Details about the terrorist threat facing the UK will be made available from August, John Reid has said.

The home secretary confirmed the moves in a statement to MPs on the government's terrorism strategy, which is codenamed 'Contest'.

Reid also told MPs that the government would continue to give its strong backing to the police and the security forces despite continued criticism of the failed Forest Gate raid.

And he would continue to impose control orders on terrorism suspects despite the latest court ruling that the policy is unlawful.

Warnings

There will be five separate warning levels, which will not be colour-coded as in the US.

MPs and peers on the cross-party intelligence and security committee had called for a more transparent system in their report on the July 7 bombings.

They highlighted how the threat level had been reduced from 'severe general' to 'substantial' prior to the London attacks.

But the committee said that decision was "not unreasonable" on the basis of the intelligence available.

Reid said the new public system of warnings would include the categories of low, moderate, substantial, severe, and critical.

But he warned that this was "not an exact science".

"It requires human judgment. No-one can predict the future, we can only make reasoned judgments," he told MPs.

"The importance of the public remaining vigilant at all times and reporting any suspicious activities is still the key message."

Shadow home secretary David Davis backed moves to establish a public threat-level warning system.

"We have been calling for this for some years now, and the proposal was supported by the intelligence and security committee two months ago," he said.

Transparency

Davis cautioned, however, that the system would "only be as good as the intelligence that underpins it".

"This is not an argument against having a transparent system," he said.

"It is an argument for reinforcing our counter-terrorist intelligence operations."

He also pointed to a critical review of 'Contest' by the prime minister's delivery unit, saying there were "very serious problems" with it.

"Is it not the case that the necessary grip on the overall counter-terrorist effort will only be taken if there is a single, cabinet-rank minister who is dedicated solely to dealing with this threat?" he asked.

"And would we not be much more certain that our counter-terrorist strategy was both well-designed and properly implemented if we had the benefit of an independent inquiry into the failure of that strategy that permitted the terrible events of July last year?"