Home Office minister Tony McNulty has said that he is sure the government can get its Counter-Terrorism Bill through the Commons.

In an interview with ePolitix.com, McNulty, who is in charge of the UK's anti-terrorist measures, insisted the legislation in the Commons for second reading next week would survive Labour rebellions.

And in a separate interview with this website, Labour backbencher Martin Salter conceded the government had moved "a long way."

Asked whether he was sure the bill would get through despite polls suggesting it would face problems, McNulty said: "Yes, because with the best will in the world, the surveys are asking very simplistic questions like: 'Do you fancy 42 days?'

"This is not that simple and it really is quite complex because we are not saying: 'Right we have thought of another number now instead of 90 and it is 42.' And I know the gags about the secrets of the universe in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy being 42.

"This legislation has been over a year in the planning - long before John Reid even said there would be this bill, we were talking about this and it is very reflective and informed, and this far and no further, in terms of a temporary reserve power."

"In the meetings and discussions I have had on this I have found that when you do set it out properly there is a greater responsiveness to it as opposed to simply saying 'let's go to 42 days permanently'," McNulty added.

He went on to attempt to reassure Labour backbenchers that the measures were a careful response with many safeguards designed to address a short-term threat.

"We have very deliberately crafted it so it is only ever temporary and then dies as a provision after it has been used.

"That needs to be seen in the context of saying 'yes' to the use, if practicable, of intercept evidence and saying 'yes' to post-charge questioning and 'yes' to making acts preparatory to terrorism and offence and 'yes' to a range of other things like the threshold test.

"Putting all that to one side, do we still think there might be the remotest possibility given all the evidence and experience we have of a need to go beyond 28 days in specific circumstances? And the answer is 'yes'.

"I think it is much safer for the country if we legislate for that reserve power now rather than in the middle of an incident or a series of incidents," he said.

Salter's view

Labour MP and member of the home affairs committee Salter indicated that previous rebels were coming round.

Whilst he said he and colleagues were pushing for further concessions, he suggested the government had done nearly enough to avert a major rebellion.

Salter, who had raised concerns about the proposal, said: "This is not a blanket extension of pre-charge detention powers to 42 days.

"We have moved an awful long way from the original proposals by previous home secretaries and I welcome the more consensual approach by both Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith."

He said he was reassured by the new "five specific safeguards built into the process" and the fact it would be up to Parliament to decide on whether the home secretary can use the powers.

However Salter said that the government could go even further. "I do think there are amendments to the legislation," he said.

"I do want Parliament to have its say much earlier in the process, much earlier than the 30 days that are currently proposed, I see no reason why we can't have a sensible debate on whether we are facing such a serious security threat that the powers are needed in the short-term."