News today is about Jacqui Smith being prepared to accept an amendment being tabled by a fellow Labour MP to move the time limit that parliament has to decide on a person being held for more than 28 days from 30 to 10. The aim, apparently, is to move the debate on from "arbitrary" numbers. The trouble is that you can't stop delays over arbitrary figures by including MORE arbitrary figures!

10 days would mean that at worst a person could be incarcerated for 38 days out of 42 before being told they can go home, and so while being much better than parliament holding a vote on a persons incarceration long after the damage is done at least it will be done while they're being illiberally held in a cell.

But it misses the point, the trouble is that the MP that tabled the amendment believes that the Home Secretary should be held to account by fellow MPs and not the judiciary. This is understandable and perhaps in the current system is the only way it can happen...but surely the point (as made by Shami Chakrabarti) is that MPs cannot have a true debate over the nature over a person being held and are not of the ability to mimic a judge.

The debate needs to get back on to much surer ground than Martin Salter would initially believe, the debate needs to be over why it is politicians with political futures on the line every time they make a decision that have this power rather than an independent and objective judiciary.