Hats off to David Davis
Thursday, June 12, 2008 Shadow Home Secretary David Davis has today resigned not only his shadow cabinet post but also as a member of Parliament in order fight a by-election in his own constituency.
He'll win, of course (so there's no great risk involved), but what a fantastic stunt and what an embarrassment it will be for Gordon Brown and the Labour party. Absolutely priceless! DeHavilland, the political information service, reports that:
Speaking on the steps of the House of Commons a few moments ago Mr Davis explained that he wished fight the ensuing by-election as a referendum against the 'slow strangulation of British freedoms'.
The shadow Home Secretary argued that the Commons, in accepting controversial proposals for 42-day detention, had failed the UK. The Government could use the Parliament Act to force the Bill through the Lords, Mr Davis warned, although he maintained that the legal basis for this was uncertain as the measure had not appeared in Labour's 2005 manifesto.
The Government had presided over the 'insidious, surreptitious and relentless erosion of our freedoms', Mr Davis claimed, highlighting the development of ID cards, a DNA database, and an assault on jury trials.
Britain was becoming a 'database state', the shadow Home Secretary asserted, criticising powers to clamp down on peaceful protest and 'hate laws' which silenced honest debate.
Although the smoking ban and threats of further tobacco controls will not be at the forefront of Davis's (re-election) campaign (it may not even get a mention), I urge everyone reading this blog to write to him about the impact of the smoking ban on you, personally.
David Davis is one of politics' good guys. I interviewed him a few years back and he impressed me enormously. In my view, he is one of the few politicians in Britain who actually listens. He's not as slick as David Cameron but with David Davis you know exactly what he stands for - decency, honesty, integrity (I say that with my fingers well and truly crossed!) - and what he believes in.
Politics just got really, really interesting again.
Simon Clark
Listening to news reports, it seems there is a 50:50 chance that Labour will decide not to contest the Haltemprice and Howden by-election. Tactically, one can understand it. Why give Davis (and the Conservatives, assuming Cameron throws his weight behind his former leadership rival) the oxygen of publicity? On the other hand, if Labour really believe the 42-day terror detention limit is justified, surely they should have the guts to defend the policy and ask the electorate to support it. Not for the first time, Brown has the opportunity to demonstrate that he has a spine. Will he take it or will fear of a humiliating defeat prove decisive? More important, if the main political parties decide to fight only those seats they think they can win, we may as well tear up our first past the post system and introduce proportional representation now. Is that what Labour want?
Simon Clark
I have just watched Nick Robinson, the BBC's political editor, on the Six O'Clock News. The way I heard it, he seemed to be suggesting that a by-election on this issue is the last thing David Cameron would have wanted. Davis, Robinson seemed to suggest, must be "bonkers". It will be interesting if the BBC continues to spin the story this way on the Ten O'Clock News and Newsnight. They just don't get it, do they? Civil liberties deserve to be properly debated in this country. For years the mainstream political parties have paid lip service to the issue, which is why so many of us feel disenfranchised from the political system. (And no, UKIP is not the answer to our problems, so PLEASE don't come on this blog and suggest that it is.)
Reader Comments (32)
David Davis will no doubt win the by-election, but if he is taken back on board with the Tories and they win the next General Election, will he continue to stick to his principles?.
Which address do we use to write to him - still at the House of Commons, London SW1A OAA?
I have been away in the wilderness (Spain actually) for too long. I did creep quietly back here from time to time to see what was going on, but to be honest, I didn't see very much to interest me enough to make me want to take part again.
But when I saw this article, I just had to get back in. As you say Simon, David is basically a very good, and honest man, but I am afraid all your article will do is provoke yet more attacks on the Tory Party.
Unless Mr Davies swore on his dead mother's life, or the equivalent, that he would carve a new set of Holy Scriptures, the most important one being that he would perform a miracle and overturn the smoking ban, as well as resurrecting an ashtray full of fag-butts and passing them round to the 10,000, then he might as well give up and go home now, as far as many people on here are concerned.
We'll have the usual old rhetoric, "I wrote to him and am still waiting for an answer", "they are all the same these Tory slimebags", "he's a wimp who don't care about us", etc etc etc.
He could be the man who helps to set us free from Europe, or sorts out the NHS, or the Education system, but if he doesn't answer straight away and promise to do something about the smoking ban, they will castigate him.
Well, I have had my say, now I suppose it's my turn to be castigated...again.
Actually, Peter, you ask for it (to be castigated by people such as me). I wanted to write to Mr Davis to applaud his decision. He is a man who is prepared to stand up for his principles. I never voted for New Labour, but I admired Robin Cook for resigning over the Iraq War decision. It's a great pity we can't encourage a lot more MPs to resign. Then we may get a general election. One down - a few hundred to go! If you think people like me only have views re: the smoking ban, you are quite wrong. I was disgusted, last week, when only 16 MPs turned up to the debate about knife crime. Mr Davis, generally, is a politician whom I admire. Probably because, like William Hague, he is a Yorkshireman. I voted for him to be the leader of the Conservative Party back in 2005. My advice to Peter Thurgood is not to judge a sausage by its skin - particularly Yorkshire ones.
PS - having given further thought to what I have posted above, I realise that John Prescott is a Yorkshireman. However, as any language scholar knows (and Mr Thurgood is my intellectual and linguistic superior!), there are exceptions to every rule.:)
However, one aspect of this story which puzzles me is that Mr Davis is re-standing. Won't that cost the taxpayers rather a lot of money? (to pay for a by-election)
A politician with integrity - a very rare beast indeed these days. Well done David Davis.
Well, it seems I was wrong: there IS (was ?)someone in the Conservative Party with the balls to stand up for our fast-diminishing liberties.
But now just watch the media toadies of the New Political Class tumbling over each other in an attempt to portray David Davis as a weird, egomaniacal crusader who 'thinks he knows best'
about how to defend our interests.
Channel 4's Jon Snow - with that wearying faux-liberal cynicism of his (which many seem to find so endearing) - started the ball rolling tonight, when he suggested that it was somehow inconsistent for Davis to make a stand on a 'civil liberties' issue whilst having supported hanging: sorry, Jon - don't QUITE see the point you're trying to make.
But then, there's so much about our 'modern' world I simply don't understand.............such as why more people should be scared of 'terrorism' than of the statistically much more likely threat of contracting Something Nasty in one of our NHS hospitals.
Simon, WRT to your last update and its comment about your view that "UKIP is not the answer...", I appreciate that this is not a political site and is not the forum for promotion of a particular political party. The smoking ban is, however, a political issue, and is, of course, part of a broader perspective. Furthermore, in making the above comment you are allowing yourself the right to make a judgmental comment on a political party whilst denying readers the chance to respond (the contributors to this site are extremely well-mannered so I doubt that that you would have to exercise your rights/power as owner/moderator of the site).
I'm stating the obvious when I say that the smoking ban is but one example of the authoritarianism of this Government (and, indeed, of the other major parties).
I would hate to believe that you abhor authoritarianism yet pay only lip service to the free expression of opinions that are germane.
In point of fact, I would be interested to know why you hold the view that you expressed in relation to UKIP. Smokers are desperate to find a party that offers hope that they are not to continue to be society's 'whipping boys'. You are in a position, as Director of the UK's foremost political smokers' lobby, to give guidance on this. Making a bald, negative statement about what appears to be our best bet is not, however, going to crack it
Indeed, well said, Joyce. UKIP are the only party to date that are unequivocal about tackling smoking bans.
I am pleased David Davis is taking the stance he is but I wish his "leader" would be equally vocal.
In fact, if Davis pulls this off, hen he is better fit to lead the opposition than "Dave".
David Davis voted for an exemption to the smoking ban in private clubs. I will be getting my Basildon Bond writing paper out for him.
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2006-02-14&number=163&mpn=David_Davis&mpc=Haltemprice+%26amp%3B+Howden
Joyce -
Well said - as ever.
But, as much as I dislike the recent obsession with 're-branding', I think it might be a good idea for UKIP to consider dropping the 'UK' part of its title, and re-launch itself as 'The Independence Party'.
And I speak as a fiercely patriotic Euro-sceptic, but the party does tend to be saddled somewhat with a 'single-issue' image (albeit a VERY important 'single issue').
With its natural connotations of Freedom, Autonomy, Liberty etc, the word 'Independence' might just serve to broaden its voter-appeal............and at least the electorate would know where IT stood on 'Europe'.
A few cross-party defections wouldn't come amiss, either !
Just a thought.................
“It will be interesting if the BBC continues to spin the story this way on the Ten O'Clock News and Newsnight. They just don't get it, do they? Civil liberties deserve to be properly debated in this country.”
Interestingly - and disappointingly, I imagine, for naive Tories - the Daily Telegraph is also obediently following the line given them by the Conservative Party, exactly as the BBC is: Tory head office’s official unofficial line is “Davis has had a breakdown.”
Do any of you “real Tory” supporters still think the Telegraph is on your side? It’s sold its soul - and its bum - to Diddy David Cameron.
Speaking as a lifelong socialist, I don’t think Davis is suffering from a mental condition; I think he is a genuine, wholehearted civil libertarian, and possibly the only interesting person on any of the three front benches at the moment. (I would love to ask him one question, though: when Maggie Thatcher ordered the police to illegally detain people travelling to pro-miners demonstrations and pickets, whose side was he on then? The Party’s, or the British constitution’s? Easy to be principled in opposition, after all. Maybe I’ll write and ask him ...)
I wish the House was full of people like Davis on all sides: red hot socialists, freethinking liberals, committed social democrats, passionate Tories.
I wonder if Davis will now form a new Freedom Party, having clearly burned his bridges with the present Tories (and derailed them from their straight track to government, into the bargain.) He could have Galloway as deputy leader ...
Oh my God, here we go again, exactly as I predicted in my first post at top of the page.
Sort of back handed compliments about Davis, coupled with out and out slagging off the Conservatives.
No one seems to have stopped and thought to themselves that it took a "Conservative", yes, the dreaded word on here, to speak up for what he believes in. Where are your other hero's voices?
Apparently the Irish Justice Minister has just announced on television that he expects the Nos to have won by a substantial majority.
For me, this has been the best couple of days in politics for years.
Thank you David Davis and thank you Ireland!
I do find your posts astonishing, Peter. Frequently I am nervous to post for fear of putting my head above the parapet, precisely because the debate on this site is so dominated by right wing Tory views. I do wonder sometimes if we're reading the same forum ...
Thank you Mat for pointing out that Mr Davis' uninterrupted civil liberties from the signing of the Magna Carta to May 1997 included Mrs Thatcher ordering the police to stop innocent people travelling about the country during the miners' strike in case they were flying pickets. And I seem to recall indefinite internment was introduced by Conservatives/Unionists and abolished by Labour ...
There was nothing backhanded about my compliment to Davis - sorry if it came over that way. I think he is an excellent politician, and we need more like him. I wouldn’t vote for him to save my life, because he and I disagree on fundamental matters ... but unlike some, I don't find that a barrier to having respect for someone.
As for “other voices” - the opposition to the 42 days has been led by Labour rebels, not Tories from the Cameron faction, who support detention without trial but pretend to oppose it (quite reasonably) to destabilise the government. That, clearly, is what the final and terminal falling out between Davis and Cameron has been about - Cameron's refusal to say that the Tory government will reverse 42 Days. Because Davis sincerely believes in what he says, he couldn't stomach it any more.
Meanwhile, Politically Correct bullying by people like Peter, above - “No-one’s allowed an opinion unless it’s approved in advance by me” - takes us round in pointless circles.
Bullying? Please read what I said again and tell me where the bullying comes in?
And as for politically correct, on these boards it is anything but politically correct to support the Conservatives.
You state "Tories from the Cameron faction, who support detention without trial but pretend to oppose it" I am sorry Mr Coward, but that is pure rubbish.
Yes, Joyce, good old Friday 13th! It is usually a lucky one for me.and this one is
un-believe-able!
Two little miracles.
Thank you David Davis for your most unexpected and welcome stand. Very good luck to you.
Thank you Irish people. Thank you UKIP MEPs & the Ind-Dem MEPs for writing to every single household in Ireland. Thank you to those organising the petition "Irish Friends vote NO for me." This was signed by people from 26 EU Member States and the final total today stood at 21823. Many letters accompanied the signatures and show the true depth of feeling in Europe against complete EU dictatorship.
I will never forgive our present ruling parties, and their supporters, for voting the Lisbon Treaty through. They gave away our right for us to govern ourselves. They did not consider us important enough to ask whether we wanted this. All oppression continues and grows in accordance with EU plan. .
So well done, David Davis - a step in the right direction.
And very well done, glorious, unpredictable Irish people. Together we CAN forge a new Europe. There will be rejoicing throughout Europe today.
Over to you, Ann, well done!
Unless Andrew Marr, as a good interviewer, was playing devil's advocate then the spin continues that David Davis is bonkers. Interviewing Mr Davis this morning, Andrew Marr seemed to me to be utterly bemused in the face of Mr Davis' insistence that the issue transcends party politics and even his own career.
What a terrible indictment of the state we're at when the 'Westminster Village' cannot understand, let alone applaud, conviction above self-interest.
I think to be fair the problem, Joyce, is not that the politically-minded can't understand conviction above self-interest; but that many people, particularly it seems those who know Davis well and even call him their friend, suspect his move is motivated more by the latter (and/or pique, vanity and attention seeking) than the former.
I take your point, Rose, although I can't understand how his interests are positively served by his action (perhaps he has a long game-plan in mind?) and it's naive. I suppose, to imagine that any politician would be willing to jeopardise his career on the altar of conviction
I'm just glad that, whatever his motivation, he is using the issue of civil liberties to make a stand.
I know this is a pro-smoking site, and believe me, I am pro-smoking, but from what I have read on here it seems more like the left wing branch of the Marxist party.
There seems to be a few people puting up with Davis beacuse they think he has got one over on Cameron.
I came on here because I thought I might meet like minded people, and together we might be able to do something about the smoking ban. Seems I was wrong.
I'm afraid, Nigel, that I'm politically unsophisticated and wouldn't know a left-wing Marxist from a red herring.
It seems to me, though, that there is much disagreement among us on the way forward precisely because we don't share any particular political ideology.
It's a shame that you leave so soon because we are all committed to one cause: that of choice on the smoking issue.
(By the way, I wouldn't describe myself as pro-smoking and neither, I believe, is this site).
Could you elucidate your meaning, Nigel? Do you mean, you came onto the site expecting to meet other right-leaning people and haven't been able to find them???
If so, does that mean Conservative and UKIP supporters (who I believe it's fair to say write a large majority of posts) aren't right-leaning enough for you?
Or did you mean something else entirely?
As Joyce quite rightly points out, the one thing that unites 99% of the posts is opposition to the smoking ban, and I think it's helpful if we can keep that in the forefront of our minds.
No, Rose Whiteley, I did not come onto this site expecting to find other right leaning people. I came onto this site expecting to find sensible people who want to do something about the smoking ban in this country.
Instead, I found a bunch of mostly sensible people, who unfortunately, seem to be dominated by a small group of left wing fanatics, who just want to argue and put down any view that opposes their left wing doctrine.
This will not help to overturn the smoking ban, it will do just the opposite, it will cause fractures within this group, if it hasn't already.
I am not of the far right, as you seem to believe, I am a middle of the road Tory who believes in freedom of choice. I am also a believer in free debate, but I do not agree with a lot of the bullying and name calling that I have seen on here, that, is what I call the politics of the Left.
David Davis voted for an exemption to the smoking ban in private clubs. I will be getting my Basildon Bond writing paper out for him. - Dave Atherton
No he didn't. He was absent from the vote on that amendment - division 164. The vote you cite was the earlier division 163, where he voted with most Labour and Lib Dem MPs.
I totally agree with you Nigel. I have been pointing this type of thing out on here for some time, but the general consensus here seems to point towards anyone or any party (except Conservatives) who would offer to amend or overturn the smoking ban, irrespective of any other policies they might or might not have.
I am surprised that you have been allowed to get away with actually saying you are a Tory on here, without being accused of such things as starting a war, blowing up the twin towers, and murdering babies.
But, as difficult as it might seem at times, we must all stick to what we believe in, and not be cajoled into submission by a few extremists. We should leave that to the antis.
Peter, why can't you understand that some people on this site are not anti-Tory per se. They simply believe - with good reason - that the Tory Party has no plans to revisit the smoking ban? Notwithstanding that, it could be that a Tory government might turn out to be more receptive to lobbying. On a continuum of political preference, however, the less inclined someone is to vote Tory, the more he or she needs to be convinced of this. There will, of course, be people who would not consider voting Tory even if the party promised to reverse the ban tomorrow, just as I am sure that you would not consider voting Labour if they promised the same. I, myself, would prefer to be in a position where I felt so in tune with a particular party that my allegiance was unswerving. Instead, the disillusioned, like myself, have to juggle a number of factors in coming to a decision.
Fascinating interview in the Morning Star (20 June) with David Davis. Unusually frank; he says, inter alia:
<<However, when it is suggested that he might describe himself on the Haltemprice ballot paper as David Davis for Freedom, the title of his website, he replies: "No, it will be David Davis the Conservative candidate."
Then he adds as an afterthought: "Actually, that's a very good point, you know. I hadn't even thought that far ahead."
Asked whether he would welcome support from Morning Star readers, he replies: "Yes, absolutely, I'm standing as a Conservative, but this is not an issue that is about me. It's an issue about freedom in the country at large."
He reports that one of the most famous Morning Star readers, Tony Benn, visited him in his parliamentary office the day before and that the veteran left campaigner would be joining him in a debate at the Festival Hall a few days before the by-election is held on July 10.
Davis adds that he and Benn are "both massively in favour of a strong parliamentary democracy and massively in favour of protecting the rights of the individual." Their views "differ but they overlap," he says.
>>>>
Apologies - the interview's in Saturday's paper, not Friday's.
Nigel, I'm not sure why you've given such an aggressive reply to my enquiry. Is it necessary for us to get so heated? I didn't say you were far right. I asked if you could explain what you meant, as I couldn't believe you were seriously suggesting the board is dominated by left wing fanatics, and I thought I must have misunderstood you.
Anyway apparently I didn't misunderstand you so perhaps you'd be kind enough to point me in the direction of the left wing fanatics on the site as they've clearly gone right over my head! Also I haven't seen any examples of bulying or name calling by left wing forum posters - perhaps you could clarify that too, for the record.
There has been quite a lot of debate between Conservative voters and UKIP voters, but I didn't know either qualified as the Left.