so.

In this case, not only do we not know the question to which 42 is the answer, 42 is not the answer to the question.