That'll be a loooong 28 days for whoever's detained, but yes, that's MUCH better than 90.

Also, the fact that Blair got it in the face is good news...

I keep coming up with stupid puns about "28 Days Later" now. Dammit!
I do wonder whether this was all they were really hoping for anyway... the rest of it could have just been PR 'haggling'. Aim high and settle for double the old limit?
Maybe, but I think he would have actually liked the 90. And I'm not 100% certain he'll settle for 28. He probably will, but there's always the possibility that his overconfidence will get the better of him.
Did it actually ever look likely? It was unclear from this side of the pond, but it seemed like the defeat was a foregone conclusion in many circles, and the chief surprise was the margin of defeat.
Quite often in the lead up to a controversial vote there are people saying that they will vote against their party's wishes who when it comes to it actually either abstain or vote in line. This is politics, deceit and bluff are part of the game.

There is also a significant amount of pressure that can be applied to a party member to vote in line. Sometimes you see MPs who are initially very vocal about something suddenly shut up and toe the line, usually they have been intimidated by party seniors.

On this occasion I guess Blair over-estimated the level of bluff and the amount of MPs that could be intimidated into voting for.
I thought so. The whips can really lean on people when it matters to them. Tone's never lost a Commons vote (as PM) before today.
And the possibility of painting the Tories as soft on terrorism - especially if there is another attack - will be priceless at the next election. Not saying I agree with 90 days, just saying any stick to hit the Tories with is a good stick.
Well, if there's an attack by someone who was released after 28 days imprisonment at least. :-)
Mmmm. Yes, it is a lovely cake, isn't it? And look - I still have it, too. Fantastic!
I'm practically thrilled, which says a lot for how despairing i've become about this.
He's getting weaker. He'll have to pay more attention and make more concessions.
I notice your sister was one of those who rebelled. Good.

As opposed to my labour MP, who as usual did exactly what Tony told her to.
Well, yes. The party's better supplied with awkward buggers than many, but there never seem to be enough.
When will Tone and his toadies cross the aisle to where they belong? They are an embarassment to every Labour tradition, and Dear Leader would clearly be a better Tory PM than he has been "Labour"!
I'm extremely glad this thing has been heavily watered down, if not totaly killed. I've been getting increasingly irrtated with the blanket "the police want this, we cant argue with them" crap in the media (not to mention 100,000 Sun readers being in favour, which should bar any legislation from being passed on principle).

Of course the police are in favour, it's thier job to catch people and this will make it easier. It is not the police's job to protect civil liberties, that is the job of MP's and the courts. It's akin to arguing in favour of fox hunting on the grounds that the huntsmen are in favour, and well, they are the experts right?
Yes, that argument "the police want this, let's do it" irritated me very much as well. I am sure the police would be very happy (and underemployed) if we all sat at home with our arms crossed but that isn't a reason to do it.
And Mr Tony Blair's other arguments seemed to be "do it because I say so" or "if you don't do what I'll say you'll all be sorry (and I'll be glad) so there"

The Guardian leader was very gleeful about Tony's defeat, which is only to be expected after he tried so hard to pass a bad law using playground arguments.
Of course, back when we were a civilised country there was a fuss about it being raised to 72 hours... :-(