Harry’s Place

I am opposed to the 42 days because I can’t recall anyone bothering to lay out a convincing case along the straight-forward lines of: “We need this because firstly A, secondly B and thirdly, and most importantly, C.”

Well, you should resign from this blog and force a by election.

Is the idea that he wins a landslide against the Labour candidate?

But… that wouldn’t really prove anything though, would it? I mean, he already has a majority of 5,000, over the Lib Dems. Who won’t be standing.

What is going on?

Seems like a huge hissy fit to me

If that is it, what a sad man! What an utter waste of time that would be.

We must be missing something. Surely even a Tory couldn’t be this stupid?

maybe he thinks that the debate against 42 days wasn’t made sufficiently clearly by the people who opposed it in parliament - ie he wanted to go further against it than Cameron would allow him. All the whispers indicate that he was being told that his claim that the tories would repeal the law if they got into power were off-message.

the by-election means he can keep the issue in the spotlight and potentially embarrass both Cameron and Brown. the public might apparently back the 42 day thing but he may be staking his career on the idea that the debate against it wasn’t focused correctly.

seeing as it’s a safe Tory seat I’m still not sure of the overall point. Much better to have just resigned or possibly defected…

The only reason I can think of is that Cameron and co were briefing that Davis had fucked up the opposition to the vote and should’ve won it.
Davis throws toys out of pram.
It will be interesting to watch him try and persuade his Tory constituents who largely support 42 days to vote for him and against 42 days.

He’ll end up running against CCTV cameras.

This is curious. And it’s this propensity to implode just at the moment when things look to be turning their way that means the Tories are not the shoe-in party of government at the next election that so many appear to think.

Weirdest bit of news in a long time.

What on earth is he up to?

Doesn’t sound like he’s got Cameron’s backing.

Really stupid move I would say. Won’t be welcomed by the public at large I would think, however the vote may go on the day.

And they were doing so well - DD in particular was nicely skewering Labour over the AQ docs that went missing.

There MUST be more behind this.

Is his constituency boundary being redrawn or something?

Hmm. Mildly Machavellian of him- I presume he has his eyes again on the party leadership, and of reclaiming the party from the rather soppy and valueless middle-ground into which Cameron has led it. Although I do greatly prefer Davis to Cameron, I’m not sure the consequences of such a move would be greatly beneficial to the party, in electoral terms.

I’m also opposed to the 42-days thing. But I’m not sure there;s anything that I should resign from over it.

Sorry to go all anti-Brownie, but - assuming this is why he resigned - is this not parliamentary democracy?

I suppose potentially it could split the Tories, with a “Real Conservatives” of Davis, Spink, UKIP types - if they went in for splits, that is. But they are generally too sensible (and power-hungry) for that sort of thing

Either he’s throwing a massive tantrum - or he’s up to something.

If it is true the LDs won’t stand against him, that would suggest some advanced plotting in the Commons tea-room…

But they are generally too sensible (and power-hungry) for that sort of thing

Um. I thought so too. Until today.

I mean, what? He threatens to run as a LibDem unless Cameron commits to repealing 42 days

WHAT IS GOING OOOONNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!?????

What happens if Labour say that, since the LDs aren’t running they’ll also not run against him? Thus leaving him up against maybe the Loony Party alone to valiently get re-elected?

Still, watch the Tory press spin this into a tale of a noble, heroic knight of the realm doing battle against the evil Red dragon.

The arrogance of the man is quite stunning. Yes there is always a political element to everything but to pretend the police chief’s and Lord Carlile are just completely lying and it’s all political, and think that line is a credible line to get away with, is quite extraordinary.

How on earth does doing a self agrandising PR stunt help your case that you are the principled politician in the room?

Bizarre.

Given that Davis and the Lib Dem got over 80% of the vote at the last election how the hell is he going to claim a “victory”?
Especially on a likely lower turnout.

If the public seem to back the plan, all the more reason for Davis to campaign strongly. David T should know that defending liberty requires leadership too - and that’s more than following opinion polls; which, of course, are not the same as elections.

If this is about principle, and the Tories have caved in some way, Davis should be supported on this issue and the Lib Dems are right not to stand against him. If someone has the balls to really keep fighting on this issue, then all liberals, libertarians and democrats, of all flavours, should back this campaign.

Sorry to go all anti-Brownie, but - assuming this is why he resigned - is this not parliamentary democracy?

I don’t understand why you think this is “anti-Brownie”?

Moreoever, I don’t understand why you would describe this as “parliamentary democracy” at all, given those who voted for him at the 2005 election did so premuably thinking they weren’t going to be asked to do the same again half-way through the electoral cycle.

On the face of it, this looks like “throwing your toys out of the pram” if it is anything at all.

Totally separately, I’ve just been watching live footage of David Cameron being berated by a slightly deranged member of the public over the NHS.

What a terrible day he is having.

The trouble is, as with Labour, there is an authoritarian and a libertarian strand in Tory thinking. Neither party can really be entirely trusted on the issue of civil liberties.

Saw David Davis on the telly yesterday - on Sky news. He was spot-on and very measured. The 42 day limit is, on balance, at least to me, seemingly unnecessarily draconian. I for one, have the suspicion it was promulgated by the Labour party largely out of popularist considerations. The Police of course almost always are inclined to more powers…it’s in their ‘DNA’.

Gordon should have lost that one; seemingly a case of party loyalty - in this particular instance - amongst Labour MPs - trumping good sense relating to the matter under consideration.

We really need a little LESS party loyalty and more dealing with the matters of the day in good-faith on their merits.

I am opposed to the 42 days because I can’t recall anyone bothering to lay out a convincing case along the straight-forward lines of: “We need this because firstly A, secondly B and thirdly, and most importantly, C.”

Oh they don’t need to. They just need to point out that some of the weaker objections to it are a bit weak. Apparently.

WHAT IS GOING OOOONNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!?????

Phone him and ask.

To show such disrespect for parliament is very damning for him.

The vote doesn’t go your way to you take your ball away, as Dennis Mcshane said.

Okay, I’ll rephrase. The Westminster method in which individuals elected ultimately have the power to withdraw their vote/position (and be told to naff off should their constituents so choose).

Davis was put in a fulcrum position by having to attack 42-days on some principle of habeus corpus when the Tories simply decided to oppose it in order to try and force an election. So, Davis was defending something I don’t really think the Conservatives support. However, his dilemma was that he either didn’t actually support it for what he thought were the right reasons or that the leadership let him know it was a ploy they would overturn or modify the law when they get in.

So, Davis rails against 42 days and when the Tories get in he will somehow have to justifyt why they are modifying it without scrapping it.

My guess that tough right-winger Davis decided to bail out of that position. Then he can rightly have a go at the Govt erosion of civil liberties in micro-chipping bins.

Nolw, had he resigned as a protest at the Government kow-towing to Islamist opinion while abandoning the Church then I would have thought that to be genuinely opinionated and a great opportunity for his by-election victory to be a referendum.

Try adding it to your ticket David!

Hmm, I don’t see how strongly opposing a ban on foxhunting is supposed to be incompatible with supporting fundamental British freedoms.

Davis has generally been excellent on this issue but he’s being an idiot here.

The problems with trying to make the byelection a referendum on 42 days detention are

1. The public seems to side with the government on this issue so he’ll most likely lose and hand the government a huge progaganda victory.
2. Even if he wins he can’t prove that people were really voting on that particular issue or that his constituency is representative of the country as a whole.

Spanish Fry - my thoughts exactly. Labour should just refuse to play.

Wardy: Oh, I wasn’t in favour of banning fox hunting. Its just that there is a certain sort of Tory conception of fundamental freedoms: where fox hunting is right up there at the top, along with denying equal rights to gays.

Oh please let Clegg and Cameron come to their senses. What we need is an official Conservative candidate and an official LibDem and Davis will be out on his ear!

In any case surely someone in the local LibDems will put up, albeit unofficially, whatever Clegg says: impossible to imagine that bunch of bearded muesli eaters letting a Tory go unchallenged.

So, David Davis is resigning in protest at the 42-day detention-without-charge thingummy.

Good for him.

Hopefully all opponents of the measure - regardless of their political stripes - can put aside their other differences and unite to keep awareness of the issue alive and to do as much as possible to see the measure consigned to the dustbin of illiberal history.

I’m sure there’s an element of vanity in all this (what politician isn’t vain?) but seeing as I oppose the measure I applaud his actions.

Actually, come to think of it, other than foxhunting what is there?

Davis came across slightly unhinged in his resignation statement to my mind. I still don’t properly understand or see his motives, or can fathom what has happened behind-the-scenes.

What would it prove if he was re-elected, even with an increased majority? It was already a Tory seat, and now the Lib Dems aren’t standing against him. What difference would it make to the passage of the bill through parliament if he’s elected as a single-issue candidate?

I find the whole thing baffling.

Either way, Broon must be rubbing his hands with glee. With the razor-thin (DUP-sized) margin with which the government won last night’s vote, I thought Labour were in for a few rough days. Now it looks like the Conservatives could well be suffering the worse of the fall-out.

Doubt anyone saw this coming. Nick Robinson looked gobsmacked.

David T

Simply attacking David Davis’s positions on abortion and gay rights does not really address issue. Irrespective of his positions on gay rights etc (and foxhunting … oh please, you are trotting out a cliched Labour argument that even you don’t believe in), there is a real debate about privacy, detention and all the issues he mentions. Fighting a byelection about it may be unusual, but it is legitimate. You might want to engage in that debate yourself rather than coming out with stock partisan arguments.

What a nutter ! Just goes to show how the paranoid opponents of the 42 days have been driven mad by this issue.

One thing here tho is that I reckon Cameron would never have rescinded 42 days or put it in the manifesto. Davis was on the radio yesterday having to be mealy mouthed on this. He obviously couldn’t handle that.

But what a stupid stunt even so.

Rather amazed that anyone here thinks it’d possibly be a good idea to get a backroom fix-up in allowing davis to stand unopposed by any serious party rather than letting the voters have a proper choice on the ballot.

This 42 day detention is just the beginning of an Orwellian nightmare.

The same surveillance techniques used for counter-terrorism are now used by local Council and petty bureaucrats to spy on law abiding citizens. The 42 day detention will be used by these same inept jobsworths to lock up people evading Council tax, TV licence, dropping apple cores on pavements, or overfilling a wheelie bin.

We should support David Davis on this issue.

Foxhunting is not about fundamental rights and freedoms anyway. You take a position either side of that debate, and still have legitimate concerns about civil liberties. It’s quite immaterial to this debate.

Pssst, Benji/Nick, there was a little debate about this last night in that thing called the House of commons.

You and your Tory pals lost.

David Davis has turned that loss into a crisis for the Tories.

Good for him.

I think foxhunting is about fundamental freedoms. I oppose it.

I just don’t think its such a big deal.

Jon D, there will be a vote at the general election. This is a stunt. That’s why the Lib dems aren’t standing. No point in Labour falling for it.

“The state has security powers to clamp down on peaceful protests and so-called hate laws which stifle debate, while those who serve violence get off scot-free.”

What are the hate laws that stifle debate?

If you want to club together for my deposit, I’ll contest his seat as a single issue 42-day supporter. I’ve even got a pale beige linen suit in the wardrobe.

hahaha. Why not!

Anyway, looking at this from a Labour point of view (I was, back in the mists of time, a loyal Labour supporter) this is just another fine mess they have got themselves into. They decided to make a big thing of this detention thing, and the PM decided to stake his reputation on it. That malarkey was entirely unnecessary, and they have just made a rod for their own back.

The public may or may not support the measure, but its certainly not a bread and butter issue; in times of economic woe, skyrocketing utility bills etc, its not such a clever move campaigning on these issues.

Go for it Brownie !

What are Nick Cohen’s views on this I wonder ?

Is there a Euston Manifesto line ?

It’s hardly fair either. Davis knows that Labour have always been a distant third in his seat at the best of times.

Imagine if every MP in a safe seat did a deal in this way to hold a byelection against the third party in their constituency? It would make parliamentary democracy a complete farse.

This should outrage democratically minded people.

It seems David Davis actually believes in something. Remember when you once did, without the cynicism, without the calculations, the fear of not being an insider who could get the sophisticated jokes? I bet that was many many years ago for many of the people who have written above. The people here who are saying ‘what’s going on?’ and that they don’t get why he has done it, just confirm why politics is in the shit state it is in and our current government is so mediocre.

Apparently UKIP and the Labour Party are both briefing that they will not stand.

Put up Brownie and get Hizb ut Tahrir to campaign for Davis against 42 Days.
Shoo in.

He certainly believes in wanting to be the leader of the Conservative party.

He will be anoying thorn for Cameron to deal with when he returns to the backbenchers.

How is Davis going to resign? I thought MPs had to apply, if they wanted to resign mid-term, for sinecure offices which debarred them from standing again. In addition, applications for the chiltern hundreds and things like that have to be approved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Do any of this blog’s legal minds know if Davis actually can resign in the way he intends to, and stand again?

David Davis has turned that loss into a crisis for the Tories.

Crisis for McBean, you mean. Davis comes across as principled. Unlike that grubby incompetant cunt Broon.

David T should have said to Brownie that he is praising his courageous personal decision.

Not anymore he doesn’t, Morgoth. Egomania has known nothing like this before.

Davis Davis’ campaign for leadership was a nastly affair. It turned a lot of Tories off him.

Basically, he was sure he was going to win. His pitch was basically “You better declare your support for me, because I’m going to win, and if you don’t, it won’t be forgotten when I’m Party Leader and then PM”

So a lot of MPs ‘declared’ for him

Then, later, a lot of MP’s switched to Cameron.

Davis was NOT liked at all among MPs. He is also obviously a bit of a dullard, which doesn’t appeal to a party which wanted a sparky Blair-like figure to lead them to victory.

Well, Davis has just gone UP in my estimation. And what Morgoth said.

(maybe he will be selected as leader of the British People’s Alliance?)

(Dave Davis, not Morgoth: incidently, there’s a train named after the former - or, more likely, a namesake of his - on the line I commute into town on)

It seems David Davis actually believes in something

Are you talking about his opposition to gay rights, or something else?

Anyway, this 42 day detention debate in the Commons was just to cover up the House of Lords debating the EU (Amendment) Bill whether to have a Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldhansrd/text/80611-0002.htm#080611100000006

Did anyone else notice that yesterday?

I think foxhunting is about fundamental freedoms. I oppose it.

Strange. You think hunting a fox is a fundamental freedom. Yeah, damnit, things are getting tough since the fundamental freedoms to bear bait, fight dogs, and hunt with bows were curtailed!

I don’t support foxhunting because I think its unnecessary and goes against modern notions of animal welfare. However, I respect the other side side who say it is necessary and make a limited case for its retention. Of course it has some sort of cultural meaning to some people. But I rather regard those who posit that foxhunting is about fundamental freedoms as on the extreme end of the scale.

Its a pity UKIP aren’t standing, they are in favour of 42 days and might even have won (or a least embarassed Davis).

Cameron must be desparately hoping they don’t stand.

I tell you what should also outrage democratically minded people Mike, how the 42 days detention thing got passed thanks to backroom horse trading and Gordon Brown reaching into his pork barrel.

Davis has taken a principled stand on this issue and those of us who believe in civil liberties, personal privacy and the freedom not to be locked up without trial should support him. It’s an opportunity for the whole gamut from 42 days to CCTV to be debated in public. That would appear to me, to be democracy in action.

Meanwhile, on a semi-related note, Compass have started eating their own over 42 days…

http://www.compassonline.org.uk/article.asp?n=2155

I look forward to many many fine op-eds in the coming days as the noble minds of the media try to explain just what the hell it all means.

Venichka, you’ve made a number of stupid statements in the last 24 hours.

Well, Davis has just gone UP in my estimation

For playing fast-and-loose with the demcoratic process? What if all 306 MPs who opposed 42-days took the same line?

If we were to genuinely have a round of single-issue, referendum style by-elections centred on 42 days, Labour would finish with a majority of about 300.

I mean, I’m game if you are?

Oh, and there are precedents here. A load of Ulster Unionists did it in the 80s in protest at the anglo-irish agreement and one of them hilariously lost his seat to the SDLP in the ensuing byelection.

(Dave Davis, not Morgoth: incidently, there’s a train named after the former - or, more likely, a namesake of his - on the line I commute into town on)

You commute in on the Sauron line?

That explains a lot…

Oh, I’m pretty sure David Davis did a spell in the Artists Rifles (21 SAS).

Is it possiible that Davis really does care this much about the 42 days issue?

It is a very strange story…

Phil, actually Brown was pretty good on saying there were no deals today, despite repeated questioning in every form of words possible, and the DUP seem to back him up, so it seems clear there was no hard deal. As has been discussed, many opposed it for political reasons themselves. Look at Davis!

A win is a win is a win is a win. Parliament has spoken.

For playing fast-and-loose with the demcoratic process?

I love the way Brownie is currently describing anything he disagrees with as “playing fast-and-loose with the democratic process”.

Actually I don’t. Its annoying as fuck.

If McBean doesn’t stand a candidate against David, it will be seen as yet another example of his cowardice. First, he was too scared of having a general election. Now he’s too scared of a parlimentary by-election.

If McBean does stand a candidate and when that hapless sod gets thumped, there’s more pressure on McBean, ala Nantwich.

The net effect of this is to rachet up to even higher levels, in the public eye, the (accurate) image of McBean as an unprincipled grubby little squatter undeserving of his current position and location.

Breaking news - lots of grinning Labour MPs spotted around Westminister.

This is London… London calling… Listen, we’ve decided it’d be expedient if we didn’t put up a candidate in the byelection.
Yeah we’re sure your voters and activists will understand and come flocking back when we tell you we’re ready to let them. caio.

Can somebody turn Mike off on the way out?

Breaking news - lots of grinning Labour MPs spotted around Westminister.

This is the same Mike who has a track record of making genuflecting-Labour-bullshit up?

Actually I don’t. Its annoying as fuck.

I’m, reassured to know my efforts are not in vain.

If McBean doesn’t stand a candidate against David, it will be seen as yet another example of his cowardice. First, he was too scared of having a general election. Now he’s too scared of a parlimentary by-election.

Imagine that, eh? The government not calling an election when the opposition wants it to, and then refusing to contest a seat in a totally contrived election in a safe Tory constituency?

Still, you may not any valid points, but we’ll never get tired of that “McBean” thing.

You McTwat.

For playing fast-and-loose with the demcoratic process

Parliament has spoken, he is not challenging that vote. The debate of course continues, and the byelection is one means of continuing the debate.

What if all 306 MPs who opposed 42-days took the same line?

Well they are not going to, and even if they did it would not usurp the vote of parliament.

Davis’s actions may be unusual, but they are legitimate.

Actually, on more reflection, as well as being principled, this is a brilliant tactical move. The Conservatives (for whom I, by and large, have currently little affection for, because they are still too authoritarian and reactionary for my liking) come out of this as principled, and Brown comes out of this as a cowardly gurning gobshite on his way out.

And by the way, I totally oppose the 42-day detention scheme because, as just about everyone expert in the field has said, it is not needed and it is dangerously authoritarian.