LONDON, England - After spending precious political capital for months propping up its so-called '42-day detention' law, the British government watched its counter-terrorism legislation die a momentous death in the House of Lords (the upper house of the UK parliament) on Monday night.

UK interior minister Jacqui Smith has pushed for the detention limit to be extended to 42 days.

The Labour government of Prime Minister Gordon Brown proposed to extend the time police can hold terror suspects without charge from 28 days to 42.

The government pressed the issue for months, saying it was a necessary safeguard to ensure national security. In June the government narrowly passed the provision  - but the House of Lords proved a tougher audience.

Britain's interior minister Jacqui Smith said she was disappointed by the vote from the Lords.

"I deeply regret that some have been prepared to ignore the terrorist threat, for fear of taking a tough but necessary decision," said Smith.

"Let no one kid themselves that this issue can be made to go away. These are hard questions, tough questions, but however much honorable members opposite may wish to duck them, Britain still needs to be protected. Britain still needs to be prepared to deal with the worst."

Smith's Minister of State for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing, Tony McNulty is a pugnacious advocate at the best of times. Sensing defeat last week, he made a controversial point that however contentious, is not new.

McNulty repeated that when his former boss, Prime Minister Tony Blair announced after the July 7 terrorist attack in 2005 that "the rules of the game have changed," Blair was wrong.

McNulty's point? Britain cannot afford to compromise its founding principles, no matter the threat to national security.

McNulty's assertions were made during a speech when he then went on to defend the use of so-called 'control orders,' when suspects deemed to be dangerous, but not serving time on probation or in prison, are put under police-imposed curfews and travel restrictions.

He defended the government, saying such a suspension of civil rights was not taken lightly and imposed in only the most urgent of circumstances.

That's exactly how the Labour government tried to defend its 42-day extension law. But even MPs in its own party refused to buy the government line.

The proposed law has been called unnecessary at best and draconian at worst. Even two former heads of MI5, the domestic intelligence service, could not be convinced of its necessity.

Many civil rights organizations and Muslim groups have long condemned the law. There was relief from many as the proposed legislation was defeated.

Mohammed Shafiq, Chief Executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said: "The House of Lords have done the country proud, for too long our hard fought freedoms and civil liberties have been taken away by an authoritarian government that seeks to reduce the rights of individuals."

What Shafiq went on to say though was that the government not only lost the vote, but also the argument.

Is that true?

Maybe. The government has not committed to reintroducing the legislation and as far as Jacqui Smith is concerned the legislation remains on the shelf, ready to be pressed into action if and when the country should need it.