A divisive Davis?
The BBC has been inundated with calls, texts, e-mails and blog comments praising David Davis' decision yesterday and some have questioned why I have suggested it may be a nightmare for the Conservative Party.
So here are ten reasons:
1) It will pit the Tories against the paper whose support they most want to win - The Sun
2) David Davis might lose the by-election, robbing the Tories of a talented politician
3) Davis may win big, emphasising his status as a potential rival for David Cameron
4) The by-election may be a damp squib in which no major party runs and is seen by many as a waste of tax payers' money
5) David Davis wins and gets back into the shadow cabinet where no-one knows what he'll do next and is therefore a divisive force
6) David Davis stays on the backbenches and becomes a focus of discontent with David Cameron and a divisive force
7) The Conservative Party is forced to have the divisive debate between libertarianism and authoritarianism
8) The Conservatives are diverted from their strategy of focusing on schools, welfare and family policies
9) David Cameron does not look in control of his top team
10) For the first time in months Gordon Brown is helped to avoid dreadful headlines which today would have read ("I did no deal, honest")
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
So in fact Mr Robinson, you cant really justify your comments. Scraping the barrel I think.
Complain about this comment
On the other hand, it is a lose/lose situation for Gordon Brown since:
i) if labour don't put up a candidate they are afraid to defend 42 days; and
ii) if they do put up a candidate they will lose heavily
It is said that the sitting labour candidate is against 42 days, so this is one reason labour may not put forward a candidate.
Complain about this comment
None of those ten reasons hold any water with the public at large. Indeed 2/3 and 5/6 are mutually contradictory and 10 is going to be outweighed by the constant debate over 42 days that will ensure.
The interesting thing is that the media seems to be operating in a bubble of its own on this issue, so opposed to what Davis has done to the extent of one of its members announcing he will stand to defend the 42 day limit.
Perhaps this is the first sign of public revolt against the mass media. People are so fed up of being spun (or lied) to that they literally do not believe what the mass media's interpretation any more.
Complain about this comment
Well as for number 7, this is a debate that is sorely needed across the whole country.
We USED to be a country in which "your home was your castle" We USED to live in a country in which we were always presumed innocent until proved guilty. we USED to live in a country where the Government was a public servant who could ask for your personal details, but you were free to say, none of your business! We live in a country where your identity belongs to you, but not for much longer. We live in a country where, if you wish, you can avoid answering to the government "servants" altogether, but not for much longer.
David's campaign is NOT only about 42 days, that is the straw that broke the camel's back. It is about the FUNDAMENTAL balance of power in the relationship between citizen and state. This is a relationship that labour have slowly been reversing, without a peep of protest from the media. Now that someone has been brave enough to stand up and say NO! The media are attacking him, INSTEAD of reporting the issues at stake.
Do we want the Government to be the public servant? OR do we want to be servants to the state?
That is the issue central in this debate. I support libertarianism 100% That is what FREEDOM means.
Complain about this comment
'Events, dear boy, events.'
Indeed.
Perhaps we would rather be amused than bored, however dire the Brownian fumblings that are the grim reality.
Well Boris got the voters out.
Davis won't go far wrong with this end-of the-pier show and the storm is unlikely to overturn the teacup.
Complain about this comment
Nick mate, who are you trying to kid?
Along with all your little media chums you have been taken completely by suprise by David David's decision.
Instead ofcollectively chuking your teddies out the pram and petulantly lashing out at both him and the Conservatives why not do the decent thing and congratulate him on catching you all out.
This sort of thing doesn't happen every day after all.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Who decides what the public feel is important, the commentariat? Politicians? Newspapers?
To paraphrase Clinton. It's the public, stupid!
It will pit the Tories against the Sun, and your point is what? Supine grovelling to the mighty Temple of Murdoch and Kingmaker Murdoch.
That alone is an insult to the British people. British politics and principle are more important than what Murdoch thinks.
Davis might lose. Heaven forbid that a point of principle might be unpopular. Principles have a habit of doing that, that's what they are. Principles are always worth debating over, they generate that level of passion long missing from politics.
Davis might win big and it sents a clear message to the government on the issue of the database state! Cameron would be delighted to have him back, point proved and Labour given another bloody nose.
Nick, just where are you getting this Davis v Cameron thing from, which HQ I wonder?
The database state is part of Conservative policy, they have no ambition for ID Cards and will repeal 42 days. How does that divert from other policies.
As for a debate of libertarianism v authoritarism, it's moot. Conservatives are small government, persona freedom and responsibility to the core. How does that create a debate?
Finally, every media outlet has tried the 'split' explanation. This is a personal decision so what can you do to stop it? If this is a principle so powerful, you can't.
Perhaps may I remind you that the greatest ever Parlimentarian crossed the floor several times in his career.
We need more MPs of principle because it's been a principle free zone for years.
As for the election being a damp squib, I doubt it, there are hundreds of activists pledging support and money. The interest of the newspaper media means this is a real contest, a real debate and you will see the attitude of the electorate to being watched, snooped on, logged and recorded at their every turn.
I do not understand why the BBC are trying to suck all the oxygen out of this. When it is reported, the BBC seems to be continually looking for an influential editorial standpoint disconnected from the reality.
My advise, go back to reporting the facts, leave the opinion to those that form it; then report that.
Let the public speak !
Complain about this comment
Some of those could as easily be positives.
A quick rephrase of a few:
2. David Davis may lose, saving the Tories from an arrogant liability of an MP
3. David Davis may win big, giving Cameron a Champion in his corner to wheel out at the appropriate times (historically, leaders have their champions)
4. Nobody is interested and the whole thing thankfully fizzles out.
5. David Davis gets back into the cabinet where everyone at last knows what he stands for - even if he is only one issue
9. Cameron is a strong enough leader to allow his top team to have convictions.
As for the rest I would argue that Cameron has already put his party at odds with the Sun over this issue - he voted against the 42 days. And to be honest, the great British public doesn't really care what Murdock thinks - it is only politicians that are that stupid.
And if you look over the last few months, if you count up the headlines, the Tories seem far more interested with the First Lords woes than they are with really focusing on other subjects.
Complain about this comment
Well Nick, you hit the nail on the head with your Top Ten of why DD should not have skewred the tories to his "gesture" (sic).
What concerns me, is the precident it sets. Are we going to have by-election after by-election every time an MP disagrees with a major vote? DD is abusing Parliment and our democracy by what he has done. It breathtaking arrogance by a man who thinks he is bigger than his leader and bigger than parliment. I hope the other parties do not stand and the elctorate ignore the vote. He may then realise its not help from the elctorate he needs.
Complain about this comment
"7) The Conservative Party is forced to have the divisive debate between libertarianism and authoritarianism."
Yeah, who'd want an actual debate in politics?
Complain about this comment
NewLabour will have to now argue their position to the electorate not the nise members of the DUP and Ann Widdecombe.
Here is a quote:
"for Labour to be saved by Ukip, Ann Widdecombe and the DUP was a humiliation. It was a personal shaming of Gordon Brown, who forced his unwilling MPs to pass a bad law born of crude political miscalculation..."
This does not come from UKIP or the Daily Telegraph; it is Polly Toynbee writing in the Guardian.
NewLabour supporters accept that Brown has scored an horrendous own goal while David Davis has just stood up for democracy.
We are watching history here and Gordon Brown will be obliged to answer the question, byelection or no.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick,
When a man is stuck in a hole he should stop digging.
When a journalist is trumpeting the Government's line and is stuck playing the party political aspect ... put the wretched trumpet away.
We're more than happy to discuss the possible party political aspects but you are becoming relentless.
It truly is not the story the common man sees. The country is cheering and you are ignoring us. You even started this blog by admitting the BBC are inundated with support for DD. So what is it that we see that you can't ?
Please, read the comments, listen to the calls. Not everything is an internal spat in a political party. The common man is shouting "ENOUGH !" to Westminster and following DD. That one aspect, at a time when Politicians are reviled as self serving hypocrites, must be worth considering by you.
Put your trumpet down ... and step away.
Complain about this comment
to 3 varstariner - thank you very much for representing the "public at large".
D Davis in my opinion has done this for personal gain. You could see it in his face he was thinking - "this is my time!".
Even if he is doing it on principle (doubtful) then he is wasting taxpayers money.
ps I am a Conservative voter who supports 42 days.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick
Reference your point 10 above.
I think the two events are inextricably linked and if headlines are as you suggest - and yours is - then this is what the media have chosen to make them. I wonder if it is simply the case that joining up events requires joined-up thinking.
Complain about this comment
Hmmm....a few why it might not be so good for Gordon:
Davis get more of the issues about the erosion of liberty into the public domain and fuels the feeling that the Govt wants a nanny state.
Davis hammers a Labour opponent. GB electorally toxic again.
Gordon dithers, again, about whether to fight or flight.
Labour rebels on this issue follow suit and resign their seats to distance themselves from a failing Govt. They win easily as independents.
Labour ministers appear to turn an obviously principled action, however foolish, to party political advantage immediately...grubby.
As the issues emerge on 42 days (like the fact that the power already existed in extremis) the public are horrified at the way GB played fast and loose with it in a public auction for votes.
The Tories are actually seen as being prepared to stick by something that is not immediately popular and argue their case. Rather than say reverse your entire tax policy in the face of a few opinion polls
Complain about this comment
Nick
Its the blogs wot done it.
People don't need the mass media to find out what others are saying/thinking.
They can read, first hand, for themselves.
Vested interests and the usual suspects have behaved exactly as you would expect.
Everyone else (anonymous and generall blob commenters etc) - from them I haven't seen a word said against what Davis has done. On the contrary, there seems to be massive and active support.
Kelvin McKenzie is clearly doing all he can to have zero credibilty (he doesn't want to stand, but he said on 'this week' that he always does what murcoch tells him to do -obedience to another person is not a great feature for an MP).
So Davis is on for unopposed campaigning, and a clear win.
At this point the conservatives will create a new post "shadow minister for citizens freedom and rights" - and challenge labour to give him someone to shadow.
The rest of Camerons cabinet can continue as is - Davis will have a new additional post, all his own.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The point is that you should also be giving us 10 reasons why this all might be a dream for the Conservative party.
Try to apply your cynical analysis of politicians to yourself and see how wrong-footed and desperate this listing makes you appear.
Complain about this comment
Yes, Nick. On the other hand it might just turn out to be Labour's worst nightmare:
1. The public gives unprecedented support to Davis (this has already happened as you point out).
2. Other MPs see it is possible for an MP to act with integrity.
3. Large numbers of Tory MPs throw their weight behind Davis' campaign to protect personal freedoms.
4. Large numbers of ordinary people decide they will vote for these MPs the first chance they get.
5. Brown calls an election and Labour are destroyed at the polls.
6. The Tories are returned to power for another 15 years.
7. The first thing they do is pass a law making it impossible for the likes of Brown to attack personal freedoms in this way ever again.
8. The second thing they do is scrap plans for ID cards,
9. The third thing they do is scrap plans for DNA databases containing the details of millions of innocent people.
10. Brown's "legacy": He is the man who tried to destroy the personal freedoms of the British people - but failed.
I know which scenario I'm betting on!!
Complain about this comment
The fact that the sisterhood those awful women Blears (this morning) and now Harperson spouting off about vanity and doing everything to downgrade what is a very bold and honest gesture shows again just what Nu lab really are all about. If these two are so certain 42 days are right then they should resign their own seats and fight DD in his own seat. They won't of course because they know they would loose heavily as DD has more right and moral courage in his little finger compared to these two put together.
DD considers they won the argument (even amongst Labour MP's) but the other side bought the votes. Even the press thinks so as they laughed as the denials from Brown. Most of us know so as well. Is this what our democracy has now been reduced to under this government?
With the failure of Brown and Co to give us a referendum on the EU, DD's constituency voters are now in a similar position as the Irish in the EU referendum. A small number of people can strike out on behalf of the vast majority for liberty and freedom for all or fall under the tyranny of a state that only wishes to suppress and ignore opposition views and monitor the people like no other before it. The nothing to hide nothing to fear argument already has been proved wrong by this and other governments in the past. The newspaper you read or the support is also irrelevant if as this affects us all. The only division here (despite what Nu lab would have us believe) is between the rights and freedoms of the people evolved over hundreds of years and the boundaries of this government which see to think they have the right to tear up these hard one traditions. We all require protection but it?s a balance and we also should not be doing the terrorists job for them.
Kind Regards
Baron Von Ripwinkle De Parkbench
Complain about this comment
#4 purpleDogzzz "I support libertarianism 100% That is what FREEDOM means."
I think your position is much too simplistic. You seem to realise that either extreme position (complete licence set against totalitarian control) is undesirable, and that the issue is where you strike the balance between the two. Central to that judgement is how much weight you give to the freedoms of the majority as against the freedoms of the minority to indulge in activities such as crime. The greater the weight you put on each side of that equation must inevitably reduce the freedom available to the other. Unfortunately you seem to be interested in looking at only one side of the issue.
It used to be the Conservatives who were big on the protection of the majority from the criminal minority. It is odd how that seems to have changed now that they are not the party normally in power. Looking at the issues raised by Davis, I still fail to see the point of principle involved in extending the period of detention without charge from 4 to 6 weeks, especially with the greater protections proposed; like most people (I think) I find CCTV cameras to be a reassuring development, not a threat; I see the success of the DNA database in bringing criminals to justice many years after they thought they had got away with it something to be welcomed; and I fail to see the threat posed by having a single card to prove my identity, rather than the pack I now have to carry round with me.
Perhaps when I was 18 I might have been on your side in all of this, and my views are conditioned by the fact that I am approaching my three score years and ten. Perhaps not.
Complain about this comment
The Sun always used to be a Conservative tabloid. When Tony Blair was elected it became a Labour tabloid.
I stopped reading it after that.
Complain about this comment
Sorry but Nick has got this spot on. This morning there is not ONE upside for David Cameron or the Tories - all the talk is about splits/turmoil etc etc. Thsi will carry on.
The only way for this legislation to be amended(repealed) is for the Tories to be elected. Cameron had Brown on the canvass - Davis has allowed him to get up.
All this proves why the Tories were right to elect Cameron rather than this grandstanding politician with suspect judgement who has just shown how utterly self indulgent he really is when putting his own vanity against the interests of the Team.
Complain about this comment
As one who did raise issues with your statements of yesterday, I welcome the fact that you acknowledge you were on the wrong side of the issue in terms of the how the public are seeing things.
Most of your 10 points are based on supposition rather than any evidence.
Where is your posting examining why Labour are refusing the put up a candidate? The LibDem position is clear - Labour are the ones who are looking as if they don't believe in their own policies.
Even-handed examination is what is needed.
Please
Complain about this comment
Where are the 10 reasons this might be a nightmare for Brown.
Start with:
1. Davis wins and it completely undermines Brown's "the public are asking for it" argument
2. Labour don't put up a candidate and are accused of bottling it, again
3. Labour do put up a candidate who loses his deposit
4. the 30 odd Labour rebels find themselves forced to support Davis
....
Complain about this comment
Nick:
Most of your ten points are good ones, but an approach based solely on calculation completely misses the point here.
On grounds of simple political calculation, I agree that David Davis' decision might not seem wise.
But his point, surely, is that the time has come where someone needs to put principle BEFORE calculation.
For a politician to act on principle, without regard to the practical cost of doing so, is immensely refreshing. That is why Davis is striking a chord with the public - even those who don't agree with him on the specific issue of 42 days.
Principles before calculation - there's an idea!
Complain about this comment
This goes far beyond party politics and what is best for the Conservative party. Mr Davis has brought the issue into the open and away from what now seems an inherently corrupt Parliament. I'm not so naive to think that horse-trading does not go on, but for our Prime Minister to resort to bribing the Northern Irish MP's, then DENY it is enough for me. He must think we are stupid.
As for whether Mr Davis will achieve his goals, I refer you to your own 'Have Your Say' board. The discussion about the 42 day law consisted of 79 pages before the debate was closed. The discussion about the effect of Mr Davies resignation is currently at 209 pages in less than 24 hours!! He has already achieved his main goal, to get us talking about it.
I have spent the past 3 years working in Bulgaria, Italy, Spain and Mexico and from what I have seen there has made me thankful to hail from a country that values democracy (or at least used to).
If this were a football match, the opposition fans would be chanting 'Are you Zimbabwe in disguise?'.
Complain about this comment
Re Nick's point 4: so the Tories are not a "major party?" on your political rpad-map?
Or have I missed the fact that Davis is going to stand as an Independent - in which case some of Nick's other points make no sense...
Complain about this comment
I can't believe that nobody understands David Camerons use of the phrase 'A very couragous decision' His decision nothing to do with the party. It was very clear to me that he was using it in the Sir Humphrey appleby 'Yes minister' sense. He was disowning davis. A leadership challange is afoot I think.
Complain about this comment
Mr Robinson not one of the 10 reasons you list is convincing.
Stop regurgitating Labour propaganda and give us real analysis . You started quite well as BBC's political editor but your coverage has steadily deteriorated and you are no longer credible as an objective reporter.
There is no doubt that David Davies' move is bold and daring and that David Cameron would have preferred keeping him in the Shadow Cabinet. However claiming that this will harm Cameron is just not credible.
It is Brown who is holed below the waterline by this. His great revival based on a hollow victory secured on dubious political trading is now stillborn and the Civil Liberties agenda will continue to remain on the front pages.
Let us look at your 10 reasons:
1. The Sun may be anti Davies but they are certainly not anti Cameron. And once the by- election is over they will fall in line particularly if DD wins big.
2. Look at HYS and the Blogs! And he is running virtually unopposed: DD is not going to lose.
3. DD and DC are not at odds on this matter - see DD's excellent piece in today's Telegraph. He was a "big beast" before with his own views: so no change there. Trying to paint this a clash between the 2 Davids is not credible.
4. Unlikely to be a damp squib. Kelvin McKenzie running and the media will make sure that does not happen. Maybe the BBC will play the Labour game and try to play it down but luckily there's SKY and the others.
5. see 3. above.
6. 7. 8. and 9. same as 3. and 5. above. In fact six of your reasons are variations of the same idea: that DD is in a fight with Cameron for the soul of the Conservative party.
DD is not challenging Cameron . There's a desperate attempt by some in the media to paint a clash between them. It makes for a good story but on available evidence wholly without substance.
10. We can rely on Gordon Brown to continue to dig himself in his whole. And Davies has just handed him a shovel so that he can dig deeper.
Complain about this comment
This affair is just a continuation of the "petrol strike" campaign kicked off by William Hague and fuelled by the media. The "Real England" theme is a phoney that's hijacking the real underlying trend of practicality and sociability that I called months before the polls picked up. Reality isn't always what you think it is, and your friends aren't always who you think they are.
The sober and nuanced issues surrounding the 42 day policy have been hijacked by vested interests. The gesture politics of the usual suspects, and the dumb and chummy vote catching opposition are getting in the way. This is deliberate because is rubbishes proper policy development and robs the government of a result, and whips up a wave of emotionalism that people can cynically ride into power.
Gordon Brown stands for purpose, society, and building for the long term. I challenge anyone to say this is not in tune with the aspirations of the common man, business, and politics. Fiddling in the dirt and arguing amongst ourselves is what drives people like Frank Whittle, the inventor of the jet engine, away from Britain, and creates ghetto communities with no hope. The City and Tories hate Gordon Brown just as they hated Stephenson, one of the founders of the industrial revolution.
You believe in Britain? Brown is Britain.
Complain about this comment
Nick, your reasons are either weak, mutually exclusive, and more pertinent to backroom government/media mutual masturbation than the impact Davis's action may have on the popular debate.
As for 10, I agree, but I must point out it makes no difference at all in moral or popular terms.
We've been inundated with stories of morally repugnant New Labour sleaze since 2003, and one more New-Labour-Sleazes-Its-Way-Out-Of-Blahblahblah would be much less significant than the current exploration of how New Labour has systematically chipped away at the rights and freedoms that make Britain special.
Team Davis.
Complain about this comment
Triffid100 - hear hear!!!
You only need to go to Have Your Say to see how much admiration and support David Davis has from the vast majority of the public (or at least BBC News website readers), that we believe this is a genuine principled stand that does Davis nothing but credit, and (for many) gives credit to the Conservative Party just by association with him.
I have never seen news reporting so out of step with public opinion. Still, I suppose a blog is generally an opinion piece, so Nick Robinson has every right to give his reading of the situation - and the opening sentence is a tacit admission that he realises most of the public disagree with that reading.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I agree with purpleDogzzz, comment 4. I wouldn't go so far as to say I support libertarianism 100%, but I do think we need a serious libertarian v authoritarian debate in this country, and for a rebalancing back from the authoritarian, "Nanny State" end of the spectrum. I can't believe that a majority of Britons support the current imbalance.
I also think that the electorate need to be reminded that this is definitively NOT a left/right issue. Could you please reference the Political Compass (search on Wikipedia and elsewhere), Nick? I see this is a very useful model and, at the very least, food for thought.
There are other "elephants in the corner" we should be debating as a country, like immigration policy and our relationship with/membership of the EU, but I think this is by far the most important current issue for us and for our children.
Complain about this comment
This post explains exactly why you command so little respect, Nick.
You have given us the impact upon the soap opera which is Westminster and completely ignored the issue at hand, namely one man's stand for the rights and liberties of the country.
I don't vote Tory - in fact I can't ever envisage a scenario when I ever would - but David Davis' stance is wholly admirable and as such is worthy of analysis on its own without recourse to the continual and easily produced incestuous Westminster gossipmongery which has now replaced actual journalism. You ain't no John Cole, that's for sure.
Complain about this comment
If this has demonstrated anything to me it is this. The media are another puppet of the hidden hand that dictates an agenda that we have been following for a very long time. The government and opposition are also puppets of this agenda. When someone has the courage to stand up to this agenda, they are savaged by the other puppets. When the left wing AND right wing media unite attack a man who made a very very popular point of principle which is a point of principle that directly attacks that hidden agenda. That shows a collusion in the support of a hidden agenda.
The agenda does not involve moving us forward as free peoples. As Gordon Brown has often spoken of a new world order. Any reference I have found that mentions what the new world order is, who it is made up of, what it's goals are are ALL heading for a global dictatorship with a cashless society and a microchipped population. A world in which people are the owned servants of the elite and that is according to the people who make up this elite themselves. They admit to each other what their goals are. These have been extensively documented.
This hyper-class is made up of the people that own the independent media that own and set the editorial line for their news stations and newspapers. This elite sit on the boards of the largest corporations and in the think-tanks that advice (dictate the agenda to) governments and they own the oil companies and the weapons companies and they are making a fortune from the wars and the divisions in society that are created by the lies spread from their media. They are conditioning the populous all the time to accept and manifest a false reality. They are conditioning people to permanently live in stress and fear. They report alarmism and terror and hate from every angle and then implore us to vote for their chosen puppet to keep us safe from impending disaster.
This is why there is a massive schism happening right now. There IS a growing divide between those of us waking up from this totalitarian nightmare and understanding that we are a manifestation of infinite consciousness experiencing an illusion, and those trapped in the conditioning, helplessly crying for the protection of the elite terrorists and there are many people who appear to be in the middle who are still in the process of waking up. Recognising the depths of evil that threaten to ensnare us as microchipped slaves, but not fully yet recognising what to do about it with their conditioned reflex being to fight. That is what the elite would love and are preparing for. There have been orders issued to police forces in this country to prepare for civil war. That is why Traffic wardens have been re-designated to become civil enforcement officers. To take over the policing role when the police are tasked with a military front line role with the army in a fight for our country against the civilian population.
Fighting is NOT the answer. Libertarianism is. Freedom is. Peaceful non-compliance is the answer. As Ghandi taught us.
Complain about this comment
I read The Sun, amongst other news sources, because over the last 10 years it has been a very good weather vane to understand which direction the government will jump.
An honourable debate between The Sun and David Davis will bring the issues out in the open. This by-election does not have to be war between The Sun and Tories.
The issues at stake have been obscured by Save-Gordon-Politics versus Kill-Gordon-Politics. The public need to hear the issues.
42 days is just one of our civil liberties the government are stamping on. Although cost of living, schools, hospitals and defence are all important issues, we can't ignore loss of liberty just because it doesn't hit us in the pocket or immediately make our lives worse.
Clearly David Davis has taken the spotlight off of the governments appalling record, that must cause Cameron a headache, but in 3 weeks time, Gordon will blunder back into the storm which we have to hope will rid this country of him.
Oddly - in conclusion - David Davis, right or wrong, his actions have prompted me to re-join the Conservatives as a member this morning. I haven't voted since 1997. I want to see the end of this government. Conviction is good. Real debate is better than Save-Gordon-Politics. Cynical removal of civil liberties is easier for Gordon than fixing genuine issues like schools and hospitals etc. I'd like to see a genuine reforming goverment in place with a positive agenda.
Complain about this comment
Just a tangential point. Davis has been described as making a stand on principle by some. I just wonder if 'he' had been 'she' instead (Davina?) whether the tone of the debate would be on the lines of "hormonal hysterical woman, over reacting as usual, having a hissy fit".
That would have been an interesting situation to see where the media bias arose.
Complain about this comment
I notice that at no stage have you addressed the actual issue.
All you do is waffle on about marginal advantage/disadvantage - who's up, who's down.
You have no vision, you have forgotten what politics is supposed to be about.
A cynic - a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
One final thought - if ministers and commentators think an election is a "stunt", or "a waste of taxpayers money" or "irresponsible", then they really have lost touch and should get out more.
Complain about this comment
I remember when it was conventional wisdom to believe an Englishman's home was his castle.
Under Labour, it is where an Englishman has to fill-in incredibly intrusive forms justifying his existence to a corrupt government or face a massive fine.
Complain about this comment
Nick - you say yourself that the BBC have been inundated with calls praising David Davis action. Yet your blog does not provide any analysis of why this should be - given that the Government insist the majority of the public is in favour of 42 days.
You do however continue to give considerable space to the idea that Davis's actions will damage the Tory party and Cameron's political standing.
Perhaps outside of Westminster the protection of civil liberties is seen as of greater importance than party politics.
Lets have some analysis of why press and public opinion seems at odds.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson's comments are so totally one-sided: quite clearly anti-Tory and pro-Labour. This is not balanced reporting - it is also totally counter to public opinion: does he not understand that people are tired of having their liberty eroded by this cosy Labour-BBC alliance, with its strangehold on democracy?
Complain about this comment
I can't argue with your logic Nick. I suppose I am sanguine because I don't vote Tory.
But I do respect the stand of David Davis as I believe that the 42 days is symptomatic of the creeping McCarthyism that is being set free. Harness public fears for short term political gains. The 42 days is cynical nonsense.
In the US, known to be soft on terrorists with Guantanamo etc., they charge after 8 days. Are people running about with their underwear on their heads because of the threat of complex long running cases? Are they five times more efficient? Are we five times safer?
Please.
There may be damage to the Tories but it will make some re-think their opinions on the Tories. That won't include me but the respect has gone up.
The other point nobody is making is that because of the McCarthyite atmosphere 60-70% of the public are for 42 days.
But the reason that this page will be 60-70% against it I believe is because these are more politically active people. That is a problem for Labour at the next election.
If you look at Labour membership desertion, funding issues and investigations, decline of party activists then Labour may have won on 42 days but their future looks bleaker than the Tories. Even Labour supporters seem resigned to a blood bath at the next election.
So 42 days is a pyrhic victory - it was not needed, it may not make it into legislation, it may be another one of those 10p factors that dooms Labour at the next election.
McNulty may not be at Westminster much longer if the SNP win big in 2010.
A changing world.
Complain about this comment
Tony McNulty, (Home office Minister) has the unfortunate task of defending totalitarianism, (sorry, protecting UK Citizens) and the introduction of the ID Card and it's inherent problems. IE not being able to detect bald people, or brown eyed people or guitar players (being all af these, I know I'm in trouble already)
I am sorry I said totalitarianism, because we live in free democracy. I know this is true because according to McNulty:
"We are not knocking down doors at four in the morning with people booted and suited in riot gear. Most of the removals occur around half-five, half-six, seven in the morning."
Phew, I am so relieved!!! . I am so glad he cleared that one up, We live in free democracy because our detainees are carted off to be detained without trial, later in the morning than detainees in genuine fascist states. I feel safer already.
No that is not a joke, he REALLY said it. And with a straight face too.
Complain about this comment
If the Tories were in power they would of implemented the 42 day ruling ... fact.
Complain about this comment
Speaking of ID cards, be aware of how much of a Ball Ache they will be to get one of these infernal Items? and YES THEY WILL BE COMPULSARY!!! Even under Current government plans, they aim to start the VOLUNTARY introduction in 2007 and have them become compulsary in 2013.
You will have to pay AT LEAST £30.00, but be sure that you are on benefits or a pension first and you do not want it to be a passport. If not the cost will be AT LEAST £97.00
Then be prepared to travel to a registration center to be fingerprinted (all fingers and thumbs) have both retinas scanned and have your photograph taken. All at your expense.
If you are a family of 5, that's over £700.oo for the day including travel and food. (If you live any distance from the registration office)
Once you have done that you can hand in your ID forms, properly filled in or face a fine.
The National Identity Register will contain the following information that has to be provided:
1. Name
2. Other previous names or aliases;
3. Date and place of birth and, if the person has died, the date of death;
4. Address
5. Previous addresses in the United Kingdom and elsewhere;
6. Times of residency at different places in the United Kingdom or elsewhere;
7. Current residential status;
8. Residential statuses previously held;
9. Information about numbers allocated to the applicant for identification purposes and about the documents to which they relate;
10. Information about occasions on which recorded information in the Register has been provided to any person;
11. Information recorded in the Register on request.
12. Photograph
13. Fingerprints
14. ?Other? biometrics (iris recognition);
15. Signature
16. Nationality;
17. Entitlement to remain in the United Kingdom; and
18. Where entitlement derives from a grant of leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, the terms and conditions of that leave.
19. National Identity Registration Number;
20. The number of any ID card that has been issued;
21. National Insurance number;
22. The number of any relevant immigration document;
23. The number of any United Kingdom passport (within the meaning of the Immigration Act 1971 (c. 77)) that has been issued; (If you have ever had a passport issued to you that has been lost or stolen and you do not have that passport's number any more, you are screwed)
24. The number of any passport issued by or on behalf of the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom or by or on behalf of an international organisation;
25. The number of any document that can be used (in some or all circumstances) instead of a passport;
26. The number of any identity card issued by the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom;
27. Any reference number allocated by the Secretary of State in connection with an application made for permission to enter or to remain in the United Kingdom;
28. The number of any work permit (within the meaning of the Immigration Act 1971);
29. Any driver number connected to a driving licence;
30. The number of any designated document which is held by the applicant that is a document the number of which does not fall within any of the preceding sub-paragraphs; ???
31. The date of expiry or period of validity of a document the number of which is recorded by virtue of this paragraph. ???
32. The date of every application for registration; ???
33. The date of every application for a modification of the contents of his entry; ???
34. The date of every application confirming the contents of his entry (with or without changes); ???
35. The reason for any omission from the information recorded in his entry;
36. Particulars (in addition to its number) of every ID card issued;
37. Whether each such card is in force and, if not, why not;
38. Particulars of every person who has countersigned an application for an ID card or a designated document; ??? What particulars?
39. Particulars of every notification given by the applicant for the purposes of regulations under section 13(1) (lost, stolen and damaged ID cards etc.);
40. Particulars of every requirement by the Secretary of State for the individual to surrender an ID card issued to the applicant.
41. The information provided in connection with every application to be entered in the Register, for a modification of the contents of entry in the Register or for the issue of an ID card;
42. Information provided in connection with every application confirming entry in the Register (with or without change;
43. Particulars of the steps taken, in connection with an application mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b) or otherwise, for identifying the applicant or for verifying the information provided in connection with the application;
44. Particulars of any other steps taken or information obtained (otherwise than in connection with an application mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b)) for ensuring that there is a complete, up-to-date and accurate entry about that individual in the Register;
45. Particulars of every notification given by that individual for the purposes of section 12.
46. A personal identification number to be used for facilitating the making of applications for information recorded in his entry, and for facilitating the provision of the information;
47. A password or other code to be used for that purpose or particulars of a method of generating such a password or code;
48. Questions and answers to be used for identifying a person seeking to make such an application or to apply for or to make a modification of that entry.
49. Particulars of every occasion on which information contained in the individual?s entry has been provided to a person;
50. Particulars of every person to whom such information has been provided on such an occasion;
51. Other particulars, in relation to each such occasion, of the provision of the information.
another version of this list here
Can you confidently provide all this info? or is this an administrative nightmare for you?
How will you provide the information for section (9) and (30) above? this could include and not be limited to:
Information about numbers allocated to you for identification purposes and about the documents to which they relate; (driving licence, passport, National insurance numbercard, birth certificate, marriage licence number, NHS Number, military ID cards, Bank account numbers, old bank account numbers, credit card accounts, telephone account number, Councils tax account number, store loyalty cards, club membership numbers, Insurance certificate numbers, vehicle registration documents, etc...(These numbers indentify you to these different organisations, do they not?))
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
For sure there are risks and potential negatives in what David Davis has done. But it is not quite as bad for the Conservatives as you make out, Nick.
Firstly, they have made it clear - it was a personal decision by Davis. Secondly, he is bound to win no matter who stands against him. Finally, although you think there is some question about the libertarian/authoritarian balance in this country, his argument is surely correct and the people will see it that way.
Complain about this comment
Surely the best place to defend our civil liberties is as shadow home secretary and in all likelyhood home secretary in the not too distant future. I'm not sure what this by-election will achieve? It certainly knocks project Cameron off course, which seemed to be going so well. If I was Davis I'd be worried, the Sun will paint him (and the Tories by implication) as the terrorists' friends. Terrorism is probably the number one concern amongst the electorate, especially if, God forbid, there's another outrage. It will be very dangerous (politically) to end up on the wrong side of this debate.
Complain about this comment
They often talk about politicians being out of touch with the public. To me, it seems like for once it is journalist who is out of touch. Nick Robinson's comments seem strangely biased and blinkered. It is not clear at all if this will be bad for the Torys. It could be good.. time will tell, but in the mean time, we only seem to hear a one sided review from Nick. :-(
Complain about this comment
Nick
I still think you should have waited before rushing to judgement on this unusual situation.
There is a real risk now that you will be leading coverage of this in a certain way to justify your premature reaction, rather that dispassionately and accurately reporting what is happening and analysing carefully what it means. This blog certainly makes me worried about that.
It is absolutely imperative that in your job you are impartial AND SEEN TO BE IMPARTIAL.
Not your finest hour, Nick.
Complain about this comment
Davis's move is a rare and inspiring case of political principle. He is a giant among the current pygmies in Parliament and he is putting the unelected and unscrupulous Brown to the sword. I am certain he will be triumphant and he will serve the country well by highlighting the insidious creep of vile authoritarianism over which this unworthy and unwanted government has presided. If Brown fails to field a candidate against him it will further illustrate the man's moral and personal cowardice. He has always been scared of the ballot box but, hopefully soon, he will die a political death by it. I for one will travel in good heart to Davis's constituency to fight for our rights alongside him. Shame on this government.
Complain about this comment
Everyone of the 10 points has a valid counter-argument.
But it's "Clause 7" that is the cross-party, cross-bench, cross electorate rallying cry.
How can an argument against authoritarianism be divisive? Unless you're part of the Establishment, 'tovarishch' and 'old bean'.
Complain about this comment
Mr. Robinson, your views are usually bang on but your way off the mark here.
This is a good move for Davis, not as he wants to be the next Tory leader but he wants to prove a point about the 42 day rule.
I'm even thinking of voting Torys the next election now he has done this.......
Complain about this comment
At 10:38 am on 13 Jun 2008, Pensfold wrote:
** If labour don't put up a candidate they are afraid to defend 42 days ***
No No No. Davis has choose to resign to force a by election.
Firstly when you resign it usually means that you then leave the stage, if that was the case then Labour should put up a candidate. But this isn't the case, the Labour Party have a manifesto, Davis is now a ONE issue Politian. Labour do not have to follow Davis's decision just because he demands it; Labour fight elections on manifesto's NOT one issue. If that were the case all 200+ Tory MPS could resign and force an election.
Secondly Labour are not afraid, they won the argument in parliament by winning the vote, simple as that.
In the days when Thatcher, Major and Blair were winning controversial votes by thin margins, the world went on, and those that disagreed had to swallow it, we have a parliamentary system after all.
Davis is behaving like a fool, and it will back fire on him.
Complain about this comment
Call it divisive if you want, but actions speak louder than words. Opposition only have words, but now we have imaginative action!
Something extraordinary needed to stir things up before this country decays beyond recovery.
How long before we get to the state Zimbabwe is in now? Not long if Labour carry on much longer.
They are evil.
Complain about this comment
I am pleased to see that I am not alone in being astonished at your, and the media in general's reaction to this. It seems to fly in the face of how the public feel. I joined this blig sight this morning as I felt compelled to say something.
I watched Newsnight last night and saw the same effect ie.
1. vast majority of the public applauding the actions of a conviction politician
2. politicians of all colour (other than Lib Dems) stand back and refuse to be associated with his actions
3. media drive forward and embellish upon the politicians view and ignore the public sentiment
Can you not see that in this case the media (TV and the papers) really is trying to create a false impression. The public support for Davis has been massive and, very unfortunately, the media are starting to belittle his actions.
I can see some small parallel with the state/media manipulation currently underway on another continent where the ruling party is desparate to stay in power.
Listen to the people in this instance! You are in denial about the groundswell of public opinion. Not for the first time in recent years I am ashamed to live in the UK.
Complain about this comment
I have to say Nick, I'm inclined to agree with the posters on here who think you've become a little blinded by the bright lights of the Westminster Village.
Out here, in the real world, David Davis' move seems to be a popular one. It puts Gordon Brown in a very difficult position (stand and lose, or fail to protect 42 days) and actually serves to enhance the image of Conservative MP's as principled and dedicated sorts, much at odds with the secret dealing and self-interest which has been seen to pepetuate the Labour party in the last week.
This isn't to say that some of your points are not valid ones, but the benefits of a bit of positive publicity around a prominent MP and the unsettling of Brown, might just make this a gamble that pays off for Davis and for Cameron.
Complain about this comment
I think that you have misread the mood of a lot of the people of this country Nick. Whilst I would not presume to speak for such people, the blogs I have read and the comment on websites such as this suggests to me that people are pleased to see that an MP acts with integrity when he feels that such a fundamental point is up for debate. I for one have had enough of the lickspittles of the the Labour Party saying that this 42 day matter is an issue of national security. It is not, it is simply the erosion of yet more of the freedoms of the people of the UK. Read Magna Carta and the Declaration of Arbroath. These documents are the building blocks of democracy in most of the English speaking world and we must not allow them to be eroded by the or any other Government.
Complain about this comment
I'm less concerned with what's good for Cameron or what's-his-name... you know... dour Scotchman... Brown? and far more concerned what's good for me, my children, and the country in which we (for the moment) live.
And Davis is right. Absolutely spot-on.
Those terrorists, the ones who are intent, in the oft-repeated warnings by nuLab mouthpieces - on "destroying our way of life"? They can't, and they don't have to. We're doing it for them.
Complain about this comment
No no, I think Nick Robinson is right. The Conservatives know that the 42 Days legislation is unpopular - the debate has been carrying on for weeks.
Now the Tories should have their payoff: a weak government who passed the legislation by buying MPs with wild promises, and all the media savaging of Gordon Brown that would have followed. Instead they have an incautious and potentially ill-disciplined frontbencher throwing his toys out of the pram.
Maybe Davis is doing this from his deep-seated convictions - and hurrah if he is. But Nick is not wrong to consider the possibility that Davis is simply setting himself up as a potential leadership challenger, because you can bet your house that's what Cameron's now thinking.
Complain about this comment
I'm confused. Who does David Davis think he is representing? Most of the Conservatives I know think locking up suspected terrorists for 42 days is a brilliant idea, in fact I'm sure they would extend it to locking up suspected benefits cheats, illegal immigrants and hoody wearers given half the chance.
Obviously they are a bit concerned that they seem to be siding with Labour on this, but they're not too worried because given enough time they think the law could be extended to locking up suspected Socialists for 42 days also.
Complain about this comment
Nick
I think 'nightmare' is way too strong for anything on your list.
I agree, however, that Davis's stance is more likely to damage his career and the best interests of his party than to enhance them.
Newsflash - personal sacrifice tends to go with the territory when a person takes a stand on principle.
Amongst politicians, this makes him or her an exotic creature to friend and foe alike; an oddball to be derided as disloyal or a stunt artist or a loser of the plot.
When a leading politician or party invokes 'principle', the arm of coincidence is long an all embracing so that whatever is being advocated on principle inevitably coincides with the best interests of the advocate.
There are, of course, exceptions but, sadly they usually involve politicians whose career has or is coming to an end. Loss of office and discovery of principles are not uncommon bedfellows.
This case is a rare exception. Davis believes - rightly or wrongly - that his proposed course of action is in the best interest of the country and that this is more important than self-interest or party advantage.
The reaction he has received from politicians and the political journalists says much more about the lack of principle in that arena than the lack of judgment on his part.
He does indeed lack judgment if his aim is to achieve self benefit or party benefit but it is plain wrong to equate presence of principle with lack of judgment.
There were a significant number of MPS who went against their principles in the 42 day vote, in favour of self or party interest. How typical that the critical headlines should be about the guy who is sacrificing self interest for principle.
Brown is let off the hook, comes the cry. By whom - Davis or the media ?
I think Davis's actions on this are politically misguided but greatly to be admired.
Complain about this comment
It is a political farce. If Davis want's a referendum on the issue he should call for one NATIONWIDE. He should state that no political parties should whip support for the referendum, and therefore apolitical organisations such as the judiciary, police and security services should be able to raise their support or objections freely. That would be a truly brave and risky option.
When the public hear the reasoning directly from the Police they will back them. Unlike the Conservative party we trust our Police and Judiciary to make the correct decisions, and trust them not to abuse power.
David C made a great deal in PMQ's of Conservative losses to terrorism. Let them share a platform with other victims of terrorism who support this measure. They are not the only ones to have suffered.
Instead this farce will become, without Lib Dem opposition, a foregone conclusion, he will simply be returned to the commons. It is not a single issue campaign if his losing it will weaken the opposition on ALL issues and increase the Governments' majority.
If he is fighting on a single issue will he pledge not to vote on other issues? Of course not, this will stop Labour supporters who disagree with the bill voting for him. The majority of the Country are fairly sick of this Government even if they support this measure, give us a chance to give a true indication of our feelings without Supporting Labour.
What self respecting Conservative would strengthen a Labour Government because they disagree with Davis on a single issue, when the Labour alternative would vote against their interests on all other issues?
The only way to truly gauge public opinion on a single issue is a full referendum. Gordon Brown should call his bluff and ask for cross party support for one. If they have nothing to fear from Democracy what could possibly be the objection? Both opposition parties state a referendum should be used when the constitution is altered, if as they claim Magna Carter (or the few clauses that remain) is at stake then surely this meets their criteria?
What this is truly about is that DC has no intention of revoking this legislation when they come to power. After all he will not need the Muslim community?s votes then will he? He will probably state that new intelligence has come to light and however evil the Labour Government were to introduce it then, it is needed now. Davis knows this and is NOT a hypocrite.
In spite of this post (or even rant, sorry I feel strongly on this) I stated yesterday and remain of the opinion that I would probably be a Tory supporter now if Davis had won the leadership. In a referendum I would vote against him, in an election probably for him.
Complain about this comment
I worked on the Davis campaign at the last general election and can vouch for the man's conviction and integrity. This is not a stunt this is a man who has decided to resign as a matter of principle. I think it shows that the tories have politicians who stand by their principles unlike the labour MP's who merely tow the party line for personal gain. I don't think it is a negative for the tories - Cameron and other top tories all have the same libertarian values as David, their is no division as the Labour Spin doctors will like to tell you. David strongly believes on this issue and will tell you the same in a debate over a pint in the local pub as he would on the sofa in any TV studio in the country. He is doing it for personal reasons, not for gain or to challenge DC, but to keep the agenda in the media and out of strong convictions and principle. Morality is a rare virtue in modern politics and rather than play the party political game we should be discussing the real issue - should we give up the premise of being innocent until being proven guilty - that is the real question right now Nick!
Complain about this comment
I'm uncomfortable with 42 days, so I'm not attacking the point Davis was making, but while his move has generated enormous publicity for his cause, which is commendable, it does threaten to degenerate into a farce that could damage the Conservatives. Quite simply, it won't be a referendum on 42 days if any Conservative voters who still support 42 days cast their vote for Davis. He will need to successfully shun their support or the result will be meaningless. How will those voters feel about that? And if Cameron does campaign on his behalf as he promised, it would also need to be on that one single issue, which risks alienating authoritarian-leaning Conservatives well beyond that constituency. And where will those voters turn to if they no longer feel welcome in the Conservative Party? I imagine Ukip must be rubbing their hands with glee. Along with Gordon Brown, of course. No wonder Cameron is so angry.
Complain about this comment
Sorry Nick, lots of conjecture but no facts.
Sadly look look only at the party politics and the personalities.
In reality, the issue of erosion of civil liberties is much bigger and much more important than party politics. It will unite people and politicians across the spectrum. Never mine Brown and Cameron, Labour or the Conservatives, this is much more important than any of them, something that the political commentators within Westminster can't seem to grasp
I've just looked at the text of David Davis' speech and find it applies to my daily life in a way I do not wish it to. The key section says
"....the generic security arguments relied on will never go away - technology, developing complexity and so on - we will next see 56 days, now it?s 70 days, 90 days.
But in truth 42 days is just one, perhaps the most salient example, of the insidious, surreptitious and relentless erosion of fundamental British freedoms.
We will have, shortly, the most intrusive identity card system in the world, a CCTV camera for every 14 citizens, a DNA database bigger than any dictator should have with thousands of innocent children and millions of innocent citizens on it.
We witness and assault on jury trial - that bulwark against bad law and its arbitrary abuse by the state, short cuts to our justice system will make our system neither firm nor fair and the creation of a database state opening up our private lives to the prying eyes of official snoopers and exposing our personal data to careless civil servants and criminal hackers.
The state has security powers to clamp down on peaceful protest and so-called hate laws to stifle legitimate debate whilst those inside Parliament get off Scot free.
This cannot go on it must be stopped and for that reason today I feel it?s incumbent on me to take a stand."
This means all of us, Nick Robinson and all. One day, at this rate, political commentators will be told what to say and those that don't will be out of a job.
Anyone, like myself, who worked in Eastern Europe in the late 70s - early 80s know the suffocated feeling of the people who now have their relative "freedom." We seem to be going the other way towards a state controlled population. Just give it 50 years. Happily I won't be around then.
Complain about this comment
i can't believe how much negativity this has generated in the press - these are fundamental questions about the liberty of every person in the country and the, frankly, despicable behaviour of the labour party in gradually removing our freedoms. We are walking into a police state and all people care about is 'its a stunt that will cost a small amount of money' - pretty small compared to the hundreds of billions of pounds wasted by this governments incompetence and corruption.
Even more amazing that it makes the conservatives look bad, which journalists keep banging on about but myself and much of the public feel the complete opposite.
Complain about this comment
32 CEH
There you go again, winding everyone up.
If "Brown is Britain" then God help us all
Complain about this comment
Nick
Just read the comments on this issue on "Have Your Say".
These are not always very insightful but on this occasion they speak for themselves.
May I respectfully suggest you have a look at them, as I think you will find them interesting and useful in your work...
Complain about this comment
I'm wondering once Mr Davis is re-elected how long before he challenges Cameron for the leadership? He must strike before the next election, and sooner rather than later.
Complain about this comment
There are just as many possible positive outcomes as negative ones, but your point blank refusal to acknowledge or comment on them reveals a bias in your thinking which while perfectly valid and suitable for material published here, should not be tainting the reports you deliver on the BBC TV news. Your 10 point list sounds a bit desperate, almost petulant. There is no evidence whatsoever of any high level split other than your conjecture.
Complain about this comment
what exactly is the "cost" of a by-election to the taxpayer, Mr Robinson? and how does that compare to the public spending growth and waste under Labour? or the licence fee, which we apparently pay to be fed government propaganda.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick,
On a football terrace we'd all be chanting...
you're wrong, and you know you are!
you're wrong, and you know you are!
you're wrong, and you know you are!
you're wrong, and you know you are!
Get over it!
Complain about this comment
I'd get out more if I were you Nick. Stop having those hugely enjoyable (and no doubt expensive) lunches with your chums in the Westminster village and start talking to real folks.
Your 10 reasons no doubt make excellent sense to your chums - in fact you probably wrote them together.
The fact is real people don't buy the party line.
Talking down to us on the basis we don't really understand how things work isn't going to cut it this time.
You are not in the loop here Nick. You have judged the mood of your chums very well. What you don't get is the mood of the people.
Complain about this comment
As if we needed more evidence that Gordon Brown stands for dithering and incompetence, we have the fantastic spectacle of a byelection being called on an issue on which Gordon Brown claims to have conviction.
Yet we have no canidate and allegedly, no decision yet whether to actually fight the election.
Brilliant. So we're told how much Gordon Brown cares about our rights but when someone challenges him he can't decide whether to field a candidate.
If he's so decisive why hasn't he appeared to say immediately they will be fielding a strongly pro 42 day detention candidate?
Complain about this comment
@ C_E_H
Charles, whenever I read any of your posts I'm reminded of a quote I read from a Zen master (you'll have to forgive me if I can't remember who it is, maybe you can enlighten me)
"If someone claims they are Zen, they are not"
Your comment that Brown *is* Britain is a very, very dangerous viewpoint to have, that reminded me of Chancellor Palpetine spitting that he *was* the Senate in Revenge of the Sith. Nothing is more dangerous to democracy than when people begin believing that 1 individual can singlehandedly "save" a country, as the people of Germany found out to their cost in the 1930's. Do you think everyone who voted for the Nazi party really shared their views? Or do you think that they had lost their national identity and pride following the 1920's, were duped into fearing the communists after the Reichstag fire, and believed that Hitler could restore their pride as a nation?
I don't believe that Brown is a Hitler or a Stalin as some people on these boards do. I think that he has nothing but good intentions, enough good intentions to pave a road right down to hell, and that is exactly what he is doing. I've always viewed Brown a little bit like my dad, when I was younger he would give me a bedtime and tell me not to talk to strangers, and that was good, I needed those rules because I wasn't able to make well informed decisions for myself. I now am old enough to make those decisions, go to bed when I deem it necessary and will take to strangers if I feel like it. Some of the rules I had as a child I do not follow as they're no longer appropriate, even if at the time they were sensible.
Brown seems to share in your delusion that he is father to the nation. He is trying to tell us to be in bed by 9, to eat our greens and, most relevantly to this issue, to not trust strangers. But me, and the vast majority of the electorate, are not children any more, and we deserve the right to an informed decision on these subjects, and that is why I believe that DD is right to force the issue. Make the case for all these intrusions into our liberty, and I mean really make the case, not trot out the "It's for security, it's to complicated to go into" line, that only readers of the Sun and the Daily Heil. If it's for security explain why! And LISTEN to the other side, don't just dismiss their arguements as wrong, explain why! This open debate is what has been missing from the whole issue and DD is an absolute saint for addressing it, whatever *his* motivations were
Sorry for the rant, give a board guy a keyboard...
Complain about this comment
Nick, just a thought. Am I picking up that you are feeling a little defensive about the reaction to the way you have been presenting this story? Have you ever had to present a 10-point justification of your views before?
I was interested in your addendum to your last Newslog message about precedents for David Davis' resignation:
"George Lansbury, 1912
The Labour MP for Tower Hamlets, Bow and Bromley resigned to fight a by-election on a platform of votes for women. The Labour Party disapproved of his resignation and Lansbury lost the contest to the Conservative candidate by 731 votes."
No doubt seen by the Labour Party leadership of the time as a nightmare for them. No doubt popular opinion was in favour of not giving votes for women, so political commentators of the time would have scoffed at this "rush of blood to the head".
But who was right in the long run?
Complain about this comment
Honestly, Mr. Robinson, you are at it again! none of your 'reasons' hold water at all. Did the Government's PR department issue you with that list or did you think of it all by yourself? I hope the latter but suspect the former.
Simple question: How come the Tories found none of this 42 day detention/ getting rid of habeus corpus/cctv everywhere nonsense necessary when the IRA were in full flow???
And what makes anyone think that the Tories NEED the support of that dreadful rag, the Sun, when they seem to be doing very well without it?
If there is one thing about the current furore that cheers me up it is the fact that the Great British Public seem to be far less influenced by the media than they used to be, for which we should all be profoundly grateful.
Complain about this comment
Although I have never agreed with conservative policy, even though I have socialist beliefs and even though I do not agree with the philosophy of the right wing - I believe what Mr Davis has done is exceptional and requires applause. I don't wish for it to be interpreted as a 'Tory discipline problem' as some of the press are keen to push - but merely a man - with a belief - and a principle - which he is prepared to risk his reputation for. I agree that the By-election might be pointless, I will be annoyed if the Labour party don't rise to the challenge and put up a candidate - but good on David for trying to highlight a serious failure of our political system. How can a 'one man cause' (as GB has made it) be forced through parliment based on the 'buying' of minority votes )the UDP)? Sure - we all know the Lords will hurl the bill out, but this is no 'fair' system. Labour have lied about the reasons for extending, lied about the standard that is set abroad and mis-led the public by claiming that 60% of people are for it - where? who? - all lies. At last the people who are involved in politics have started to realise the system is flawed and DOES NOT REPRESENT THE PEOPLE.
David may be the first, but I sincerely hope there are many to follow. In answer to the critics who say this is pointless - I ask them what's the point of David continuing as an MP if the position becomes pointless in the face of a system which tramples all over the philosophy he originally began politics for (representation). I think Labour backbenchers who opposed the bill should show the same principles and resolve and do the same - then we would have a much more interesting situation for Gormless Brown to deal with. Maybe this is the first chip from the block of democracy and a sign that things really need to change with the British political system.
Complain about this comment
Labour should refuse to stand against Davis on a point of principal and civil liberties he seems to have forgotten - that this country is run as a democracy and parliament votes to make decisions, majority over minority. If he wants anarchy then he is (I suspect) in the wrong party. No one should stand against the man, expose him as a self interested opportunist whose odd behaviour stands to cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of pounds in a no-point by-election.
Complain about this comment
Taking a step back, DD is doing us all a favour by allowing us to pause and reflect and the incremental changes that have been happening over recent years.
It may be embarrassing or inconvenient for the Tories, it may be a high risk to DD personally, but I think it will pay off.
It does also turn the spotlight on the obvious and (perhaps not so obvious influence) of Rupert Murdoch.
Complain about this comment
-----------
#47 At 11:44 am on 13 Jun 2008, mullerman wrote:
If the Tories were in power they would of implemented the 42 day ruling ... fact.
----------
er, no. Opinion. You'd do well to recognise the difference.
Complain about this comment
It seems, Nick, as though you have done the classic media thing of creating your narrative before considering the evidence, and then finding yourself able to speculate only in a way which takes what available evidence there so far is and fits it to support your narrative. We seem to be in uncharted waters and yet you are pre-determining that the story should be 'trouble for Cameron'.
Please stand back and consider how the three leaders have handled the surprise so far: Clegg - decisive response; Cameron - unflustered piece to camera that shows a calm and tolerant attitude to an unforeseen situation; Brown - .... ah, yes... no evidence at all: might he be dithering by any chance?
I would not be surprised if Cameron did not like Davis's decision; equally I suspect that Davis foresaw that and therefore (determined to go ahead anyhow) acted unilaterally. By so doing Davis created space in which Cameron could create his own position, something he has done in an intelligent, measured and confident way. As a result, at this moment, he seems to have considerably more leadership skill, judgment and character than Mr. Brown. And Clegg certainly seems to have taken some steps in furthering his leadership profile.
Come on Nick: where is the balance in your commentary?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Why are you so blind to your own mistake? Or do you just like digging yourself a hole?
I won't go over the points that have been eloquently made above by a variety of people but clearly the truth is that David Davis did an honourable thing, and the public reaction has been positive. Your ten points on the other hand are utterly unconvincing and you are starting to sound dangerously like a (za)Nu Labour spokesperson: you're on the BBC now, so you're supposed to be impartial ;)
Complain about this comment
So Gordon avoid headlines in the paper? So what?> (Ed Balls) ;)
everyone knows what Gordon Brown did, the damage is already done. The media isn't just newspapoers , only 20% buy a paper, TV the web and the blogs know what went on.
Complain about this comment
Kelvin McKenzie has got another problem to contend with if he stands - Liverpool FC supporters.
They have never ever forgotten what he and his paper wrote about Hillsboro and they will never ever forgive it.
Already on the 606 site, Liverpool fans are urging their fellow supporters in that constituency not to vote for him.
Complain about this comment
I think some of the above posters are missing the point of Nick's article. He is not stating an opinion as to whether he believes Davis has made the right decision, rather pointing out how that decision could impact on the Conservative party. As a result, it isn't really a matter of much debate; this is where things stand.
Complain about this comment
I think Nick's ten reasons are right and this is bad news for Cameron - but he has two years to gloss over the whole thing. Davis will be re-elected and the Conservatives will not lose a seat, which must be the most important thing leading up to an election. I would expect Labour not to field a candidate and spend their time improving their ratings. If Labour DO put up a candidate, then I would question Gordon's judgement - it's a contest they won't win and do not have to fight.
Complain about this comment
Harriet Harman has developed a spine and Hazel Blears has developed an aura of happiness, as comment pundits have observed. By letting go of their party machine thinking and affiliations, their more natural characters are arising. This is quite enlightened from a Daoist/Buddhist/Stoic perspective.
Detachment is not indifference. It is the prerequisite for effective involvement. Often what we think is best for others is distorted by our attachment to our opinions: we want others to be happy in the way we think they should be happy. It is only when we want nothing for ourselves that we are able to see clearly into others? needs and understand how to serve them.
-- Mahatma Gandhi
Oh, dear. What has Gordon unleashed...
Complain about this comment
I pitty people who are willing to support a party who wishes to remove their freedoms, over a principled man because of ignorant fanboyism and misplaced loyalty.
Think about what you are agreeing with.
Turn of the SPIN, stop proliferating lies and disinformation.
The whole situation has NOTHING to do with PARTY POLITICS, NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CONSERVATIVES.
The ONLY thing this is about is your fundamental freedoms and rights, and whether you want to live in a country that is GREAT for being built on these.
Be aware of their gradual erosion.
Complain about this comment
@47
You claim that if the Tories were in power they would've implemented 42 days. Fact.
I'd be interested to know how you came by this fact, because that's a theory. They're not in power, so you cannot state as fact how they may have reacted to a particular set of circumstances. We can guess and theorise but never claim it as fact.
Which goes a long way to proving the problem I have with the die hard Labour supporters. By distorting the facts and mixing in rumours and suspicions they aim to warp the debate into the one they want to have.
A few more examples
1. DD was sacked because he said he would repeal 42 days and DC didn't want that
-Then why was Dominic Greive on Channel 4 news last night saying he would repeal the law? Why would DC appoint a new Shadow Home Sec. that had the same views as the one he "Fired"
2. This is about 42 Days
- No, this is about the whole spectrum of erosions into our liberties, CCTV, ID Cards, DNA Database. 42 Days is just one small aspect of this.
3. It's just a publicity stunt.
- Thats true, but not for the reasons you believe. The General population seems to have been conditioned to accept, without thinking, the "function creep" of "anti terror" legislation. If DD'd resignation draws more attention to that surely it's a good thing, whatever the outcome.
4. It will achieve nothing
- Surely the fact we're all posting so vocifourously on the subject proves it already HAS achieved something, to stimulate debate on the issue. Whatever the outcome we can't say we've sleepwalked into a surviellance society. The issues have been raised and thoroughly examined
Complain about this comment
Nick.. time to stop digging.
The public arent interested in the party politics, they are interested in the principle.
Why does everything revolve around a party power struggle.
Complain about this comment
If there is an authoritarian/libertarian split as per your point 7 Nick, we know where your loyalties willl lie from your Ein Volk Conservatism as national YC Chairman.
Complain about this comment
I am confused by why in your Blog you aren't actually discussing the issue of 42 days for which the public are applauding David Davies (please read HYS) on but instead some trivial dissagreement with David Cameron for which no-one seems interested in but both yourself and evening news correspondents seem keen to pursue?
Please Nick, get back to the basics of the actual issues and not the political soap opera that is Westminster.
Let us properly debate the 42 day ruling, let Labour actually come out and tell me why it is a good thing, with evidence.
Complain about this comment
#48 purpledogzzz, I had hoped that you had taken the hint and gone on holiday but no, there you are spouting off your verbal D when are you going to realise that less is more, as they say on the TV " calm down its only a commercial"
Complain about this comment
vastariner:
no, I fear it is the civil libertarians who are living in a bubble of their own, caught up in a peculiar frenzy of self-congratulation, and of congratulation for a man wth whom they make very strage bedfellows indeed.
Complain about this comment
Nick, your 10 negatives versus the hordes of positive responses from the public demonstrate the vast gulf between the public and the westminster insiders.
Why don't you step back and try thinking up 10 reasons why this is a positive step?
Perhaps instead of the Tories being seen as split, it embarrasses Labour into debating it between the rebels htse who don't like it but were bribed/whipped into shape, and Brown's calculating/corrupt government.
Perhaps DD uses this to convince the supposed 60% in favour that their approval is giving Brown his justification?
give it a try!
Complain about this comment
I really can not understand how we in Britain came to this sorry state, where we have the media who are meant to stay neutral and offer credible reporting now offer their own view of 'HOW' the news looks like.
Its always a good day for Labour with the BBC's Nick Robinson. Does the man not listen to the views of the general public? Remember Nick, its we who pay your salary, unless of course you have been open to 'special favours' by the Labour party.
Complain about this comment
# 57 boohoousa. excellent I agree with every word my thoughts exactly, only I could'nt have put it so eloquently.
Complain about this comment
I dislike Tories in general. I'm impressed by Davis's move.
I think it says a lot about the weakness, and shallowness of Cameron, however. Brown, as we all know, is dead in the water, and will lose the next General Election by a landslide, if he makes it that far. So what of the Tory leader?
Does he have genuine beliefs? Do his oppose this ridiculous piece of legislation? Is he willing to fight the Government on the ISSUE? No.
He opposes the move because it hurts Brown, but he refuses to commit to striking it down when he becomes PM, because he's scared of The Sun.
As sure as day follows night, Cameron will be our next Prime Minster (assuming he doesn't go the way of John Smith). Everything I've seen of Cameron indicates he's going to be just like Blair. Smooth, smart and interested only in power, not in principle or policies.
The British have got the party politics their obsession with Jordan, Wayne Rooney and 'The Apprentice' deserves.
Complain about this comment
Bravo for David Davis!
So it is now clear what we face the true battle for the minds of the UK populace.
The Conservative Party versus Rupert Murdoch.
I'm surely not the only one who have put two and two together and realised the only press anti Davis are the Rupert Murdoch Sun and Times and the BBC.
Even the editor of the Daily Mail normally Gordon's number one supporter can see where the man in the street is going on this issue.
Complain about this comment
I have a feeling that both the media has been wrong-footed on this issue. Though a majority of the papers came out against Davis this morning, they may soon discover their readership view the matter in a very different light, and may need to do a lot of backtracking in the coming weeks.
Complain about this comment
42 days is a fair thing to protest about but why not 28?
I believe some people are living in the realms of fantasy about this civil liberties thing. It appears to be based on technophobia. a bit odd from people typing negative comments about the government. Using an email that can be traced. Internet spyware, and search engines snoop on us on the internet all the time,
Do they use mobile phones. Every now and again a mobile sends out a signal to find phone masts in the area. This can be used to track someone.
As for the Conservative party the party that says its THE party of Law and order being against CCTV cameras I find that very difficult to believe. Although they would probably like to imply being against speed cameras. I dont think they are though.
Is David Davis demanding that this technology should be uninvented?
A stunt from the ludites champion, and a possible leadership challenge?
Complain about this comment
Finally we have a politician willing to stand up and say "I care about this issue, and I am going to make a stand on principle"
"On Principle" - given all the exposure over MPs expenses, demanding that they are given eye-watering pay-rises, enhanced and protected pensions, finally we have an MP willing to fight for something on principle - something that I and many other people suspected that MPs had forgotten all about, in their eagerness to ride the gravy train.
Also DD has said that his stand is based on the creeping erosion of our personal freedoms, it is about so much more than just the 42 days, its about CCTV, ID cards, National Databases of all our phone calls, emails and web browsing, its about the ever-growing power of the state that has nothing to do with improving security as terrorists will find ways around all of these things.
As for those who say that this is a shameful waste of money by DD, these are the same people who backed a £2.4Bn (failed) bribe in an attempt to head off a back-bench revolt over the 10p tax band, these are the same people that relied on a £200m bribe to the DUP to head off a defeat over 42 days. The cost of a by-election fades into insignificance compared to these cynical use of taxpayers money.
Lets hope more MPs follows DD's lead and start to speak out for the freedoms that being constantly eroded by the state without good reason.
Complain about this comment
Dont try to kid anyone that these messages represent public opinion. I know some of you have multiple memberships.
Complain about this comment
10 possible reasons for keeping the status-quo? I think the public prefer the one simple fact - there is a politician who is prepared to risk his job - his long career - on a matter of principle.
He could have moaned about the way the vote was won and kept drawing the salary, pretty confident anyway that Labour has not long left and he is set for Government. But no; he is putting his own job where his mouth is.
I think people of all political views admire him. As the Lib Dems have shown, this is not a simple party political issue. It is one of trust and honesty.
Just as Ministers used to resign if something went wrong in their Department, so David Davis is prepared to fall on his sword over the issue. I hope his constituents will raise him onto their shoulders to do battle with the Labour press if Labour have not got the courage to fight themselves. In any choice between trusting a man of principle and a red top newspaper I think most will favour the decent David Davis over a journalist from London.
Complain about this comment
So you're saying it's a bad idea because he might lose or he might win... Sorry, but how much do they pay you for this?
Meanwhile all I see is a list of reasons why what he did may or may not have been a good idea for shallow political advantage. Totally missing the point that this was not about political advantage for him or the Conservative Party, it was about doing what he believe was right for the country. And if people come to believe that Conservatives will do that - unlike Labour whose entire 42 days (whatever happened to 90?) was the real political stunt - then I believe it will do more good than ill.
Politicians and media seem oblivious to this, as if they are incapable of either recognising a principled act for what it is, or of seeing such an act without believing there must be cynical political reason behind it - either of which says more about them than about David Davis.
Yes, it gets Brown out of bad headlines - but the Tories don't need to get people to despise Brown even more, they need to get people to respect them. And this is earning a *lot* of respect out here in the real non-Westminster world.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
You, like most of the denizens of the Westminster hothouse, are out of line with the country on this one.
DaviEs is currently the most respected politician in the country.
Don't know how long it will last, but that's not the point.
As for your list of 'problems for the Tories, none of them are worth a cup of warm spit.
1/ The Sun backs winners. If the Tories lead the field, the Sun will swing into line.
2/ + 3/ DaviEs will not lose. Even if he is a rival for Cameron, so what? There should be several capable politicians in the Cabinet, all of whom are PM potential. If Davies becomes PM instead of Cameron, who loses? Who cares?
4/ The by-election will be a two hander with kelving McKenzie, and will be all about the issue. Labour will bottle it, and look weak.
5/ to 8/ are all healthy. The current strategy is built around not having policies. We need to know where we stand.
9/ A little debate is a good thing. Who wantsa dictator?
10/ Gordon is deep in the doo doo. He will get the bad headlines tomorrow.
Complain about this comment
Nick, you are obviously an expert on the comings and goings in the Westminster "village", so I was interested to read your 10 points. I may not fully agree with your analysis from my own viewpoint, but you live and breathe the environment so I take your feedback seriously and view it in the way that professional politicians and political watchers will analyse it.
Personally I agree with this action of David Davis, he seems to be a man of genuine conviction particularly on the issue of our fundamental freedoms. I do feel that this action is a powerful tool for keeping a really challenging debate in the "public eye".
It is rare to see such a powerful response to this blog, that seems to bely the perceived "public opinion" on the 42 days issue. maybe there are more people out in the UK who don't like this idea than current opinion polls state.
I live in hope.
Complain about this comment
David Davis is not just talking about 42 days. A sort of sleazy, secretive authoritarianism seems to have developed. We can all be spied on, and our privacy is not respected. I think it started before 9/11: e.g. RIPA 2000. This does not feel like the Britain I grew up in. DD may be revealing how many people dislike this new culture.
Complain about this comment
Oh Nick you've got yourself so intrinsically involved in the Westminster Village that you've just become its gossip monkey. And just like anyone else who relies completely on gossip you've become totally devoid of any ability to convey the TRUTH and the FACTS. Now, when an event occurs that is all about fact and substance, you find yourself floudering and desperately trying to create some, any gossip.
The moment you find yourself having to justify and convince the public that they are wrong and you are right is the day you need to seriously look at yourself as a journalist. Your job is tell us the facts, not to speculate and integrate your hunches and opinions. It seems your employers (us) disagree with you, why not take it as a wake up call - to do your job and report the news, stop trying to make the news. The public are fed up with being told what our opinion should be; learn fast or leave fast: you're choice.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick,
Good points. However, the greatest damage to the Conservatives at this stage seems to have come from the Media decision to analyse the damage. There seems to have been little attention paid to the face value of what Mr Davis has actually said.
The question "what's the political impact?" seems to have been assessed only how the Conservatives have been impacted. Very little analysis on how Labour is impacted. Would you address that please?
Labour has described Mr Davis's decision as a "vanity exercise". If they really feel that way, then how about they train their guns on the policy instead. Stop focussing on him and start focussing on the policy. Then they tear the vanity exercise apart and tackle the issue, on which they claim to have the public's support. If that is a genuine argument, then they have a great opportunity to fight on that basis.
Complain about this comment
Purpledogzzz, for heavens sake will you look up the meaning of totalitarianism and fascism, because I can assure you the true victims of either had to endure considerably more hardship than filling in really really complicated forms.
Further, Police all over the world do tend to burst into peoples houses when they arrest them, that does not in itself constitute totalitarianism or fascism.
I don't believe in 42 days either, but then I didn't really agree with 28 days, but apparently that wasn't a big enough principle for Dave "send em back" Davis, Man of the People (tm), or maybe he stood a real chance of losing his seat then?, it was either that or not a big enough principle, 4 weeks without charge is ok, but 6 weeks is simply beyond the pale, I must have missed that clause in Magna Carta, presumably the Conservatives missed Magna Carta altogether when they were interning Irish terrorists indefinitely in the late 50's and early 60's, Magna Carta did exist then didn't it?
Incidentally, the support for DD, MotP (tm) in Have Your Say is far from universal, there's a lot of dissent on there too.
Complain about this comment
Iain Dale wrote a piece on his blog about how this story is showing up the gap between the Westminster Village and Planet Earth. On just about every blog and forum I've looked at the comments have been hugely supportive of Davis. People like maverick politicians prepared to stand for what they believe in rather than say anything out of powerlust, the best recent example of this was Gwyneth Dunwoody. Davis will not stop 42 days going through, but he will make himself an authoritative figure on civil liberties and PM Cameron will have to cater for him.
Complain about this comment
Your first observation is that the Tories won't want to alienate Rupert Murdoch. While I appreciate the importance of having the media "on-side" are you really suggesting that British civil rights should be decided by an ex-Australian, American citizen? It should come as no surprise,I suppose, that the labour party wants to hide behind Murdoch's skirts rather than fight the by-election so Davis has done a double service in forcing this issue and in revealing the government for the ignoble, dissembling pack of cowards that it is. Good for Davis.
Complain about this comment
So we keep hearing that public opinion is behind 42 days.
What DD is trying to do is *form* public opinion---to provoke a period of intense debate and commentary about: Detention without charge; surveillance (not just CCTV, but espionage by councils); collection and sharing of personal data.
The fear of the stateists is that the population will wake up and realise that 1984 has arrived. The popular press gives us the two-minutes hate each morning chosen from among: paedophila; terrorism/Islamism; immigration. The liberal establishment have become the thought police. And Big Brother truly is watching us. So far only the Americans have given us Room 101 (extraordinary rendition), let us not follow.
Complain about this comment
Sorry Nick. I normally agree with everything you say, but you and the media can't see beyond the politics on this one, and you're wrong.
This is a highly principled move by a principled man, and everyone I've spoken to be they Tories, labourites or lib-dems are totally behind him.
Gorden Brown has gained nothing from this.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Your analysis is interesting but, in my opinion, flawed. This is just as dangerous for Brown and New Labour, maybe more so.
What Davis has done, and I have been giving this a lot of thought overnight, is to crystalise people's thoughts about the constant and draconian erosion of personal freedoms that have taken place over the last decade in particular. We have all heard the moans about councils placing microchips in wheelie bins or spying on people for allegedly living in the wrong school catchment area, quangos being given powers to examine E-mails or letters, officials having over 200 reasons to enter private homes, Home Information Packs which will have results entered onto a central database etc etc. These infringements of liberty were all enacted under Labour. Then we have ID cards, DNA databases, microphones on CCTV cameras in the high street. The refusal of the government to honour a manifesto promise for an EU referendum is a symptom of that whole attitude that BIG Brother knows what's best for us. People are tired of it and increasingly angry.
If Labour don't contest this seat they look weak and afraid of the debate. If they do then they will have to defend the way they have trashed long-held personal freedoms. This is not a debate that Gordon Brown, the architypal central controller of people's lives, wants to have. It is almost as if the British people have at last awoken from a long sleep like Rip Van Winkle and don't much care for what they find. Even a cursory glance at the HYS blogs, let alone listen to the views being expressed "down the pub", should convince anyone that the anger is real, and now that the topic is being aired, it will have to be addressed.
Credit to David Davis for acting as the prisim to focus all this feeling through. Maybe it will at last light the fire that will burn much of the intrusive and illiberal legislation that Brown and Blair have inflicted upon a once free country.
Complain about this comment
Nick
Quite clearly you and the rest of the Left spinning political pundits are smarting at being blind-sided by this move.
Put Simply DD has done the most for democracy since Emily Pankhurst decided to chain herself up.
He has single-handedly put clear blue water between Labour (notice the NU has been dropped by GB) and Conservative.
He has completely removed the last vestiges of slease and corruption from the Tories and laid it firmly at the door of Number 10.
Nick have you missed the debate about Nanny-State that occurs in the country? Its not just in the Pubs with the prols, the same conversations are being had in the Churches, Mosques and just about anywhere else two or more meet.
And under the 42 day law we can all be locked up without charge for 6 weeks for even discussing the matter.
Hurrah for DD for really being in touch with the population and saying Enough is Enough.
Complain about this comment
It is very apparent that the Tories made the correct decision in electing David Cameron as their leader.
It is team players we need to lead us to the next election.
DD will no doubt be re-elected and will hopefully be a leading backbencher
Complain about this comment
Ludicrously biased journalism from the BBC on this (and normally I would be a big supporter of Auntie Beeb).
For example, in today's article by Jo Coburn:
"Then, out he came, and made what can only be described as a most bizarre statement justifying his decision. "
What the heck was bizarre about it? It's a guy standing up for principles which he believes in, and I for one applaud him. I almost wanted to punch the air in delight that, seemingly, someone at Westminster has finally caught on that the UK has been led into a surveillance society, without even a whimper of protest.
Grow up BBC, and start reporting the *facts*, not spin!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I agree with Nick. As a Conservative party member, i'm torn between being as outraged as DD at this legislation and the wish to accept defeat for this battle, but the desire to continue fighting the war.
Now, Brown has been let off the hook with what should have been a day/week of very negative press headlines. I genuinely can't see what DD is trying to achieve here! Arghhh!!!
Complain about this comment
A lot of people complaining about Nick robinsons being more balanced. from people who's political centre of balance is more to the right of most peoples.
You multiple memberships are going to busy this afternoon.
Complain about this comment
I applaud wholeheartedly what David Davis has done and I just wish more politians could be so honourable as to risk all and ask their constituents for a mandate in such an important matter of conscience.
I generally enjoy Nick Robinson and think on the whole that he is a fair commentator, but on this occassion I think he has cockooned himself in the Westminster bubble and misjudged the high ground that D.Davis has acquired for himself.
Although there may be a downturn for the tories in this it will only be temporary and they will spring back twice as strong.
Unfortunately for the general public the media and Westminster have gone off half cocked as usual and misintepreted public opinion.
Complain about this comment
The BBC's coverage of this has been a disgrace. The Westminster Village is now so disconnected from reality that the thought of a politician acting on principle as a matter of conscience seems unthinkable.
I am naturally a Labour Party voter and have never voted Tory, but this issue is so important that it supercedes party allegiances.
I want my Liberty back. I am appalled at the treatment of an MP willing to fight for it.
If Labour do not contest this election then that will say it all for me.
Complain about this comment
Hundreds of computers, CCTV hours and encryption. The time taken to investigate is directly linked to the resources put into it.
It's our responsibility to properly resource investigations to get them completed within timescales, not to lock people up while our security services and police continue at the pace of previous years.
Brown wouldn't even pay the hand full of millions for police pay and it is now uncharged suspects who will pay the price for his reluctance to invest enough to keep up with technology.
As for public support, you could make exactly the same arguments for investigating pedophile rings. And the Sun would probably support pre-charge castration.
Davis is in danger of starring in a circus, but we do need this to be fought all the way and under constant scrutiny.
Complain about this comment
Well Nick, maybe this will be a nightmare for the Conservative Party, and maybe it won't. We can't really know at the moment. But we'll get a pretty good clue from the results of the by-election.
So, are you willing to put your money where your mouth is? I'll bet you a tenner that Davis wins the by-election with an increased majority. Are we on?
Complain about this comment
A quick question: if David Davis is taking the stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds in order to leave Parliament, will he be able to quit that role in time to stand for Parliament once again?
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson's Weak in Politics. But never mind, so are the newspapers.
Journalists have been presented with a novel situation. And it really shows - they don't know which way to jump.
So they're pretending to sound all authoritative, when in fact they really don't have a clue.
That's why we have Nick's 10 clueless comments that amount to nothing much.
You would be wiser dear chap to say "I don't honestly know". Maybe stick to analysing the possibilities. Or just read a few of your reader's comments for a far better analysis
Complain about this comment
I find it very hard to believe that any MP who's career is the ascendancy, as opposed to being consigned to the back benches, would do something so noble. I thought they spend most of their time with their heads in the John Lewis catalogue.
But perhaps in this case Davis feels enough is enough and that we should have a debate.
I like many on this board do not like the idea of the freedoms that so many have died for in the past cast aside because of the threats from a bunch of thugs and crimminals( which is how A Qaeda and their friends should be treated).
However, I'm not so sure the man on the street agrees. That is quite snobbish of me to say as I live on a street. But I feel that the concept to most people in this country of 42 days detention is as about as remote from their lives as winning the lottery. Man on the street want the laws as tough as they can be on "them terrrorists" and that is that.
We have nt seen the people that this will really hurt coming out to speak - I'm thinking foreingers or our constantly under attack Moslem community- Perhaps Davis will give them a voice.
But at the same time I don't know anyone who will vote for a party next time because of their policy on detention on trial whereas I know plenty who despise Brown and will using their vote as protest at the taxes he seems to determind to bring us to our knees with. Nick is right - anything that takes people's eyes of the "real ball" that the Conservatives are interested in ( kicking Brown while he is down) is bound to cause friction.
Complain about this comment
Yet again Nick Robinson comes out with the Westminster Village drivel. Tell me Nick, is it the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation or just Westminster Broadcasting Corporation that is your employer? You've gone native. You attempt to pursue a critique which has already lost its credibility in the country. Why don't you go and report what the people of Tayside, Belfast, Durham, Truro, Brecon, Warwick, Bury St Edmunds feel? This myopia is bringing the country judderingly to the verge of another Glorious Revolution, only this time there'll be no Dutch deus ex machina but a libertarian republican movement.
Complain about this comment
A total nightmare for the Tories.
About to get much worse if the grotesque barmy army of oddballs of old come out of the undergrowth. Rendering them unelectable - again.
What a disaster. I feel really sorry for Cameron. Presumably the whole farce is really about a fantasy leadership challenge.
And re the issue, what people hate is the oppressive bureaucracy and tin-pot dictators now ruling their lives. Not the security measures. The whole thing will be a total mess.
Complain about this comment
REf 32, From CEH
Charles
How can Brown be Britain when he has the lowest level support since records began. He might be the Britain that you would like to see, but the Britain I see has had enough.
Every politician will say they stand for purpose, society, and building for the long term, its just a case of MO. In Browns case its Tax Tax Tax and control control control.
Our right not to be held without charge, enshrined in law since 1215 is about to be eroded by a PM and a party who wouldnt stand a chance in an election. Its offensive for such as issue to be used as mechanism to prove the PM is strong and not a ditherer.
See now you?ve gone and put me in a really bad mood.
Pahhhhh.
Complain about this comment
For once an MP stands on principle, and all you can think of Mr Robinson, are spurious reasons which only curry favour within the Westminster village. Why don't you get out and see what the real world thinks? You may get quite a surprise.
Complain about this comment
At last, we have a politician who is prepared to stand up and be counted, and who is prepared to defend civil liberties against excessive, disproportionate snooping and surveillance. We should be careful that we don't wind up like Germany in the 1930s where dissenters and non-conformists were eliminated by the state.
I am sorry that he isn't in my constituency of Cheadle. We could do with someone decent!
Complain about this comment
I think the only reason ANYONE in Westminster village is upset about this is that they were looking forward to a nice summer holiday and now they've got a big-ticket by-election. I have been quite dismayed by the poor coverage of this by the mainstream media, the BBC in particular - the main headline on News at 10 last night did not make it clear that DD was standing down as an MP and in doing so implied that he was resigning from the Conservative Party!!
Complain about this comment
I must say tory bloggers sound rather shrill in their denial that this indicates disharmony in the conservative party.
To be honest I think alot of labour supporters would hold their hands up and say there has been things that have been wrong with Browns leadership style.
Its a pity that the tory-fans arent gracious enough to accept that the bullingdon boys may not be the perfect solution either.
Complain about this comment
Nick your a reporter , start reporting the facts and ask people what they think outside the fantasy world called Westminster, I think your find for the past few years, most of the general public, dont trust the politicians, cannot understand them, and have nothing in common with them.
The government are given these priviledged positions by the people, and for once its nice to see one who still thinks it too.
If i was Gordon Brown and i saw what was happening to this country outside his hidden world , i would be terrified, and its about time the media started reporting the facts back to the MP's, because the boys and girls in fantasy land are in for a very nasty shock!!!
Complain about this comment
Initially I thought it was a stunt, but for all the reasons you say, I'm sure it was a genuine principled stance (if one coming slightly oddly from the mouth of someone who in the past has been happy to portray himself as an unreconstituted right-winger).
If so, the real point is that away from the Westminster circus where the media seem to regard the running of our country as no more than some sort of long-running soap opera, genuine stands of principle are what re-engage people with politics. Whether voters agree or disagree with David Davis, many would applaud his courage and will join in the debate.
Is that really such a bad outcome for the conservative party ? If they handle it right, it could destroy labour's middle class vote, and I can't see the Sun backing Gordon Brown if he still looks like he is going to lose - Davis could earn the paper's respect (only a politician would want it) even if they disagree.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Watching your report last night and reading your blogs today it's clear that the one getting off the hook with DD's resignation statement is your good self.
It's a perfect excuse to stop saying anything negative about 'your' guys and/or try and spin something negative against the tories. (well, not quite but as with the WMD dossier, any justification, eh?) Please stop trying to pretend that your reporting is anything like unbiased - you cut your journalistic teeth bashing the tories when they were in power and can't even now after 10+ years.
Please remember - and report - the reasons (right or wrong) why he's probably done what he's done.
-To force a debate that should have happened but didn't
-To try and prompt the high-profile 'journalists' to frame the questions that they don't seem to be able to see
Huw must really cringe in that seat sometimes...
Complain about this comment
A one issue by - election reduces politics to a side show on the wider stage.
Is David Davis so arrogant he thinks he can detemine the political agenda ahead of the main political parties and the electorate.
David Cameron needs to show some integrity in this issue and disown David Davis
geefully
Complain about this comment
You can tell it's Friday lunchtime - look at that moderation queue.
Even though by the time you read this it won't be there.
.... a bit like DD?
Complain about this comment
David Davis is right is what he is standing for:
On ID cards and DNA, there is a common response that you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide.
But I do have something to hide. To hide from the criminals who will undoubtedly be attracted to work with the data ? the same as paedophiles are attracted to schools and the power-crazed to politics. To hide from the recipients of information that is lost, stolen or strayed from the ?secure? place that it ought to be in. To hide from the prying and intrusive eyes of later government initiatives that will use the data for purposes it was neither given not intended for.
So do we all.
Plus, as the government has an interest in protecting the identities of some people (security services/new identities given to released offenders etc), the database will be set up so that data can be falsified. And if it can be falsified it will be.
On detention without charge, we are told that there are thousands of people involved in plotting terrorism right now in the UK. But on the evidence seen in cases that have come to court , it seems likely that over half of these exist only in the imaginations of the authorities. That?s thousands of innocent people who could, at the whim of the authorities, be banged up without cause, without redress at untold damage to their personal lives. How much evidence would the authorities take to detain some one? One anonymous call? Two? How long before ?denounce your neighbour? becomes a national pastime?
He?s also right in what he has done.
The government brutally cut short the lively and largely principled debate in the commons, and these issues deserve a wider debate than they have been getting. If the government wants a consensus it should argue for one in parliament or in public and in detail, and not merely claim that it has public support on the basis of polls.
The way to test public support is at the ballot box. That is what Mr Davies is attempting to force, and he is doing it because the government steamrollered and cut short the debate in parliament, failed to include it in its manifesto and shows every sign of bypassing the even more principled debate in the Lords.
As to the political impact ? this issue is at least as divisive to Labour as it is to the Conservatives. The overall effect, if Mr Davis pulls it off, will be to put civil liberties at the forefront of the next General Election, to divide Labour and leave them without a leg to stand on, cement the Tory policy and deliver a new government that is both libertarian and Conservative.
The first of which, at least, is something we could all do with. I admire his stance and very much hope it works.
Complain about this comment
@108
dhwilkinson, so you *know* that some of us have multiple memberships? How do you know this? is it because there are always more messages in support of things you don't agree with than the ones you do? That's an attitude that seems systemic amongst the government. "The facts don't agree with us, the facts must be wrong" (WMD's "lethal" pot, etc etc)
What I can tell from this post, and others on the subject is that the overwhelming majority think that what DD has done is to take a principled stand on something that he strongly agrees in. Whenever a Tory gets caught up in a sleaze scandal many Labour supporters (and I can't direct that at you specifically because I have no facts to abck that up) clamour for politicians who are more principled, and not just in politics to get on the gravy train. Well now you have got your wish, a politician who's deliberatly got off the gravy train and stepped away from his fat paycheck to take a principled stand for something he believes in, and what do you do? Dismiss it as a publicity stunt. You cant have it both ways.
Yes, it seems very likely that he will get elected, but there's a possibility he wont. Especially since he's only fighting on one issue, one that you claim the majority of the public are behind you on. So either Labour should put their money where their mouth is and fight the issue, or they admit that they have misjudged the balance between liberty and security (something that the labour candidate in Mr Davis' constituency has admitted)
Complain about this comment
How can anyone get this wrong David Davis resigned of his own free will.He gave up what would have been a cabinet job after the next election.If he wins his seat back he will probably be on the back benches.Now if that is not a sign of a man who believes in what he says I don't what is
Complain about this comment
It's a nightmare for Cameron, because for the first time in his leadership he is forced to get off the fence and have a definite policy.
Personally, I don't think he's up to it.
Complain about this comment
As this country does not have a written constitution we are particularly vulnerable to creeping state control. The history of other countries has shown how quickly 'right thinking people with nothing to fear' can be outflanked by a malignant government. David Davies is right to point out that the slippery slope has to start somewhere and we are definitely there or thereabouts.
Complain about this comment
So next time the police have a terrorist suspect in custody, are investigating extensive links in Afhganistan, Pakistan and are attempting to unravel carefully encoded internet communicatons we should let them go, possibly to carry out a suicide bombing. Some of you don't seem to comprehend the dangers we are all facing, despite 9/11, desite 7/7, despite Madrid, despite Bali ... these are not scaremongering but reality, real people's mothers, daughters,fathers and sons maimed and killed. We've seen terror plots to blow you up whilst taking your kids on the trip of a lifetime to Disneyland ... stop harping on about this erosion of civil liberty, the reality is that no normal person will be affected by 42 days, only suspected terrorists for which substantial evidence has been reviewed by a judge, and re-reviewed every 7 days. I do not feel my civil liberty has been affected one iota by the 42 day proposal, but I do feel my civil liberty to go about my life safely has been attacked by terrorist fanatics. We should all be rejoicing that our government is taking measures to protect us, not spouting on about some theoretical future use of the powers to supress us all.
Complain about this comment
It's amazing how much flak Nick has taken for his blog. It's almost as if half of Tory central office has signed in...
Anyway
Clearly the theory was that if Labour don't contest it they concede the argument and if they do it they'll lose and it will appear that Parliment is out of step with the electorate. Which makes sense.
But they payoff is not that great; Brown had already lost the argument on 42 days and is perceived as being out of step on a range of issues.
The risk is greater; although Davis is highly unlikely to lose, if he is left against a high-profile Sun candidate it could be very damaging. Or Labour could run and do better than expected.
Either way, this occupies the news agenda and will do so while the by-election is held - which with the press he has been getting recently, Brown will be extremely grateful for.
Complain about this comment
With regards to your comments I think it very interesting that you should start with reference to the Sun. If we are seriously as Englishmen to fear doing or saying something because it may upset the owners or the readers of the Sun then we might as well throw away the key now.
I would be even more strongly in favour of David Davis if we can put the Sun into the shade. I think it is because the politicians are trying to get on the right side of the media that a lot of errors of judgement are being made.
I have said before the latest furore that I doubted the PM when we were told that 70% want detention without trial for six weeks. My fear is the misuse of such a facility.
As for the DUP then I look forward to hearing from them when they are not to benefit from the sale of former army sites in the province, as for water, well here in the westcountry we could do with some help.
Finally, I am a supporter of Ron Paul, who is making a statement over the weekend and so it must be understood that I am a libertarian.
Finally, I look forward to hearing how Gordon Brown explains why there is no referendum in this country over the Treaty of Lisbon especially now that Ireland seems to have voted no. Does anybody seriously think that we live in a democracy. It's a dictatorship!
Complain about this comment
C_E_H
"You believe in Britain? Brown is Britain."
Just can't believe you would write such tripe.
If Brown is Britain, is Britain Brown?
Are you suggesting that if and when Brown pops his political clogs, Britain will not just express regret (or thanks) and move on? Or will it subside into the North Sea?
If Brown is Britain, then I assume that he is relying on credit to get through life, can't pay his way in the world, is the sort of guy who wanders into a car showroom and forces the salesman to increase the published price of the vehicle (a la medical consultants, PFI, etc. etc.).
If Brown is so far-sighted, why did he flog off Westinghouse just before we need them most?
It's the sheer waste of money that gets people down - not the potentially good ideas that could be achieved with controlled expenditure.
If Brown does not put up a Labour candidate to run in the "Davis by-election", you have to wonder whether it's because the Labour Party is running out of financial options. I even wonder whether the failure to call a general election last year was because somebody pointed out that the party could be accused of risking its creditors' money.
Complain about this comment
Of course its a nightmare for the Tories.
About to get worse as the old barmy army of oddball suppporters crawl back out of the woodwork. Reminding us they are unelectable and undoing the hard work of many, many people.
Clearly it's a strategic move in a fantasy leadership bid to challenge Cameron. Otherwise why not fight your corner from your powerful position inside the tent?
Unfortunately it does wider damage to DC: why did he tolerate this maverick loose cannon at the centre for so long? In a Cabinet system, DD is unfit for office.
And the civil liberty issue people hate is the encroaching and oppressive bureaucracy of the State and the tin-pot dictators making life a misery. Not the security issue. The whole thing is a destructive farce.
Complain about this comment
I love the way everybody on hear seems to think they represent the wider public. People forget that the majority of the uk public support 42 days and do not see it a a scanadalous erosion of liberties.
D Davies can stck to his principles (personally I dont buy it) but dont be fooled in thinking the whole nation is behind him.
Complain about this comment
I can't believe all this "Public opinion"??? is taking a by election between a former shadow home office minister, THE SUN and the monster raving loony party so seriously. Dead ringers or headcases couldn't write this stuff.
Complain about this comment
1. Weaning politicians off appeasing the Sun is the single most important requirement to break the UK bonds of servitude to the USA.
2. Giving ex Sun executives a taste of their own medicine in the political arena would be the single most healthy thing that this country could do. The fact that Rebekah Wade was not sacked for beating her husband whilst running a strident moralistic comic is the biggest joke in the attempt to portray Rupert Murdoch as a serious businessman. He hires rottweilers to bully the UK Govt.
3. Resigning on principle is very different to holding a general election after 2 years - that is money well spent. Just as fighting hitler was.
4. If David Cameron is so weak that he can't overcome this, he's not the leader he's portrayed to be.
5. If the Tories are such an army of do-what-David-says muppets, then the sooner we know that the better.
6. David Davis has used independent judgement for right or wrong. That is what MPs should do.
Complain about this comment
I have to say I agree with what others have said, I've never seen the media so out of step with what actual real people in the streets outside of political circles are thinking about this issue.
The erosion of our civil liberties is something we care passionately about. And really I think this is probably causing just as much resentment as the 10p tax thing, but it seems the issue the media are not keen to talk about.
For example, new Labours recent criminalisation of 'extreme pornography', which has very few guidelines on what exactly 'extreme' is, and seems to me like a piece of regulation that is very open to abuse by Government.
ID Cards. The list goes on. Honestly, I think this move by Davis is playing extremely well with people. Hell, this is the first time in 20 years I've felt an ounce of respect for anybody in the Tory party.
Complain about this comment
The press is actively engaged in trying to make Cameron admit he was a part of this. So then The Tories can have a bigger and better drubbing. AND they can sell more newspapers. The SUN is following the BBC line as are others which was your lead. That lead was to take apart a very brave man who has the full support of all tories. This alledged row with Cameron is mischief making and hearsay. Much of the media is busy in a proactive campaign against Mr Davies who is exposing the truth. No matter how you look at it the irish voters show the public may be stupid some of the time but many have now caught up. Looks like the BBC and all of you are being very closely watched.
Complain about this comment
So the BBC is desperate to suggest this is somehow a problem for the Conservative Party? What a surprise!
David Davis is enjoying unpresedented - and deserved - public support. To deny it just makes the BBC look even more foolish than usual.
Complain about this comment
It is about time someone stood up to be counted in this grubby Parliment of ours.
Our civil liberties are being destroyed and no matter what may be said now it will come back to haunt us, (it did with the miners who were just fighting to survive and were called the enemy within ) By then if we are not carefull it will be to late to do anything about it.
Well done David Davis you are right, any right thinking person in this country can not fail to be behind you and support you.
Lets see if Labour will stand up and be counted or turn tail in the cowardly way they are used to.
Complain about this comment
The media have something to blow out of all proportion and twist to whatever they want. That's the only mistake Davis has made.
The simple fact is an opposition politician has stood up for his principles, the party in power will be too afraid to run against him and a tabloid newspaper wants some free publicity.
I heard Gordon Brown today, saying that the Conservatives are divisive. Excuse me, how many Labour rebels were there? Only by doing a deal with the DUP did the 42 day bill get through, not through Labour unity.
Personally, I think the 42 day bill is valid (if not more) but I think Davis should be applauded for bringing this to the public.
It will be interesting to see how this develops, but I can't see anything but Labour looking pathetic for either not running a candiate or putting up lame justification of the terrorism bill.
Complain about this comment
Nick
In spite of believing that the case for 42 days has not really been demonstrated, I still feel that this resignation is shallow political posturing. Davis is a canny politician and would not risk losing his seat. He knows that if he had a comfortable majority at the last election it is inconceivable that he would lose his seat in the current political climate. As for making a stand, well I am not even slightly impressed. If a labour front bencher had done this, their actions would rightly be seen as a major embarrassment for the government, but not a member of the opposition. If 42 days had been official conservative policy they would all have fallen into line and Davis would never have done what he is doing now. The public ARE gullible: just because you support his line on the 42 day legislation it doesn't mean you should support his hollow gestured resignation.
Complain about this comment
Grubear wrote:
And to be honest, the great British public doesn't really care what Murdock thinks
----------------------------------------------------------
Sorry? Remember 1992. It was the Sun wot won it.
Complain about this comment
Its a good move, not a bad one. Davis has shown that conservatives can be strong on civil liberties, and politicians of conviction. This means they have
1) boosted their support amongst anti-authoritarians
2)stolen some ground from the libdems
3)shown up the unprincipled and authoritarian stance of the labour party
4)kept the 42 days vote in the public mind.
people in the media and westminster may not approve of what he did, but that just shows how out of touch they are. Actual VOTERS are very impressed with his decision.
An impressed Lib Dem party member.
Complain about this comment
Even if there has been disagreement with Cameron on Davis's decision, so what? Doesn't it show a man and a party that have the courage to do what they think is right despite any party implications. That's a whole lot more than can be said for the majority of Labour MPs who voted 'for' despite their misgivings in order to save their party from meltdown and that of their ever more pathetic and dangerous leader.
Complain about this comment
I do not know where the hell your coming from Nick with the so called 10 points - your well off.
Brown is a dithering, bottling idiot, unable to fool the British public in regards to their civil liberties that he is so eager to undemocratically take away. He is the FARSE and his party is the only one totally divided. Please Brown just go its so painful to watch you squirm and play politics very very badly. Very poor. It stinks.
Thank you Mr Davies for standing up for the unbrainwashed man on the street - take on the mighty Sun - when you win, it will show the rest of the men and women on the street just what that newspaper is all about - watch their sales plummit. hehe.
Is this the begining of the man on the street saying ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. STOP THE INVASION OF OUR FREEDOMS OUR PRIVACY AND STOP THE EROSION OF OUR GREAT BRITISH DEMOCRACY. MORE IMPORTANTLY STOP TELLING US WHAT TO THINK AND BELIEVE!!!!!!
Davies is the man to sense the feeling and he will capitilise. Conservatives will only lose out if they fail to buck the media and support this cuase COS THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN GIVEN A CHANCE AT LAST TO EXPRESS THEIR HORROR AT ID CARDS CCTV DNA DATABASE'S etc 1984 etc.
Complain about this comment
I feel Davis ought to pay the costs of the by-election he has instigated rather than the taxpayer.
It is an issue of principle for him so that that principle extend to his own wallet? Why should taxpayers foot the bill which can be estimated at £155,000.
Join the Facebook group to petition Davis to pay for the by-election costs.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=16034573521
Feel free to join up.
Complain about this comment
1) It will pit the Tories against the paper whose support they most want to win - The Sun
The Tories want to win the support of the people who may read the Sun. The Sun as mentioned above will change its spots to support winners.
2) David Davis might lose the by-election, robbing the Tories of a talented politician
And Gordon Brown will sign the next European treaty in the full glare of publicity.
3) Davis may win big, emphasising his status as a potential rival for David Cameron
Labour was traduced by Mr Blair and Mr Brown into being ruled by two people - even now no obvious heavyweights are present. With regard to the Tories - there won't be a leadership campaign unless and until Cameron loses an election or if it is forecast to lose one.
4) The by-election may be a damp squib in which no major party runs and is seen by many as a waste of tax payers' money
The cost of the by-election is trivial - less than a day's interest on the £2.7 billion borrowed by Darling to try and buy votes. We know the Lib-dems won't run - stated reason that they are in agreement with Davis. Labour probably won't run but if they don't then they will be called 'chicken' from now until the next election - it will just emphasisie the epithet - 'dithering, bottling Brown' - and that can't be good for Labour or Bad for the Tories.
5) David Davis wins and gets back into the shadow cabinet where no-one knows what he'll do next and is therefore a divisive force
Nothing has been said by anyone that this is likely. Mr Davis knew that he would lose his position as a result of his actions. MrDavis is a talented person and as someone once said - you don't waste talent - it is too rare a commodity.
6) David Davis stays on the backbenches and becomes a focus of discontent with David Cameron and a divisive force
Obviously 5 and 6 are exclusive. I would expect Mr Davis to be given some position of Authority in the Conservative party - if only to keep him in the public eye as a principled politician - to remind the population of why he stood down.
7) The Conservative Party is forced to have the divisive debate between libertarianism and authoritarianism
Would you rather have a debate about libertarianism and authoritarianism - or a party that just goes for authoritarianism.
8) The Conservatives are diverted from their strategy of focusing on schools, welfare and family policies
No more than Labour are - what one person does is not too significant. There will be probably half a dozen low priority news articles on the BBC before the by-election and after the election - hardly enough to keep out other news items.
News articles:
1) Davis resigns
2) Writ is moved for election
3) Early Report on canvassing for election
4) Late report on day before
5) By Election Special
6) Analysis the next day
9) David Cameron does not look in control of his top team
During the vote one Tory member voted for the Government and 36 Labour members voted against - it appears that Labour have the difficulty controlling the politicians.
10) For the first time in months Gordon Brown is helped to avoid dreadful headlines which today would have read ("I did no deal, honest")
True - but it won't be long before he is back in the soft and smelly. What is his reactions to the Irish referendum? People will be reminded of his sneaking in through the back door to sign it.
Complain about this comment
I have to disagree with this. The only negative part is the bit about running against the Sun. Thats the only danger. Otherwise I think your average voter will probably think he's doing the right thing.
As for number 3) on the list of 10 reasons above, I really dont think David Davis is that stupid. He would not jeopardise Cameron's position as Prime Minister in waiting and the key to getting the Tories back in government.
Complain about this comment
I forgot add ..
As any Journalist knows - any title with a '?' at the end of it means that the answer is 'NO'.
Complain about this comment
Obviously all you bloggers that support the resignation and forced by election no longer believe in parliamentary democracy, that has stood for centuries. This is just hypocracy pure and simple.
Whether the present system of democratic representation is the best or even truly democratic, perhaps should be the point Mr. Davis should be asking, but, then would he or any of his collegues really want true democracy?
When I was a child I remember seeing other children going in the huff and picking up their football crying as they left, its my ball your not playing!
If Mr. Davis is resigning on principle, does this mean that Mr. Cameron and the rest of the Tory party who oppose the extension the same as Mr. Davis, are not as principled?
Mr Davis if he is a man of principle would accept the will of parliament, just as he would expect labour parliamentarians to accept a Tory government winning a debate.
Is this th esame Mr. Davis who condemms the excessive spending of taxpayers money yet is happy to waste taxpayers money on what can only be described as a farce, as nothing will be acheived by this stunt.
Personally I have to confess that I have voted labour in the past, however, I will never vote labour again, not because of the detention issue, but because the labour party like the Tories want power at any price!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Your interpretation, and that of the BBC and the media in general, is so far away from the general public's feelings and interpretations of David Davis' stand, that it appears to be total spin.
We're used to New Labour constantly spinning, but for you and the BBC to appear to support their bleating is inexcusable. The BBC should be presenting pros and cons to both sides.
The public can see this man is doing something right in a country going so wrong. Why can't you see this and why it is so important for someone like this to make a stand?
Speculating on internal fallouts gives you something to write about and talk about, but it doesn't reflect the known facts, only your assumptions of a possible scenario, that might be good for reality tv.
Stick to the truth and the known facts - this man has given up his job to make a stand for what many people believe in and many have died defending, so give him some credit.
Complain about this comment
92 CEH
In you blog regarding the present demenour of Hazel Blears, please substitute "Smarmyness" for "Happiness"
94 ArsenaltilI die
Superb summary.
Complain about this comment
Unbelieveble how NR can only see the NuLab point of view. The media are determined to see only that particular view is given out.
What DD has done is remarkable and for a politician to basically give up a top job in government, to stand up for the British people of all party persuasions, is a breath of fresh air after all the sleeze/expenses scandals recently from all the main political parties.
If the "sun" want to put up a candiate celebrating locking up innocent people without charge or trial for 42 days, let them get on with it.
If Labour don't put up a candidate they accept that DD is right as they won't fight on the issue.
People are interested in politics again for all the right reasons. Brown's dirty deals will come back to haunt him.
Complain about this comment
THIS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PARTY POLITICS, IT IS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF BRITAIN
Regarding funding David Davis' campaign, if he has a whip-round my cheque will be in the post immediately, like many others I imagine.
I've also been looking at the Liberty website. They will probably get my £30 membership later today.
In fact David Davis and Shami. Chakrabarti make a good team. If DD is the figurehead and Shami is the spokesperson this would be excellent.
Complain about this comment
#141
"labour supporters" - probably yes. "Labour supporters blogging on this site", emphatically no.
Generally, the same goes for Conservative supporters as opposed to Conservative bloggers.
I think you need to expect a place like this to be a home for strongly held and fiervely defended party political viewpoints (with a fair sprinkling of independents).
Complain about this comment
not my normal place to post, but please Nick take a step back and see the real issue.
The real issue is that a politician has finally made a personal stand about a genuine issue about what this country should stand for.
Good luck to him.
7 days without charge has always sounded a lot to me personally. If I was arrested I would want to know what i had been charged with, even if I end up on remand for 12 months before I get to court.
Fundamentally have the security forces even ASKED for this level of power?
If so what is it going to be for on a practical basis?
And why do the Americans only need a fraction of this time?
these are the relevant question to the man on the street. Quite frankly most political comment is NOT about the policy, but how the policy might (and I stress the word might) play with the public. That might excite journalists but it leaves the public cold.
Get back to reporting the facts and not the hypothetical drama and you will find interest in politics increases measurably.
Complain about this comment
Those 10 points of why Davis should not have resigned is an excellent political analysis.
However isn't what really matters is that someone shouts out loud for our basic freedoms.
Isn't that what we want of our elected leaders? That they stand up for their principals and encourage us to join in a debate about it?
Is it better they just work out some machavellian strategy in a smoky room for getting there own way? No I don't think so
I agree with what Davis says... holding people for 42 days without charging them is just plain evil!
Complain about this comment
If I can attempt my own nutshell review: its not about `DD+ 10 party political points' anymore. Its about Gordon Brown: any force against him is now viewed highly favourably by the public. If you don't believe me wait until his next popularity rating scome out. The bottom will have fallen out. And he is yet to be visited by George Bush this weekend!
Complain about this comment
Amongst all the gravy train snouts in the trough unprincipled political expediency that's left MPs standing at the low level it is one MP puts his job on the line for his principles and you indulge in Westminster navel gazing.
Complain about this comment
It's about time someone put Rupert Murdoch and his empire of darkness in their proper place. Murdoch is allowed, without being elected, to be the most powerful figure in a land that he doesn't care about.
Gordon the Golem's - and before him Brother Blair's - toadying submission to this monster is among their most shameful acts.
Complain about this comment
If Davis beats a Labour candidate convincingly, with the LDs out of the contest, having had a proper debate about all the civil liberties issues, does he not make that issue a Tory issue and take it away from the LDs for good? That would hurt the LDs, who get support from those who think Labour too lefty and Conservatives too nasty. Taking a lump out of their vote because the Tories had become the party of civil rights would be a big win for the Conservatives.
As for being a waste of public money, an MP is elected by his constituents. If s/he feels, at any point and for whatever reason, that his/her mandate is challengeable, then it is entirely proper to put the question again.
We did not hear this reasoning when TB cleared off to pocket cash as quickly as possible after resigning as PM.
Complain about this comment
What's most interesting about this issue is that British liberty is being defined by viewers and commentators as the freedom to resist change. This is one of the most long-standing positions in Tory politics (some 330 years old, indeed). Whilst I applaud David Davis's conviction politics, I am baffled as to why he has chosen this issue and this moment in the parliamentary process to make such a stand. I also disagree fundamentally with the 'freedom from change' and the 'liberty to maintain tradition' arguments which have so frequently lain under the surface of Conservative politics. We must allow changes to our laws and our unwritten 'constitution'. We do not live in the same world governed by Magna Charta, and Magna Charta was not set up to defend the ordinary British people from oppression in any case! Without changes to our laws and our 'constitution', we would end up with a far more outmoded, irrelevant and repressive regime than the one which we currently have! There are other reasons why I think that Davis's decision is misquided - some, but not all, are similar to those given by Nick Robinson. Firstly, public opinion is surely likely to swing against Davis when the election takes place and is seen to be somewhat pathetic, meaningless and odd. I do think that this move also starts to undermine Cameron's control of the Tory leadership, and reminds the electorate that he appears weak on policy decisions, however cunning he has been on strategy. I also think that Cameron will feel that he has lost a golden opportunity to give Brown another hammering, not least because he will be inviting a hammering in return. On the other hand, this change in the pattern of news coverage does at least give the government time to regroup - it is important that they are given a chance to do this.
Complain about this comment
It's time the media made up their mind. Do they want honourable politicians who take a stand for what they believe in regardless of the consequences(as many claim). Or don't they. You judge this purely on the politics. Yes politically it is probably a questionable thing to do. But as you have pointed out you have received many communications supporting DD. I think overall the public will endorse this move as they will see a politician standing up for something that he obviously believes in.
Complain about this comment
In everyone?s haste to rant and rave, I think we are all forgetting that DD is NOT taking this issue to the PEOPLE; he is taking this issue to a small SUBSET of the people, his constituency.
Unless everyone is going to move there in the next 6 weeks or so, so they can vote, this is no more a demonstration of the will of "The people" than the vote in the house or the numerous polls. Even less so when
at the moment it looks as if it will be between DD and the Ex sun editor.
Now that is a real democratic decision for the electorate is it not?, Not so much about invasive snooping more about enlarged egos.
People can babble on about principles but DD made sure the first port of call after making his decision was the Lib Dems, to make sure they wouldn?t stand against him, he is hardly full of courage then, but quite full of political connivance.
There is no doubt that we are snooped on too much, but you dont change important issues like that by an empty gesture, and the gesture is empty because he will get back in through default becauseall he will have to beat is KM and even a one legged dog should be able to do that.
Complain about this comment
Nice to see a politician with principles, unlike the DUP MPs.
Complain about this comment
Nick, this just shows how biased you are, you comment on how much the British public respect the decision of David Davis, but then give no mention of why that might be, instead, rather strangely seeming to have more interest in potential pitfalls. You must realise, most of the viewing public see you as very biased towards the Brown government. Your credibility as a journalist would be heightened if you had some balance in reports...
Complain about this comment
After reading ALL the comments above, and in light of the recent inquiry by the BBC trust regarding 'fair and balanced reporting across all regions' - Don't you (the BBC) think it's time you started learning from your mistakes and started reporting what the public believe, rather than reporting what you THINK the public SHOULD believe.
I'm still hung up on the burning statement the BBC continue to stand by which is that 60% of people are in favour of the 42 days ruling. I ask again - where? who? What evidence do you base this on? A street survey in St Albans? Hardly representative of the general public.
Surely the BBC recognise that if you have stirred 163 comments (so far) - which is phenomenally high - on this blog - and the majority conflict with this statistic - then the gathering of your 'public opinion' must be flawed.
Of course you might already know this - in which case you really are the puppet of which ever party is in power at the time - parading spin and lies as 'truth and fact' to the public - who clearly don't believe you anyway.
All adds up to a big waste of time, and I'm sure the first B stands for bullsh*t and not British in the acronym BBC.
I guess the question is how long before Nick Robinson discovers that his job has become as pointless as David Davis's and resigns in protest. Yes that's right Nick, when you started out your career you would have been full of how you were going to bring the 'truth' to the public, open their eyes and expose the lies in Government - oh how far you have come - just another cog in the machine - doing your job without realising the contribution you have made to keeping the lid on what you saught to expose when you were a keen young journalist.
Complain about this comment
Well I don't know what David Davis will do to the tory party but his actions got me to sign up for this blog!
However - like most of us I have no idea whether this is a high risk gamble by an ambitious politician, a principled stand or a fit of pique. But again, I suspect like most of us I hope that this is a principled decision.
In this country we are immensely complacent about our freedom, levels of surveillance and police powers now exist that were not deemed right during the second world war, 35 years of IRA activity or indeed during the post war years when palestinan sympathisers were hijacking, bombing and shooting all over the world. Now I accept that technology has made more things possible but just because we can do something does not mean that we should, we are in danger of accepting anything that is covered by the blanket of national security.
If you visit America you will notice on your return just how repressive this country is becoming. I don't think that the USA is perfect but they do have their right to freedom enshrined in law.
David Davis is I hope starting a long overdue debate on what price we are going to pay for this so called security. Whether he is re-elected is to some degree irrelvant, he has stood up to be counted and those who treat politics as a game should be ashamed of themselves.
Complain about this comment
Aw crap - there's now 192 comments - I can't keep up.
A revolution in the making..
Complain about this comment
Davis is not exactly flavour of the month with his collaegues at Westminster.
It is also being reported that Cameron is more than happy to be rid of the loner.
Last but not least allow me to dispel the myth that Davis was ex-SAS, he was not a regular.
Complain about this comment
I agree this isn't just about 42 days it is about things like RFID chips in wheelie bins: it is about councils using anti terror laws to see it you live outside a school catchment area; it is about many many other things that other people have listed above.
There comes a point when you have to say enough is enough.
I am reminded of the famous quote by the monk about the Nazi government in Germany and finally when they came for him there was no one to stand up for him.
We are sleep walking into a Police state it is time to say no more.
Complain about this comment
How about 10 reasons Nick seriously misjudged the mood of the country.
Nick, I usually find you interesting and insightful, but you got it badly wrong this time. A senior politician has just thrown away a near certain opportunity to be Home Secretary because he sincerely believes that the nation needs to debate civil liberties - and you instead focus on the leadership of the Tory party. Good grief, why? Commentators need to get out of the Westminster echo chamber more.
I have never voted Tory. I never will. But David Davis's principled stand should be applauded from the rooftops.
Don't feel that you have to apologise. We all understand that surrounded by career politicians in Westminster, it is easy to forget what a principle is.
Perhaps at sometime during the next few weeks you could turn some of your attention to ID cards, arbitrary detention and the other assaults on our precious and essential liberties that are being so casually eroded for short term political gain.
Complain about this comment
@152
Be honest, when you say no "normal" person will be affected by 42 days detention, you really mean no "white" person will be affected didn't you.
Just another quick thought, would 42 days be OK if normal/white people WERE affected? Would it be OK if YOU were affected?
Hate to break this to you, but a "suspected" terrorist *IS* a normal person. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. I know, I know, centuries of hard won legal principles can be so *damned* inconvenient when pushing a social agenda can't they. The only way an ACTUAL terrorist will be arrested is if they've already done something, in which case
a) there'll be plenty of evidence, so no need for 42 days
b) innoccent lives will already have been lost so 42 days won't have helped them will it?
Complain about this comment
155 chriskingfleet
Good point about Labour funds.
By the time of the bye-election Labour may be in liquidation due to lack of money.
Complain about this comment
CEH # 32
"Gordon Brown stands for purpose, society, and building for the long term. I challenge anyone to say this is not in tune with the aspirations of the common man, business, and politics. "
"You believe in Britain? Brown is Britain."
While the "common man" etc may want purpose, society and building for the short term, GB does not seem to if you judge him by his actions.
Bringing a country to the levels of indebtedness in which we now find ourselves, despite having just come through an economic boom, is not long-term building.
Compounding a pension crisis but layering additional taxation onto pension funds is not building for the long term.
Spending billions extra on the NHS, with little real benefit being delivered is not building for the long term.
Mortgaging the countries future on hugely expensive, ill-conceived and one-sided PFI agreements is not building for the long term.
GB is about short term expediency at the cost of long term prosperity, and in the sense that we as a nation have the highest level of personal debt ever, then as least you are correct when you say that "Brown is Britain", and there is much wrong with both at the moment.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I think there is a huge gulf between the incredibly subtle game of Westminster politics and the politics of the general public. David Davis has made a move that makes perfect sense to the general public, but doesn't compute in the Westminster game, and your analysis shows a total lack of understanding of the real, human politics that goes on outside the soap opera in Westminster.
Complain about this comment
If a case requires an additional two weeks for all the evidence to be discovered and investigated then let's go to the 42 days. The civil liberties question is one that, as a pensioner, always causes me some ammusement. I like cameras to be where I go and for the images to be observed by those guarding the nation and if, God forbid, Mr Davis had one of his loved ones killed in an explosion created by a suspect released because there wasn't time to complete an investigation then he would be singing a different tune. Real care for the community is shown, not by all the fancy talk about what is thought to impinge on civil liberty but in things like ensuring a minimum wage and decent working conditions. Things the tories don't give a stuff about.
Complain about this comment
If a case requires an additional two weeks for all the evidence to be discovered and investigated then let's go to the 42 days. The civil liberties question is one that, as a pensioner, always causes me some ammusement. I like cameras to be where I go and for the images to be observed by those guarding the nation and if, God forbid, Mr Davis had one of his loved ones killed in an explosion created by a suspect released because there wasn't time to complete an investigation then he would be singing a different tune. Real care for the community is shown, not by all the fancy talk about what is thought to impinge on civil liberty but in things like ensuring a minimum wage and decent working conditions. Things the tories don't give a stuff about. Gren Gaskell
Complain about this comment
Nick, can I respectfully ask that you, and the BBC, wake up and smell the coffee?
The country has finaly realised that Labour have failed the nation and the electorate are willing and able to force a long spell in opposition for the current government.
Given record personal debt, a bankrupt party has created a bankrupt nation.
The sooner the BBC 'gets' this, the less likely you are to lose the licence fee. The more you desperately clamour to improve Gordon's dismal poll ratings the quicker you undewrite his demise.
Carry on pushing the liberal left bias and you will be posting your own P45's after 2010.
Many things are changing in this country, and the attitude to the licence fee poll tax paying for an editorial bias far removed from impartiality is sailing off into the sunset.
All Guardanistas hail the new dawn!
Complain about this comment
Since Nick is being accused of being pro-Labour on this thread, perhaps in his next blog he would like to put the record straight and tell us where is political alliegence actually lays.
Complain about this comment
talking of splits, Its Europe next. a lot of fun to be had with the conservatives on that one as well. Watch all these strange name people disappear to 'have your say' after four o'clock.
Complain about this comment
Labour vs Conservative is of little concern to me. It might sell a few papers, or generate some website hits. However, it is a poor "choice" at best. Meanwhile, there have been real reductions in civil liberties, now paid for with tawdry deals with the DUP, and people condemn a man for speaking out?
If the Tories were merely posturing on this issue and are unprepared to support a principled stance, then I would be delighted if this move provides them with a headache. If however they are prepared to put their money where their mouths have been in the way that Davis has done, they might just win my support.
Complain about this comment
Its interesting to note the Labour governments comments about the David Davis affair. Turmoil, division, splits. Looking at the results of the vote on 42 days detention, I see the Labour Party had 36 rebels and the Conservatives had...one. The reaction to this whole affair from Labour smacks of desperation and just confirms that this is a government hanging on by its coat-tails. For Gordon Brown to talk of a 'farce' considering his disastrous first year in charge is nothing if not amusing. The attitude of surprise and derision aimed at Mr Davis' decision sums this government up nicely. It would be complete anathema for a Labour government to see someone stand up for centuries-held British freedoms and institutions, wouldn't it?
Complain about this comment
I think you may have missed the point of the public sentiment (or at least mine) - it is not that the impact on the Tory party is not interesting or uncertain, but that erosion of civil liberties is an important topic. I am much more interested in hearing a well balanced debate about civil liberties than about how the major parties will try to manipulate us to try to score points about this topic. I think you have lead us into a trap of talking about spin when substantive and important policy differences are at hand. Shame on you.
Complain about this comment
7) The Conservative Party is forced to have the divisive debate between libertarianism and authoritarianism
Nick, this is a GOOD thing.
Complain about this comment
Nick
In the interest of "balanced" reporting, why not do ten reasons why this is bad for Labour-PF?
Complain about this comment
Nick, you are beginning to sound like the PM's PR man. (Are you just a tad annoyed you didn't have wind of this story?)
Davis's announcement changed none of the political fundamentals. Davis is challenging the public opinion polls on 42 days and asking his electorate to confirm or deny their veracity. Meanwhile, The Sun has got a huge problem. It knows it is failing to 'lead' any opinion in the country at the moment and its candidacy in the by-election is an attention-seeking antic through which all will see. You see, the Sun must be seen to have the readership which determines the outcome of the next General Election because this is what sells newspapers. Thus far, the result is a no-brainer and The Sun is out of control of events and it doesn't like it. Young Kelvin - sorry Murdoch - will seek to change all that, for all the wrong reasons. Sussed.
Complain about this comment
#124 - The answer to your question is because the BBC don't understand principles - they will write whatever they are told to. How could a modern journalist ever comprehend resigning on a principle? I'm afraid anyone who has made it 'to the top' has had to leave their morals and principles on the negotiating / bargaining table.
If a journalist had such morales then there wouldn;t be many left as they would be resigning in droves everytime they 'mis-reported' a story.
For example - did anyone see on the local London news about '7/7 victims having to resort to escorting to survive due to the lack of compensation offered by the government'?
If you saw it then you would know exactly what I mean. Talk about half a mis-reported story - and I saw it twice that evening. No substance, no evidence simple gossip and hear say.
....and the BBC is something we should be proud of? - Give me a break.
Complain about this comment
Ten good reasons - if you're isolated in Westminster and your expenses mean more than democracy and freedom.
Nick - you've been in New Labour's spin dryer too long.
Mr Davis believes that this issue is fundamental - bravo for a politician who'll take a stand on his beliefs.
Incidentally, where are the 30 or so Labour MPs who felt so strongly that they would do anything short of disturbing their pension?
Yours, in admiration of Mr Davis, and in disgust at the rest.
Complain about this comment
Labour may be back in the unpopular headlines following the BBC Website politics news reference to
"UK TO PRESS AHEAD WITH EU TREATYt
The British government has said it will continue to ratify the EU Treaty, as unofficial counts suggest it has been rejected by the Irish in a referendum. ........"
This is certainly not supported by the British public. If anything is going to push support the Conservative way this is it.
Complain about this comment
moderators - have you missed 174 to 179.
I can't think six on the trot have broken your rules.
Complain about this comment
dhwilkinson - despite the fact you believe all these comments are posted by the same few people - you are in fact wrong.
Don't take the word of this blog, get off you backside and go into the street and see what the 'public feeling' is.
I think you'll find when you get back your views will be somewhat different.
I am not right wing, in fact nothing could be further from the truth - honour and principle fly high above any 'allegiance to left or right'.
Don't be a fool and suggest that the Labour party actually represents the views of the working class anymore. This matter is not one of party politics, it's a matter that has the public livid about their rights as citizens, and their authority as the 'mandate givers'. Both have been trodded all over by a set of self-interested mugs who are backed by many misguided souls like yourself.
This isn't football, you don't stick with your team through thick and thin. When your (team) loses it's principles and changes it's political stance - then you drop them.
You muppet.
Complain about this comment
wow; if that topic summary doesn't prove massive pro-labour/anti-tory bias in the bbc then I don't know what does
can I have my license fee back please?
Complain about this comment
TheresOnly1Soupey@191
There are far more accurate measures than this 'blog' , 'have your say' and any other forum on the internet(aliens etc). this is not public opinion. this is a group of enthusiasts for certain differing opinions. Most people don't feel the need to do this.
Lets not forget the cheating that goes on with multiple memberships.
Complain about this comment
#157: "I love the way everybody on hear seems to think they represent the wider public. People forget that the majority of the uk public support 42 days and do not see it a a scanadalous erosion of liberties.
"D Davies can stck to his principles (personally I dont buy it) but dont be fooled in thinking the whole nation is behind him."
What's your evidence that the majority of the UK public support 42 days? The only evidence I've seen are opinion polls that won't publish their sampling methodology or the precise questions they asked. I think you could be the one who's been fooled.
Complain about this comment
Remember dear friends;
?Those who have changed the universe have never done it by changing officials, but always by inspiring the people.?
? Napoleon Boneparte
Complain about this comment
dhwilkinson
You are correct, their are multiple identities on this blog
My other identity is ............
dhwilkinson
Complain about this comment
Your ten points seem more like a Labour wish list than anything else Nick.
As others have noted, there are also a number of positive results of Davis' actions that you have completely ignored/not thought of.
Complain about this comment
So, someone decides to take their "...ball home..." just because the rest of the gang doesn't want to play to their own beliefs.
But, hang on, didn't we just have a democatic vote on the belief at issue which, albeit only just, received a parliamentary majority consent.
As individuals, we may or may not like the outcome but, over centuries of civil war, we have agreed on a democratic system for arriving at solutions to issues which trouble our nation.
Hence, what a WASTE of taxpayers money just to make a point which has been discussed at length and the outcome already decided upon.
C'mon Mr C, get your party in order. You should be stronger than this. Whimsical distractions to cater for those in the party who think their egos are bigger than the electorate are surely not on.
Complain about this comment
Is it certain that David Davis will be selected as the Tory candidate at the by election? If he is not following the party line, why is he to be their candidate? In any event would he not make the point he wishes to make more effectively as an independent candidate not trying to reply on party support influence and current apparent popularity.
Complain about this comment
I couldn't agree more with people who say the BBC is seriously out of touch with their view-point on this issue.
I have never voted for the tories before, but for the first time in my life, I can seriously imagine myself voting Conservative. If that's not a sign of a good move, then I don't know what is.
Complain about this comment
Nick - Not a Nightmare, here are 10 Reasons:
1. We are daft enough to be persuaded by a newspaper (hopefully)
2. No way on earth he would lose on the Civil Liberties issue.
3. This amy be true, if so good.
4. There are over 600 wastes of tax payers money in the House of Commons.
5. Good, we want more divisive forces in Politics. (but hardly likely)
6. A lot of people are discontent with DC.
7. Better to debate Common Sense (sadly lacking in many)
8. No policy differences (of any note) between any of the parties.
9. Whatever happened to concensus?.
10. Headlines, just like the Truth about their sleaze and corruption does not seem to effect the politicians.
So there you have it Nick, 10 reasons and no Nightmare.
Theo Lansing of the The UK Column.
Complain about this comment
Soupey saids: ** How could a modern journalist ever comprehend resigning on a principle? **
Rubbish! Nick has it dead right.
It is a quite different thing to resign from a Cabinet (like Hesletine or Cook) because you DISAGREE with a policy, but to resign from Parliament when you AGREE with YOUR party's policy, but don't like the way the OTHER parties voted is simply idiotic.
At least it is unlikely now that he will ever be able to exercise that kind of loonie judgement in office. I'm against the 42 days but I can still recognise petty egotistical posturing when I see it.
Complain about this comment
The only thing I can say is that I was talking to a couple of colleagues at work today and 2 of the 3, who have never voted Tory before, said they would vote for DD.
People forget that the whole 42 day idea was only created so that Gordon Brown could accuse the Opposition of being 'weak on terror'. Noone was asking for it, noone has asked for intrusive ID cards, noone has asked for our bank details to be sent through the post by the Government.
Please get out of London and go and talk to some real people, who actually care about more than their jobs and secretarial allowances.
Complain about this comment
dhwilkinson - even if you watered down the responses and assumed several were created by your so called 'double entires' - you would still see that there is a strong feeling against this - contrary to what the polls are telling us.
Next you'll be suggesting that all the people here are against the 42 days because they are all terrorists - such is the belief that there is a 'terrorist around every corner'.
You carry on believing it matey - I learn from history. Every governement lies to it's people - and this one is no exception.
#219 makes the perfect point - if you ask the right question in the right way then you will get the response you require.
Stop me in the street and say:
"Are you for locking up terrorists for 42 days without charge" - and I might say yes.
However ask me:
"Do you trust your / any government (with it's great track record for perfect justice) to have the power to lock up ANY citizen it deems to be a 'terror suspect' - by it's own definition" - then I will certainly say NO.
...and even if you can get over that - then how are you going to justify the £3k per day in compensation of your money the government will be paying out to terror suspects when they simply don't have enough evidence to charge / convict after 42 days?
Surely even you must see this policy is madness - the compromises and shenanegans that have gone on to force this in have made it a complete waste of time.
Wasting time and Money is the ONLY thing every British government has excelled at.
Complain about this comment
#215
I feel sorry for the moderators - and I bet they thought they were going to have a quiet Friday afternoon!
Complain about this comment
Finally....I have discovered where it's all going wrong.
Our illustrious Prime rib minister is more interested it sh*te on TV than actually running the country.
This man is laughing at us all.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7450282.stm
Complain about this comment
Nick
Thank you for your desperate attempt to cheer up GB and his unwholesome bunch of clowns.
I'm sure there is a drinkie at no.10 for you.
Complain about this comment
Nick, I'm not being funny, but do you have any interest at all in democracy?
The points you made all speak about the concerns of power, ambition, control and all the small-minded gossip of Westminster.
You will have learned by now just how out of touch you, and the people whose views you report, are with the public.
Complain about this comment
Well done David Davis,
This Londoner salutes you. It is high time that someone makes a vocal stand against the insiduous removal of civil liberties in this country.
The press, who for so long have been a negative voice in this country needs to wake up and realise that complaceny and taking the freedom we enjoy for granted is simply not an option anymore.
Murdoch press has been a blight on the country and the sooner a goverment can win inspite of it and then do something to limit it's influence, the better.
Nick, why don't you publish ten reasons why DD is actually doing the right thing and why people should stand behind him?
Complain about this comment
C_E_H
A while ago you posted that you would leave this site today and apply your talents elsewhere.
I believe that would be a loss.
I disagree with much of what you write, but you write it well. (We could all probably do with less of the Zen stuff, but I guess that's just you.)
It would be good to have less veneration of Brown. He's just a guy doing what he thinks is right, like most of us.
But, be frank - do you really believe that tax payers' money has been wisely, prudently, spent over a decade?
If a business hits a rough patch, it cuts its ambitions until it can afford to do what it would like. (That could mean culling some existing spending areas or tightening control and getting better productivity from others.)
It just seems that, once he had let go of Ken Clarke's two year budget plan, Gordon had no idea how to get a grip when he opened the flood-gates.
Davis is taking a stand on the most elusive part of politics - "justice".
You can't measure it easily. You often can't see it slipping out of reach. But we do have a massively intrusive state.
Yet still, GB and Co plunge ahead with the ID card fiasco. For goodness sake, realise that some of the technology just doesn't work universally.
And, just as with the "42 days" issue, assertion always conquers "arguable fact" when power is too tightly centralised.
In cases which involve "technology", it doesn't help that most politicians have bugger all understanding of how companies work, how consultancies work, how offering a political "wet dream" just makes people want to make money from a tax-paying people who have little control over how much their governments waste.
Not supporting any party with the following comment. Vince Cable was the Chief Economist for Shell. Real business. Real problems to deal with. Only income from people's disposable income.
If Brown had any sense, he would not have said in the House that Cable didn't understand the economics. As a guy with a PhD in "The Labour Party and social change in Scotland..", he hardly qualifies as a business technocrat.
Had Brown the sense to "draft" Cable into the Treasury, I have absolutely no doubt that he would have found a way to trim between 2-5% off government expenditure. Even my old Mum could do that...
Guess what, that's an enormous amount.
He could have avoided shafting private pension funds.
Had he chosen, he could have stopped forcing changes into local government and just allowed citizens to ask for reasonable services at a reasonable rate. I don't need a UKL100K plus person to run a local council. There are plenty of people with huge experience who would probably be delighted to do the job for half the price, to while away their early retirement years.
But no. It has to be about "committed" people. So you think that means money? Go ask the people helping in Darfur.
Let's just force government back to where it should be - as little seen as possible, making the best use of any money it takes from people and properly regulating areas where it is currently doing an awful job.
(Yes, like banking. I don't want to own part of Northern Rock. If it failed, then just bye-bye. Collapse of financial arrangements, well either get a grip or let them fail.)
If Davis stands up for the minimisation of state intrusion, I'll be with him.
Prove any case for different laws and I'll be with you.
Complain about this comment
A few problems with your 10 reasons Nick:
1) They were already pitted against The Sun on this issue so nothing has been lost there. The Sun also has something of a tendancy to go which ever way the wind is blowing. If the Tories are doing well in the polls before the next election then The Sun will back them to increase sales. If you have any doubts about that look at 1997.
2) He may lose it. I may win the Eurovision song contest. Rushden and Diamonds may win the FA Cup. All sorts of things may happen but are hugely unlikely to. Considering the political make up of that constituency and the fact that the Lib Dems are not standing I think DD is pretty safe.
3) If he wins big with no credible opposition then that hardly poses a threat and if Labour do field a candidate then a big win will show that the anti-42 day stance was the right one despite (what I can't help but think as highly dodgy) opinion poll findings.
4) If nobody else, and lets be honest by that we mean Labour, chooses to stand then that's their choice and, again in the case of Labour, makes them look rather weak and not willing to stand up to genuine scrutiny.
5) There is of course no golden ticket for DD back into the shadow cabinet but if he does make it back in I have every faith that DC can give him a post that would be suited to this cause without turfing out the fairly universally liked Mr Grieve.
6) That one is possible but only if there is mass discontent with DC and I'm sorry to steal your thunder Nick but there just isn't.
7) That debate would neither be divisive nor necessary. The Conservative Party is committed to freedom, of that there is no doubt.
8) I have faith in the Conservatives' ability to walk and chew gum at the same time. In any event there are still about 2 years to the next general election. More than enough time to get the message across.
9) I do get where you come from on this but I'm not sure that the British people are not tired of the idea of a presidential prime minister who is the supreme ruler of the minds of all his underlings. DD has made a personal choice to gamble his career. There is nothing anyone could do to stop that. However, DC and CCHQ should now make sure that DD enjoys their full support.
10) Those headlines appeared yesterday before DD made his speech. Like I said above, there is plenty more time before 2010 for Brown's mistakes to be splashed all over the front pages. Also, the people just do not seem willing to eat what the media feeds them on this.
I'm not saying that what David Davis did was the best thing that has ever happened to the party but I think to brand it as a massive crisis for the Tories is misleading. I have no idea where this idea of an internal rift of ideas that Labour are trying to peddle has come from. Opposition to 42 days was genuine across the shadow cabinet. Another unfortunate example of the Labour ethos of repeating a lie so often that you hope everyone falls for it.
What DD has done is show that politics can be about principle, about something more than keeping on the right side of Rupert Murdoch and getting the approval of Nick Robinson. He is standing up for what he believes in and that cause is a just one and a one that needs to get out to more people than it so far has.
I feel that that will be remembered long after aby short term problems have subsided.
Complain about this comment
It potentially might be a political nightmare for the Torys, but its genuinely righteous stance and so has merit, and hopefully will start more general awareness and opposition and direct action against the police state that these war criminal perverts have been bringing in. It would of course be very very sweet to see the Sun/BNP disease humiliated. Perhaps even better would be for people to stop buying that poisonous comic.
Complain about this comment
Nick
The savage truth is that I now have a party I can support. An odd thought as up to now I have been vacillating between parties. For the first time in recent history an honourable member of Parliament has done the honourable thing.
Far from being a nightmare for Cameron it is a nightmare for Brown. Does he fight or not? Is he prepared to argue his case? If he does and loses, he is in trouble, if he doesn't fight he is in trouble. In either case Brown has lost big time.
The press seem desperate to protect Brown which is odd. Oh and the Sun? Sorry don't know or care what that rag says, it does not matter.
Complain about this comment
230 TO1S
Don't feel sorry for the moderators.
In reality its only the Blue Peter cat pressing keys at random.
Complain about this comment
TOMORROWS HEADLINES
Normal service resumed.
Brown dithers over David "Dangerous" Davis bye election.
Labour in disarray over what to do.
Nick Robinson castigated by bloggers.
Hooray for the Irish. Brown says we carry on to ratify!!!
Complain about this comment
Davis is a legend. Its about time someone stood up for what they believe in. I used to be a labour but Tory all the way now.
Complain about this comment
I am sure that in the previous criminal cases that the suspects have been held up to the limit of the law, then released and re-arrested and held for another period of time.
Then if a suspect is re-arrested then they could be held for 56 days greater than 42.
As the law strands today:
If the police and intelligence services cannot find anything significant on the suspects in 28 days then they are either overworked or lacking resources. I would imagine that if I was a held suspect I would expect to be put to the front of the queue to have my life/bank details/ computer disk etc pored over and either charge or let go for lack of evidence. Now, does lack of evidence mean not guilty, that is another question.
Could the Government be looking to create another level of law agency between the intrusive surveillance local authourity(Speed cameras CCTV, Congestion charge, Oyster card....) and the enforcing agency Police and Courts?
Now where has that 3 tier system been used before?
Complain about this comment
I think this response is somewhat mistaken Nick, for the following reasons:
1) It will pit the Tories against the paper whose support they most want to win - The Sun
Surely we do not want our democracy run by the Sun newspaper - it is up to journalists like yourself to make a stand and applaud courageous political acts.
2) David Davis might lose the by-election, robbing the Tories of a talented politician
Then we who are against this preposterous piece of legislation will have failed to win the debate - but a battle lost not a war.
3) Davis may win big, emphasising his status as a potential rival for David Cameron
One can always find a negative in absolutely anything, and it is this attitude that has turned off the masses to politics and made us a politcally apathetic nation -we have to start applauding idealism and strength. An army is no use if only the general knows how to fire a gun - the same with a political party.
4) The by-election may be a damp squib in which no major party runs and is seen by many as a waste of tax payers' money
Well this really is the apathetic's dream - but surely the small change spent on a point of real, fundamental principle is as nothing compared to the millions spent on a war none of us wanted. At least this is real political debate, not New Labour spin.
5) David Davis wins and gets back into the shadow cabinet where no-one knows what he'll do next and is therefore a divisive force
Do we really want the most senior politicians in the land responsible for our collective governance to be nothing more than sheep bleeting in the political fold? - that is a waste of tax payers money.
6) David Davis stays on the backbenches and becomes a focus of discontent with David Cameron and a divisive force
And he joins father's for justice, dresses as the bionic woman and sings karaoke for a living. Best not take a stand on any political point then.
7) The Conservative Party is forced to have the divisive debate between libertarianism and authoritarianism
The COUNTRY must be FORCED into a debate of civil liberties that have been hard won over centuries of strife and effort by the politically active, only to be thrown out in an instant at the whim of an ideologically barren New Labour governement
8) The Conservatives are diverted from their strategy of focusing on schools, welfare and family policies
For God's sake, our civil liberties are fundamental, the basis of the democracy for which we are supposedly fighting in the first place! This point is fatuous at best.
9) David Cameron does not look in control of his top team
Same as point 5 - Cameron will have taken a radical step forward in British politics by appointing Lions instead of Donkeys - God knows we need it.
10) For the first time in months Gordon Brown is helped to avoid dreadful headlines which today would have read ("I did no deal, honest")
But he still would have sneeked his awful legislation through, without proper consultation from the people who SHOULD be in charge of these matters - The JUDICIARY. New Labour has forgotten the basic principles of democracy - the separation of powers, The Legislature, The Executive, and the Judiciary. This principle has been in place since democracy was born in ancient Greence, yet this government are rolling back three thousand years of progress. This government have politicised the judicial process time and again, constantly eroding the democracy they say they wish to protect. They are fighting the terrorist's battles for them - who needs Al Queda when you have New Labour?
Complain about this comment
I think most people of any political party are pretty upset about their rights being constantly chipped away at since labour came into power.
Just consider the Lisbon treaty for starters; devolving more powers to what's basically just a foreign non-democratic quango without even asking any of your own country about it first (apart from Ireland; well done you guys for having a vote).
Do we really want to have children's dna on a national database? Is that really necessary?
Do we really need to be forced into carrying our papers/ID with us and then be imprisoned when we leave them at home? And then be locked up for six weeks in a cell with no window because one of your neighbours doesn't like people who look a bit foreign?
Is it right that nobody is allowed to wear a t-shirt that says "I don't like war" anywhere near parliament without being arrested for terrorism?
Gordon Brown, and the labour government generally, need to stop the "we know best" approach and get real. People do not like having their rights taken away from them, it's as simple as that.
In a free society there's a balance between protecting the population from danger, and protecting individuals' rights. Basically the current/proposed balance is completely skewed; it needs to move back towards individuals having some rights again.
Complain about this comment
It seems that the story is becoming the media's disconnect from the public.
Virtually all the reasons given above that this is a damaging move are only relevant if you care about political gossip. The vast majority of the public don't. Why would they?
Where we draw the line on civil liberties vs national security.... That's something that we all can get our teeth into...
Complain about this comment
think you have misread the situation on D.D's resignation. You are looking at from the view of an insider who simply doesnt understand that politics is nothing if you have no principles.
We now await the response of cowardly Brown who will yet again demonstrate his lack of conviction and courage by refusing to put up a candidate against D.D . He has no primciples and no backbone
This is a story about the Big Brother state and the unwillingness of this Government to defend its ever increasing control over us , the people.
Complain about this comment
My post was found to break house rules (No 18). So I'll try again since I'm a little baffled as to why.
1) I doubt very much if the support of a newspaper these days is critical to election success.
2) Davies is highly unlikely to lose, although stranger things have happened.
3) If he wins big, then he is only a threat if he makes noises in public. I think he is intelligent enough to realise that if he does wish to make such a move, wait until after a general election. If he moved before this would rip the Conservatives apart and give Gordon Brown the escape he sorely needs.
4) I actually agree with this point, but saying that many people are encouraged that he has made such a stand and respect his reasons.
5) I think this is pure speculation. He knows that to make any further high profile actions could destroy his political career.
6) Same as for point 5.
7) This I do not understand. Why do they need to have this debate? Davies resigned for personal reasons based on this particular issue. When Robin Cook resigned the same analysis could have been applied.
8) A temporary diversion. More important political issues will arise over the next few weeks.
9) Lack of control? If Cameron had decided to stop Davies then people might say he is a control freak. Cameron has immediately stated that he respects his decision to resign but appoints a replacement straight away. That is a sign of control.
10) On the contrary, when the campaigning begins I would expect the issue of whether a deal was struck or not to be raised again, potentially causing Gordon Brown more embarassment at possibly a crucial time.
Davies may have decide to begin a long, subtle campaign to take over leadership of the Conservative Party. He might even go for the jugular if he is successful in the by-election. But if he is being honest about his reasons then this will only be a blip on the political landscape.
Complain about this comment
Disnaymatter, you miss the point entirely. The massive flood of support for Mr Davis from the public clearly shows that it is Gordon Brown and his second rate failure of a government that is anti-democratic, not Mr Davis.
By forcing this by-election on the issue he will give the public, who the Government are supposed to represent, a chance to have a say. How is this anti-democratic?
Is locking people up without any charge for over a month really democratic? Facist maybe, but not democratic.
Complain about this comment
Tell me something because I'm even more confused than I was yesterday. What exactly and precisely is Davis' campaign about?
Is it
* Intrusive government?
No-one said it was going to be easy to strike a balance between civil liberties and keeping ahead of the terrorist. What's Mr. Davis' view on the alternative because if there's an easier way, let's see the policy.
* Six weeks pre-charge detention as opposed to 4 weeks?
How many days would Mr. Davis accept - 7, 14, 21? Or is he saying that suspected terrorists should be subject to the same time-limits as other suspects?
* Government tactics to ensure that the legislation got through?
*The impotence of the Official Opposition under David Cameron's leadership and their inability to make an impact on the debate?
What on earth is the man saying? Is he making a stand against all or some of them or have I lost his thread completely?
Complain about this comment
TheresOnly1Soupey@229
You mention the compensation. Let me help your case that the figure has not been decided yet.
I am against routine dentention up to 42 days for terrorist suspects. but i am persuaded by the case that if the likelyhood of this is extremely rare and serious and the government are willing to take the very serious consequences and pay decent compensation for getting it wrong.
My problem is that I don't see things in black and white. The other problem I have is the crusade against technology element of this idea. Suggesting a surveilance state therefore implying the former Conservative shadow home secretary would remove these CCTV cameras. I think that is unlikely dont you?
What about the amount of people complaining that the former Conservative is liberal left bias? I'm not suggesting he is biased against the conservatives either(any more NLNH_2!) Those letters stand for someone who is following me around BBC Cyberspace who I caught by accident using 2/3 names.
Complain about this comment
I dont normally write comments on Nick's blogs - but this one has me fuming!!!
Why isnt the pressure on Gordon Brown, Nick? How the hell can he get away with not putting a candidate up for the by-election? Why arent Nick and other commentators pressuring him to say if he will ?
Who cares about Kelvin McKenzie? Nothing but a foul-mouthed chav and as for his old boss - Rupert Murdoch - well I'm sick and tired of Rupert (a non tax payer here and a US resident) sticking his bloody nose into our affairs in the UK! The best thing that could happen to this country would be for The Sun newspaper to disappear off the face of the earth!!!!
Complain about this comment
Nick
I don't blame you for adopting a quizzical stance immediately following a very sudden and unexpected announcement. What is scary is the way your response has been echoed by so many outlets in the media who have had longer to consider it than you did (or at least time to ring their proprietors for instructions).
For the first time since I stopped reading it in 1991, I paid my own money to buy a copy of the Independent today. Why? Because of all the quality media it was the only one covering DD's resignation in a balanced fashion on its front page. It will be interesting to see whether the Saturday press moderates its stance towards DD as a result of the groundswell of public opinion, but I am not holding my breath.
As a committed conservative I have often felt that our failure to campaign more vigorously on the issue of personal liberty in its widest forms has been a missed opportunity. DD's principled stand is not about the treatment of terrorists per se, but about the relentlessly creeping ability of the state to collect, misuse and mislay data about each of us that it does not really need, potentially keeping us detained without charge while it does so. The public has been a lot quicker to grasp this point than the media, hence the media seeming so out of step.
Complain about this comment
Must admit I haven't read all the posts but the more I think about this the more I feel it is completely pointless.
He seems to be try to con the people that this is in someway a "referendum" on $" days and if he wins his own seat back as he clearly will that he has in someway proved a point, that public opinion is somehow "proved" to be against this measure,
But think of thes, you are a died in the wool Tory who happens to want Davis as your MP BUT you happen to support up to 42 days detention for terror suspects. I suspect many people in the seat fit this description. How do you vote?
Its going to prove absolutely nothing whatsoever about Public opinion it really is such a stupid thing to do all at tax payers expense. Why should any other party dance to this tune and take place in a farce just because this (some would say rather opinionated) person wants to "prove" he's loved in his own constituency. Is it a bi-election or a referendum?
Complain about this comment
To me it is simple, a politician with principles who is prepared to stick to them. It is internment by another name.
I am tired of a government which wants to control me, my family, my privacy, my ID, my money and how it is spent.
Roll on a change of government where personal freedom can be valued more than the power of the state.
I am also disgusted by the bias of the BBC. On Breakfast this morning, 2 people were interviewed, both against his action.
Complain about this comment
251#
The reason why I personaly hope Labour don't put up a candidate is becaused a blind man can see that this is a political stunt. Of course DD believes strongly in his beliefs I have no doubt BUt whatever the result in a one off bi-election cum referendum, what will have been proved whatever the result. Do you honestly believe that a victory for David Davis means that he has demonstrated that the country backs him on 42 days. All it will prove is that the majority Tory vote in his constituency want him as their MP and we already know that. There will be 100s of Loyal Torys voting him back in even they believe in 42 days, Cant you see that?
Complain about this comment
Something else important here, but which seems to have been missed in all the media, is why did the speaker not allow Davis to make a statement in the commons?
The speaker basically said that because the views that he would have expressed would be different to those of Gordon Brown, that he was not allowed to voice them in Parliament (ie the speaker explicitly said, in Parliament, that nobody who disagrees with the current government is allowed to voice their opinion in Parliament)
Doesn't that scare anyone here? Nick? Doesn't that scare you? Doesn't that reek of the Stalinist state that is precisely what David Davis was talking about? Doesn't it prove why Brown and his gravy train speaker are such dangerous men?
Complain about this comment
Guys, whether you agree with Nick or not, stop trying to tell him what to write!
I'm sick of people urging him to read Have Your Say as though it was the fount of all wisdom. His job is to report the party political angle and bring these possibilities to our attention, not to tell people what they want to hear!
Complain about this comment
"The BBC has been inundated with calls, texts, e-mails and blog comments praising David Davis' decision yesterday and some have questioned why I have suggested it may be a nightmare for the Conservative Party."
I think we all know WHY you've suggested that Mr Robinson, but we also know that you are grasping at straws.
Away from the cosy world of Westminster the people who actualy matter are impressed with this action by DD, and despite the BBC's clumsy attempts at news management they are making their voices heard.
It's been a great couple of days for the populace at large breaking the incestuous strangle hold the political classes and their media whores have over the news agenda.
I'll be toasting DD with a Guinness tonight!
Complain about this comment
Prediction For October 2008
George Osborne on a matter of high principle resigns his safe seat to fighr a bi-election/referendum on fuel duty. If he wins it will prove that fuel duty is unpopular and against the will of the Good People of Britain and Gordon Brown must listen to the people and scrap it imediately.
February 2009.
Caroline Spellman on a matter of high principle resigns her safe seat to fight a bi-election /referendum on scandalous mis use of MPs allownces. Oh no that wont work !!!!!
But you may get my drift
Complain about this comment
The fact that is not being reported is that Gordon Brown, an unelected Prime Minister, did various deals in order to secure the 42 day detention; a measure that he has no mandate to push through Parliament, because it was not included in any manifesto.
There is no guarantee these days that the House of Lords will stop the measure and if they try, the government will force it through using the Parliament Act. Where is the democracy in that?
Nowhere in this process has the ordinary citizen been given the chance to have a say.
David Davis is right to highlight this and previous so-called "security" measures Labour have pushed through without a mandate.
Complain about this comment
Nick said:
1) It will pit the Tories against the paper whose support they most want to win - The Sun
- Cynical comment - it's not 'The Sun wot won it' anymore.
2) David Davis might lose the by-election, robbing the Tories of a talented politician
- He won't
3) Davis may win big, emphasising his status as a potential rival for David Cameron
- So?
4) The by-election may be a damp squib in which no major party runs and is seen by many as a waste of tax payers' money
- Que Sera, Sera
5) David Davis wins and gets back into the shadow cabinet where no-one knows what he'll do next and is therefore a divisive force
- You made that point earlier
6) David Davis stays on the backbenches and becomes a focus of discontent with David Cameron and a divisive force
- You're making the same point
7) The Conservative Party is forced to have the divisive debate between libertarianism and authoritarianism
- Oh my God, it's the end of civilisation as we know it.
8) The Conservatives are diverted from their strategy of focusing on schools, welfare and family policies
- No one believes all that anyway
9) David Cameron does not look in control of his top team
- Like Brown and Clegg you mean?
10) For the first time in months Gordon Brown is helped to avoid dreadful headlines which today would have read ("I did no deal, honest")
- Some people read more than the headlines, Nick.
Sorry, you've failed your GSE in political intrigue.
Complain about this comment
258# Good for you Margaret, Toast away, I'll continue to think David Davis is somewhat stupid as I feel will be demonstrated by a stunt that will prove absolutely nothing other than his mis judgement regarding his own self importance.
Complain about this comment
Dear oh dear - why can't people see past narrow party political issues and enjoy a wider view of things?
Robinson is simply telling us what the Tory party thinks of all this. It's a matter of record that Davis's cabinet colleagues are furious at his decision, and that David Cameron and others tried to dissuade him. You may not agree with them, but that's the way it is.
I'll wager that Robinson, and all the political editors of the press who are saying the same thing, have much better contacts with Tory MPs than any of the commentators here do who are denying the obvious.
Complain about this comment
259#
what could possibly need moderating in that???????????
Complain about this comment
There is no need for any debate about DD and 42 days. Because it is not about 42 days! It is about DD attempting to becoming leader of the Tory party. DD is cynically using this issue to undermine Chameron's authority. I would have some respect - but not much - for DD if:
1) he declared he was going to stand agst Chameron at the next possible opportunity.
2) stood as an independent in the by-election and retained that status when he returns to parliament.
DD has proved by this stunt he is unfit to hold any senior position in opposition and government. But don't go away David - you are reminding the country how ineffectual and spineless Chameron is when the big situations arise.
Complain about this comment
#263 "Robinson, and all the political editors of the press who are saying the same thing, have much better contacts with Tory MPs than any of the commentators here do who are denying the obvious"
#262 "Davis is somewhat stupid as I feel will be demonstrated by a stunt that will prove absolutely nothing other than his mis judgement "
263 misses the point. We've broken the mould here. Their contacts were worthless with respect to this event. They didn't have an inkling and still have missed the public mood.
262; Davis is expendable, and he's the first to admit it. You've been starved of real politicians for so long you've forgotten how they're supposed to behave.
Complain about this comment
Once upon a time radio, television and newspapers reported the news and the general public were then able to make up their mind about the issues of the day. Sometime in the not too distant past, round about the time Rupert Murdoch purchased a number of newspapers everything changed and journalists weren't content with reporting the news they felt they had to make and influence it.
What I have noticed over the past two days is just about every journalist saying "Oh what an error of judgement." But if you listen to the general public's consensus of opinion it is firmly in favour of what David Davis has done. I know I am sick to death of feeling that I am being snooped upon by jobsworth in central and local government. In fact I was getting paranoid about using the telepone to speak to my sisters in the US, each time I had an echo and could hear everything I was saying coming back to me.
I think David Davis is right, our liberty has been eroded, this hapless government has used it as an excuse to control us further, therefore the terrorists have won.
Complain about this comment
Nick - you're in a hole.
Stop digging.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations to David Davis. He is winning. The debate has started, we are all part of it, and it will only get more intense.
Now, can we stop concentrating on the "red herring", 42 days. That was only the catalyst. The debate should be, and will become, the erosion of civil liberties in all its horrible forms.
David Davis has timed and planned this to perfection.
The more Labour complain about "stunts" the more they are drawn into the debate by default.
The more the BBC and the other media avoid the real subject of civil liberties the more out of touch they will look.
The more the public see the two above the more they will make up their own minds rather than having them made up for them.
The longer Brown puts off a decision about whether or not to have a candidate the more he will look like a ditherer.
The longer this goes on the more will come out about the alleged deals with the DUP to the embarrassment of Labour.
The longer it goes on the stronger public opinion will become and the stronger demovracy will become.
Anmd there are plenty of other banana-skins for Brown, such as ratifying the Lisbon Treaty with out a referendum.
No matter what you think, you have to hand it to David Davis. Good luck to him, he is working for all our interests. Even Nick's.
Complain about this comment
Yesterday and today we've seen proof that Westminster hacks are as out of touch with the people as the politicians they are supposed to be reporting on. It's about time some of you stepped out of the bubble and joined us in the real world.
Complain about this comment
# 256. wrote ** the speaker explicitly said, in Parliament, that nobody who disagrees with the current government is allowed to voice their opinion in Parliament **
What utter nonsense!! Are you REALLY unaware that the previous night there had been a lengthy debate in which plenty of MPs - including Davis - openly 'voiced their opinion' of government policy on this subject? That is what debates are for. Davis, however, failed to convince sufficient people to vote for what he wanted. So the next day he petulantly threw his dummy out of the pram. By that time the debate was well over.
Parliament is conducted in an orderly fashion. Debates and statements are timetabled. MPs cannot just abruptly stamp their foot and scream "I wanna talk about the price of fish". They have to give notice, or fit the subject into an appropriate debate.
Davis appears to be too stupid to know that. Which of course is consistent with his susequent silly course of action.
The "bye-election" will prove NOTHING at all about the national mood on the matter. People vote for a range of reasons. How would anyone know which issue determined the outcome? And anyway why should we believe that a safe Tory seat uncontested by the LibDems is representative of all of the rest of us?
It is just an irresponsible waste of public money. And think of the harm he will have done to his cause if say the Sun were to beat him! It would entirely undermine future opposition to the 42 days. It is madness!
Complain about this comment
Nick's reason number one is critical. Having the support of the Murdoch media empire is cruicial in British politics. "The Sun" has always been vital in moulding public opinion. When did "The Sun" last back the losing party at a General Election?
Getting The Sun to come out in favour of Brown on this issue is a spectacular own goal by the Conservatives.
I suspect David Cameron knows this. I know Gordon Brown does.
One last thought - the Irish have also done Brown a favour tonight. More on this from Nick shortly I hope.
Complain about this comment
I too bought a copy of the Independent today, since they, seemingly alone amongst the media weirdos, gave Davies a fair hearing. What in god's name is going on in medialand, where all we hear is utter bilge about the Tories being in disarray? It's like living in Berlusconi's Italy.
Good on Davies. I hope he destroys Murdoch's puppet Kelvin Mackenzie.
Complain about this comment
Nick.
We the voting public are told over and over again that there is voter apathy, that we don't trust MP's, they are only ever out for themselves.
Its hardly suprising that we seem to feel this way if on the occasion of an MP taking a principled and brave stand against something he believes in... you pop up and start ringing the "its all a stunt" bell because it makes you look "informed" and "in the know"
Please for once, allow us to actually believe that this might actually be a Politician worth respecting. Because heaven knows if anyone needs a political champion, the British public do.
Well done David Davies the public are behind you, and Redmorgie (271) if this is a waste of money... its a mere drop in the ocean compared to the billions wasted by this government over the last decade. The difference here, is that its about something which may affect me, being locked up away from my family for 6 weeks without reason.
Complain about this comment
David Davis has caused the Conservatives a headache, but as with most head aches I think it will be short lived. I agree with David Cameron to the extent it is a "risky" thing to have done, but it is brave.
It has certainly shed more light on the issue of erosion of our freedom now and I hope that continues.
DD could have fought the issue from his shadow post, but Gordon Brown and Labour will seemingly cling to power for as long as they can. Perhaps, just perhaps, DD could not face another two years watching the apparent skulduggery of the kind used on and before the vote on Wednesday - with the further damage to the reputation of Parliament and the cause he cares for?
My feeling? This government's policy of sacrificing our freedoms must be stopped and DD is making a start - good on him.
Complain about this comment
100-1 on that 99% of the people praising Brave Dave, Dave Davis Man of the People (tm) for his stand on fundamental freedoms, are the same people who clog up have your say bemoaning "Human Rights" every time people like Abu Hamza exercise their fundamental freedom to appeal against sentence and so forth.
I'm amazed at just how many people are telling Nick that he shouldn't be just canvassing the views in Westminster, which I must admit I had always considered a prerequisite for a parliamentary reporter, besides we've got Daring Dave Davis, The People's Champion (tm) as a barometer of the public's opinion, surely it's only fair that parliamentary reporters should ask the MP's what they think?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
As with the EU 'treaty' you and the rest of the political class have seemed to forgotten whose opinion really matters, the public's.
The comments here could all come from Tories, or perhaps you, yet again, have got it wrong.
Complain about this comment
1 - look at the target seats. This will gain the Conservatives the support of the voters they need - the Liberal Democrats.
2 - David Davis won't lose.
3 - Keeping Cameron on his toes is good for the Tories, not bad for them.
4 - Labour have to run. If they don't, Bottler Brown who's scared of elections will go from being an isult to an epitaph.
5 - People know what Davis believes in, and that what he believes in, he'll do. No unknowns there.
6 - Cameron has to reward the returning hero with all the glory he deserves. The man's been to Eton. He knows how Rome works.
7 - The Tories are Libertarian, not Authoritarian. No debate necessary.
8 - That agenda will go on apace.
9 - By praising Davis' courage and character Cameron can be seen as the leader of a wolfpack, not the master of a pack of dogs.
10 - Lisbon.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Reading David Davis's interview in the Telegraph today makes me wonder when you will apologise for your wide-of-the-mark comments on the BBC News yesterday and here on your blog. You explicity say the Tories are split. Show us the evidence? Otherwise, you're comments are mere subjective opinion without basis.
The BBC should be asking the implication of Davis not being challenged to this duel by a Labour candidate.
But then Labour is on the point of financial insolvency and cannot afford to bribe East Yorkshire can it?
Complain about this comment
So many NuLabour supporters on this blog are desperate to deploy any diversionary tactics to not admit to themselves that the horse they thought they were on has its head at the other end and they are facing backwards.
It's not a government of freedom for the ordinary citizen, social equality and opportunity. Its has morphed into an administration whose aim is a locked down society where everybody does as they're told, under the direction of finger wagging, first generation middle class ministers and keeps schtoom.
The fact that this issue has united ordinary citizens right across the political spectrum is evidence of extant aspirations that none of the parties accommodate or even acknowledge.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick, there is a world outside the Westminster Village.
Some of us may not have been Davis supporters before, but we can genuinely see the principles behind this. At the moment, the only negative comment is coming from the Westminster Village.
Complain about this comment
269.mikepko was right in her way:
"Now, can we stop concentrating on the "red herring", 42 days. That was only the catalyst."
Horrible to agree with Kelvin MacKenzie, but our democratic liberties are not being eroded and etc. IOt is tosh got up by the oppositions - left, right and far right - for the most part.
As he points out we have nothing to fear from all these new security measures - ID cards, up to 42 day detentions (subject to all sorts of checks by Parliament and the judiciary) for suspected terrorists in the most complex cases, CCTV cameras (many of them privately owned by shops and malls etc).
Likewise the new measures which permit the Inland Revenue to search premises in certain circumstances should only worry tax fiddlers, I have read bitter complaints forma market trader re this, I wonder why?
And if you don't speed, don't park illegally you steer clear of almost all run ins with the authorities and their essential surveillance too, don't you?
My Liberties remain unchallenged by HMG and our society generally.
Complain about this comment
282. At 11:29 pm on 13 Jun 2008, SMG701
Fraid that is rubbish, even in davis' constituency some interviewed think he is clowning about.
Do you people really believe that you only have to say something once to make it true, I thought your predecessors said you had to say it three times for it to be true?
"Anything I say three times is true" Lewis Carroll in "Through the Looking Glass."
Complain about this comment
(283) It is not nearly as simple as that.
Far right and far left would want the infringements of liberty you welcome if history is a guide.
I am against the freedom we have being taken from us by things like ID cards (plus the Registry that goes with that) and the 42 day detention.
One must remember that there are a raft of measures in place or coming which together could be subject to enormous abuse in the wrong hands (and do we really have full trust in politicians?).
ID cards will do nothing to help our security - the are an expensive red herring if anything is. 42 day detention is counterproductive in fighting extremism and the experts remain divided on whether we need it. The safeguards are not worth the paper they are written on.
And who is sat behind the CCTV cameras? Why would they want such a job? One could go on.
This is where Labour need to come out of the shadows and actually make a cogent argument as to WHY we need these infringements on our freedoms beyond "it is for national security". So Mr Brown - Challenge Mr Davis and justify your policies.
Complain about this comment
Nick what would you suggest?
David Davis said what a majority of the voters are thinking.
No one else is going to tell it how it is.
He may not get the support of other MP's
(Or maybe they do support him Quietly.)
but the respect and admiration he has from the voters is sincere.
He is a ray of hope at a time of low moral in the country.
How many other MP's know how the country is being divided on so many issues and feel powerless to stop it.
Maybe David Davis can not sit by and watch the slide any longer. British people are leaving this country, can not live with it.
David Cameron should be pleased to have him back after the election and DC's supporters would know him to be a true leader, unafraid, confident, as he should be with a party member bringing more supporters to the party.
Complain about this comment
I have some questions.
Firstly, would you like to give us a list of reasons why Davis' move might turn out to be a nightmare for Gordon Brown and Labour?
The government have already tried to rubbish Davis and the Tories in response to Davis' move. This includes the claim that the Tories are in disarray, despite the more than one in ten rebellion rate amongst Labour MPs who voted. Isn't such a blatant piece of pot'n'kettle on the part of the government just going to further undermine their credibility with the public?
What happens if a serious, credible candidate comes forward in defence of the government, and loses?
Without putting forward an official Labour candidate, an independent may well stand against Davis instead. But Labour won't have any control over an independent. Does Gordon Brown want to trust an independent to defend his government's policies? What might he risk if he does?
What if Labour itself is further split on these civil liberties issues? They've already suffered a rebellion of more than one in ten MPs who voted on 42 days. In contrast, the Tories had only one rebel out of nearly 200 MPs. While the government might want to dismiss Davis' move as a "stunt", are Labour rebels going to comply?
What if Davis is successful in broadening the focus to civil liberties more generally? People don't like the idea of the state logging all their internet use, for example. While the government might have the support of the majority on 42 days, does it have the support of the majority on civil liberties issues more generally?
Complain about this comment
Please add this to the civil liberties debate.
Are UK universities a recruiting sergeant for terrorists?
What appears to go unnoticed is the erosion of liberty in other areas of life. The Student Complaints Scheme is blatantly obstructed and perverted, it takes away the right to a judicial revue, is unenforceable, and the findings kept confidential. Whoever thought that one up was not acting in the interests of students.
This abuse of power by UK universities concerning complaints procedures is just what extremists want to recruit others to carry out acts of terrorism, and in that respect we have clearly learned nothing from our experience of the home-grown variety. What drives the ordinary people to commit atrocities is abuse of power by those in authority who then abuse the system to stitch people up to make them and the problem go away.
42 days detention without trial is going to be seen as a stitch up and an abuse of powers under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, as we have already seen with the arrest of 82-year-old ?political? protesters. They have already banged up students for researching their thesis, when are they going to start banging them up for making a legitimate complaint?
Complain about this comment
Surely the main reason why this is a dumb move from Cameron's point of view is that it highlights his (Cameron's) fecklessness on the issue of the usurpation of common rights by the contrl freak in No 10.
Complain about this comment
First can I say Happy Birthday to Her Majesty the Queen.
I am getting worried about quietzapple. The poor old dear seem to be living in clood cuckoo land in believeing that the esrosion of civil liberties affects only the bad. At low low level two incidents have happened locally over the last few days concerning Traffic wardens (sorry Civil Enforcement Officers).
One old lady (and I mean old) was given a ticket for just touching the white line in a car park bay. She was left in tears by the so called public servant.
Another got a ticket for parking across a line. A 4 x 4 was badly parked, the car in question got into the space available, got the ticket and was told if you have to park on the line then you shouldn't use the bay.
This to me is absolutely stupid.
So what is my point. Simple.
Once you bring in a law public officials will use the law to its extremity and even abuse it.
With civil liberties this will have far reaching and and normally irreversible effects on all of the public. So when dear old quietzapple does something "sensible" and is penalised for it should we he sympathetic. My answer is a huge NO because people who do not fight for their civil liberties do not deserve them.
Complain about this comment
The points you make are all valid but a week or a day is long time in politics and we know have the issue of the Irish and the EU vote.
Both Labour and Conservatives have vocal anti European views and have all been quiet on this front.
Will now this start again? my guess it will and the David Davis party issue will fade.
So good on you for pointing it out, the big issue is yet to come.
Complain about this comment
Actually, it hardly matters what the Uk conservative party does or does not do anymore. Now we are not only lead and dictated to by the Scots, but the Irish, a charming and different kettle of fish are putting in their spoke. Remember, that it was the Irish patron saint who drove all the poisonous snakes from the emerald isle. Now we just need the people from the hills, the Welsh, to sing in unison as they drive the English like sheep onto the right path.
Complain about this comment
All those who are complaining about the by-election wasting money...
""I think it is right that we follow the view that each country must see the ratification process to a conclusion," he said. "
David Milliband decides Parliamentary time should be used for a dead European treaty rather than things like crime or the NHS.
Complain about this comment
Can I add a few points of my own to Nick's? Is nothing owed to the electorate of David Davis's constituency? They voted him into the House of Commons in good faith to represent them and their interests. Is he not letting them down by resigning?
Also does he not owe his party, who will have financed and supported his election, at least the consideration of warning them in advance he will resign over this issue? Especially since his party had honoured him with the status of Shadow Home Secretary. This controversial bill has passed its initial stage. It is likely the Lords will modify it or even throw it back to the Commons. Surely he should have waited for that and used his not inconsiderable status in the Commons and his party to continue his campaign against it. May I suggest the timing of this resignation shows a certain amount of contempt for both the party political system and the parliamentary system?
Complain about this comment
I would sincerely like to know at what point David Davis became troubled with his principles. It patently was'nt at 28 days, so was it 29 or 30 or only at 42 maybe 40 days would have been OK,
I would also like to know, because all you tories have suddenly come out of the woodwork with a distinct smell of fear in your postings, if as you all seem to imply that DD is brave and highly principled for resigning does that mean that all those that voted against the 42 days E.G. David Cameron, the tory front bench, the labour rebels and the liberal party are all cowards and unprincipled because they did'nt resign.
What I dont understand if he's a hero as some have proclaimed [although that is an insult to real heroes] is that he resigned only after making sure that he would be the only Tory candidate in his constuency and getting an assurance from the Liberals that they would not stand against him, so if the liberals had not given him that assurance and his contituency had said no we have a number of candidates waiting for a seat if you resigned yours why do you think you should have priority over them. Then I doubt very much whether this highly principled man would have resigned, his actions are highly suspicious and required no bravery only ego. By impication he has said that none of his colleagues are as principled as he is.
I was going to say that he's a chancer but he isnt even that, he made sure that nothing was left to chance before he resigned. one other small point he is constantly refering to actions of the government that if they were working for a company they would be this or that. What I would like to know is what company would allow any employee to resign and allow him to put his name at the top of the list of candidates to be re-employed.
Brave the man is nothing but a ego tripper.
Complain about this comment
# 292 mighty angela, nice to see you back or have I missed your posts, I see that your love affair with the Tories has waned a little,
being a Welshman I dont altogether agree with you regarding the English, I am afraid that I am a dyed in the wool unionist and would dearly love to see all this talk of separatism disappear these Islands will lose much of its respect and influence if its split up.
Complain about this comment
#290 mikepko, Mike your posts are becoming daily more condescending and patronising . One might say insulting, this is disapointing to me as I had thought that you had got over that grammatical nonsense after the number of posts we've had before, but I have to reiterate that being able to write a grammatically correct letter merely means that you can write a grammatically correct letter nothing else just that. It does'nt make you any more intelligent than anybody else, so climb down of your high horse and try to treat the people with differing opinions with respect.
The two stories that you relay to us, did you actually witness these events or was the story relayed to you, not that I doubt your word but being old myself I perhaps have less sympathy as I saw a very old lady recently trying to park in a space for three carss, took five attempts to get into the space and then occupied two spaces, when she came out of the store she had the same problem, being old does'nt give you a amnesty as much as we wish it did.
Anyway I think that Davis is not in the slightest bit courageous, he made sure that every thing was in place for relection before he resigned, the mans on a ego trip and I think he's going to make a fool of himself.
Complain about this comment
NeoCromwellian states at post 288 "Please add this to the civil liberties debate".
What debate?? All I've heard or read about is the propagandist mainstream media, the BBC being the greatest offender, rabbitting on about "splits in the Conservatives" or "Cameron's anger" and other such tripe.
Where is the debate, apart from amongst we bloggers?? Why is Brown and his cronies so worried about having a debate with the citizens of the UK? Why, Nick, are people like you also so afraid to debate?? Is it because much of the public have seen through the continual state propaganda spouted by the BBC. Your corporation lost its impartiality during the whitewash of the Hutton inquiry. (And unless you understand what I'm saying, yes, Blair did lie to us about WMDs in Iraq, and use those lies to illegally invade another country which has never attacked us - the supreme crime according to the Nuremburg War Tribunal following WWII)
And why do New World Order advocates, such as Rupert Murdoch, continually try to mould public opinion rather than just impartially report the news and let the public form their own opinions. The public spoke in Ireland yesterday, but now it seems the European Governments intend to ignore what the public have decided.
So let's see NuLabour debate the issue of their thieving of our liberties. Let's see the gutless BBC publicly debate this issue. Let's see the whorish mainstream media debate this.
Let's see if Brown has the guts to field a Labour candidate to go head to head with Mr Davis. Somehow I am doubtful, but this will only serve the purpose of showing how empty of argument Brown truly is.
Let's have a public debate.
Complain about this comment
Grandantidote, I don't underswtand why these people continue to argue with you. You're clearly a fool.
Complain about this comment
Moderator - you seem to have ignored comments 174-179
Complain about this comment
'I perhaps have less sympathy as I saw a very old lady recently trying to park in a space for three carss, took five attempts to get into the space and then occupied two spaces, when she came out of the store she had the same problem, being old does'nt give you a amnesty as much as we wish it did.'
A civil society can't be legislated for and enforced with CCTV cameras. It is built on little acts of kindness, tolerance and understanding, particularly in respect of the elderly. If everybody practised that it would ameliorate some of the pernicious effects of this censorious society we live in.
Complain about this comment
Ref 295. from grandantidote
Ok a few answers to consider and definitely not from a Tory.
42 days was clearly the tipping point for him, 28 days wasn?t, nothing in between was an option.
Not resigning isnt cowardly, but resigning is a more principled stance as he is clearly risking his career in the party and possibly as an MP. How many MPs have done this on any issue even when they have a massive majority.
DC may not want him back as he now presents himself as a maverick and that?s not a good characteristic for the front benches. Given that the Tories will certainly be in power after the next election that was a big risk.
He may also not even be reelected as the public, on the whole, agrees with this legislation as they don?t really think that it affects them. Its all just about locking up Muslim fundamentalists after all.
He is making a stand against the constant erosion of our civil liberties. To argue that there is no risk to him is to fail to follow the story or understand the state of things here.
Complain about this comment
286. machinehappydays wrote:
"David Davis said what a majority of the voters are thinking. "
Evidence, please.
Complain about this comment
Noting the Brown response to the Davis resignation, namely 'a stunt and an farce' tells you quite a lot about why Brown is failing badly to 'connect' with the public.
His predecessor was a master at handling unexpected event like this.
Blair would never have used those utterly predictable tribal words.
I would hazard a guess that Blair would have said something like :
'Look guys, David Davis has gone off on one and that is his perogative. It is a pretty unusual thing to do but he obviously feels strongly about it and wants to make a point, albeit misguidedly. I feel he and the public of his constituency would be better served if he did not cause this disruption and remained in Parliament to fight his case."
Something like that would have appealed a lot more to the public than Brown's clunking style.
Anyway, please hang in there Mr. Brown for two more years - we English need you to do that - so in a roundabout way - we get our England back again around 2010/11.
We English have a lot to look forward to ... the football team will start winning again once they are no longer forced to sing that dreadful dirge 'Cod Save the Queen' - we English can have something much more appropriate - Land of Hope and Glory?
Complain about this comment
Having seen the rabid media coverage of this whole affair, I have to say that the BBC, including Nick, have proven conclusively that their coverage is wholly biased.
Yes, Davis is taking an almighty risk, and yes it is an odd thing to do, however, the BBC (and Sky) have openly ridiculed him. The only thing that is a farce is the thought that the BBC is an impartial reporter of news. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Complain about this comment
Robinsons is obviously hoping that this will be the narrative.
Unfortuantely I suspect his last point.
'For the first time in months Gordon Brown is helped to avoid dreadful headlines which today would have read ("I did no deal, honest")'
Will be the one to unravel all of them because when Brown says that Labour will not stand everything that you expected to write now will be written under the headline:
Election Nerves - The Sequel - Bottler Brown II
Out it will all come, the not quite right polls, the pork-barrel politics and the fact that Brown and Labour have neither the courage and conviction to fight for 42 days.
Complain about this comment
I dont know whats got into you Nick but its not your normal style. Maybe, just maybe someone in parliament actually has principles, no wonder it came as a shock.
1. Cameron shouldn't be courting any American owned newspaper he should be outlawing non EU ownership (dont forget the pseudo-american owner cynically changed nationality to own fox)
2. Want a small wager on that one. £10 to a charity of your choice if he loses, £10 to the Tory party in my name if he wins
3. Maggie was surrounded by strong politicians, all who where touted as rivals at some point in time, in addition to this it also means that the Tories have a future leader with principles (something the labour party couldn't manage from 97 onwards)
4. Just because Labour cant justify its 42 day stance to the public doesn't mean its a waste of money. Personally I would like to see ALL of them resign and re-stand.
5. Just plain stupid Nick and not worthy of either a comment by you or a reply
6 He represents his constituents so he should put their views across no matter which party he belongs to, and its better than the SHEEP on the labour back benches, a good thing if you ask me.
7 SO should every party, especially on the subject of the EU, if that's not a classic example of authoritarianism then I don't know what is
8. The Tories should nay must not shy away from difficult subjects including Europe.
9. But then again maybe, just maybe Cameron isn't a control freak and believes that healthy discussion and debate is the way forward (naar even I cant believe that) but at least there will be somebody in the shadow (soon to be real) cabinet that will give Cameron a reality check now and again.
10. The Media are the only ones who care about the media Nick, people in the REAL world admire and respect principles far more than they take pleasure at other people's downfall and discomfort.
Reality check for you Nick look at the comments on HYS and see what most of us think about David Davis
Complain about this comment
Re #296 Grandantidote
Glad you missed my postings, but let me make it clear once and for all, and I'm only saying this once, that I am not interested in having a feud, third world war etc. by blog, so no personal comments please.
Also, you again have made a misjudgment, I am not a Tory, have never voted for them, and in fact no political party is worthy of my vote.
Must state, I've just read the most wonderful book by Peter Ho Davies, "The Welsh Girl". Instead of being upset by the events taking place, seek pleasure in the pages of this wonderful story.
Complain about this comment
It could be of course that all recent opinion polls on the 42 day issue are wrong, that's possible but not very likely as there have been a considerable number showing65%+ in favour. The reason I mention this is that so many people on this blog appear to feel that Davis is capturing the mood of the majority, this is often stated as "fact" rather than opinion.
Also how can any Government possibly respond to this sort of "challenge", it almost undermines the whole democratic process of our parliamentary system. If you don't like the result just call your own mini "referendum" as if this proves anything.
And just for the many true blues on here I'd just like to know what you see this as. Is it a bi-election or a referendum??
If the latter it would whats the choice the voters are given.
If a bi-election (as it will be officially) then people vote for dozens of different reasons. If you can't see how stupid this is it beggars belief
Plus whats to stop another fine Tory, lets say Osborne resigning his safe seat on another "point of high principle" say fuel tax, of course it would get popular support to cut fuel tax at the moment, he'd undoubtedly win but its no way for a supposed "government in waiting" to act. The best way I can describe it is immature if not childish.
Complain about this comment
304#Like the Blair quote, quite accurate I'd say. But like Brown he'd also realise that it would be madness to respond the this sort of gesture politics.
Many on this board can't come to terms with the fact that Labour are democratically elected on a manifesto which indicated this policy. The rabid right wing clamour to get theor hands back on power is palpable on these blogs. (not necesarily you of course).
Complain about this comment
As the unholy gaggle of sneerers and put-downers lining up to criticise David Davis have only one other thing in common -that they are the very people I wouldn't normally trust to tell me that the sun rose this morning- I wish him and the cause of freedom success.
Complain about this comment
I respect your views Nick, but I feel David Davis has touched a raw nerve with a large section of the electorate (of varying political hues). We have been subjected to a systematic erosion of hard won liberties during the past 10 years. Sadly, many of our younger voters (and those not yet able to vote) are unaware, or ignorant, of the cost of the liberties we have enjoyed. Those of us who do know, because we have been taught the history of our nation, realize what we are losing....and have lost. Enough is enough! David Davis has taken a principled stand. The cynical media response is to be deplored. The political response is what one would expect - I believe it could well prove to be wrong. People are truly exercised over encroaching state interference with ever aspect of individual life.
Complain about this comment
311#
So is this a bi-election or referendum? Presumeably to ask makes me a "sneerer".
Feel free to say how you feel this "vote" in a place near Hull, will demonstrate in any way what public opinion is on any issue.
Complain about this comment
311# BTW the Sun did not actually rise this morning, that big bright thing is just a flood light attached to a CCTV camera and its watching your every paranoid move!
Complain about this comment
312# Last time I checked I was an "individual" and can't think of any way that my life is being encroached upon, let alone "every aspect". Is it possible you could be exagerating slightly? What do you want to change exactly and what of these changes do you think will be included in the next Tory manifesto?
Complain about this comment
I suggested that Nick Robinson counted to 1000 before he blogged anything. It seems he hasn't taken my advice ..yet.
The main stream media are completely WRONG about David Davis.
If you don't believe me listen to the latest edition of Any Answers.
Complain about this comment
Dear Mr Robinson, I am deeply perplexed by why such a normally astute journalist is completely missing the main story.
Yes, your 10 items might be correct, but they are immaterial. The real story on this issue has nothing to do with whether DD is right or wrong but can be found in the the complete disconnect between politicians/media and the rest of us in reaction to it. Why not give it some thought?
On a slightly tangental point, Jasper39's fine distinction between regular and TA when dismissing DD's background might not be too highly appreciated by the reservists(and their families) who have lost their lives in countless wars including Iraq, in the service of this country.
Complain about this comment
I think the idea of a forced byelection is appropriate. A cross on a ballot paper is all the power we have these days. (And sometimes we are denied even that.) Powers increasingly have been handed over to the unelected bureaucrats who fine us, create rules for us, watch us, spend our money and devise more ways to take more of it...
42 days, id cards, cctv - you know it's you and me they're after. They have been ignoring/appeasing/funding extremist religious preachers for years as part of official policy and allowed them to radicalise our youth but make a documentary exposing the issue and you get arrested for Race Relations 'breaches'. State the wrong opinion too close to the seat of goverment and you get a criminal record. Put your child into possibly the wrong school and the full force of terrorist legislation comes down upon your head.
If I thought things like the 42 days legislation was all to keep us safe I would welcome and support it. However, I look at the evidence of who legislation is being used against and they quality of person who is using it. I believe the terrorists, as always, are quite quite safe while the cameras are trained on my neighbour's wheely bin.
Complain about this comment
Doesn't the BBC have some obligation at least to recognise that David Davis seems to have hit a nerve with a large number of people who are NOT career politicians or media people?
I´m a fairly regular reader of HYS and it seems to me that the reaction to his move has been a) significant in number and b) overwhelmingly positive.
However, little or no mention of that is made in your coverage, except when you insist in rebutting the points raised?
Ok, you are entitled to push your point of view, but I think some recognition of the popularity of his move would be appropriate too.
PS - perhaps you should also consider the POSSIBILITY that you and your professional media colleagues have actually missed something here - and something big is happening on this issue that you aren´t latching onto?
Complain about this comment
# 299 zidedine zidane-thats how i'd like to retire from my work too, so you think I'm a fool , well I guess I must be because only a man that could be stupid enough to have a pseudonym like yours would be able to judge, and as you say if I wrote it which I did then I must be as stupid as you. your opinion of me matters not one jot I dont come on here to give personal insults, I leave that to people like you, So why dont you go back to whatever sort of sleep you have and try to dream of something intelligent to say, I know it will be a struggle but give it a try then someone on here might take you seriously.
Complain about this comment
Personally I am frustrated with David Davies. What is he trying to prove. Surely, considering his position in the Conservative Party, his seat must be fairly safe. So what is he trying to prove, rallying a majority of people who already support you as an MP does not prove that the British public support or oppose the 42-day plan.
Complain about this comment
#197
You couldn't be more wrong. There are terrorists of all colours, I want to be protected from all of them.
By 'normal' people I mean people without any evidence of terrorism against them, people uninterested in terrorism or making bombs or killing people. I'm 'normal', no evidence against me would last more than 42 seconds examination, let alone 42 days. I will not be detained without charge on suspicion of terrorism. Any 'normal' person who thinks they will be is just paranoid.
Complain about this comment
308 mighty angela,OK angela no personal comments but you should remember you were the one who started it, I did'nt know you from adam when you attacked me over free speech.
I have no desire to have a feud or war or anything else on here, I thought that we came on hear to exchange views some times they get a little heated but we should try to keep a sense of decorum, so your quite safe from me unless you attempt to insult me. I thank you for the information regarding"the Welsh girl I shall make a point of getting it and of course reading it, perhaps you should read a trilogy by alexandre cordell. The first being "the rape of the fair country" you wont be disapointed I promise, after reading this book politics will take on a whole new meaning, although its not political in any way. good reading, Im sorry I called you a tory.
Complain about this comment
Re: 323 Grandantidote
Just looked on the web and this sounds just the sort of reading I enjoy. I have so many "must reads" in a pile, but will certainly get this trilogy.
You may not see so many postings because I am trying to catch up as the pile is becoming daunting. Because you have recommended such an interesting trilogy, you will be spared further barbs and insults, at least until all three books have been read. Thanks.
Complain about this comment
322. At 4:24 pm on 14 Jun 2008, ConManDave wrote:
#197
You couldn't be more wrong. There are terrorists of all colours, I want to be protected from all of them.
By 'normal' people I mean people without any evidence of terrorism against them, people uninterested in terrorism or making bombs or killing people. I'm 'normal', no evidence against me would last more than 42 seconds examination, let alone 42 days. I will not be detained without charge on suspicion of terrorism. Any 'normal' person who thinks they will be is just paranoid.
ConManDave, while what you say is correct in principle, we have already seen where anti-terrorism laws have been used wrongly: the Labour Party Conference, ejecting an old man for voicing his views; councils using anti-terror legislation to check where someone lives because they think they are telling lies about school placings!
If they must draft in anti-terror laws, then there must be safeguards to ensure that they are only used for that purpose. Anyone using the laws for other purposes must be prosecuted.
Complain about this comment
# 310
I think you are on shaky ground saying it (42 days) was in their manifesto because lots of things are in political party manifesto's but simply get ignored once the party is in power.
For example, a crucial example, Labours manifesto promise to have a Euro referendum - double-crossing the people does not come much bigger than that.
Hence the Court challenge by Wheeler - which the Government is so worried about that they have employed 'the cleverest man in England' QC Jonathan Sumption, at vast taxpayers expense of course, to defend the Government, in effect, from a democractic process.
Decades ago, English people would read manifesto's and believe in the contents and the prospective politicians would be mostly in it to 'serve the people'.
Today, you would not wipe your backside with a political party manifesto and prospective politicians seem to be mostly in it for personal enrichment.
Complain about this comment
Davis is cashing in on paranoia. There was european and immigration paranoia. Now its the government conspiracy paranoia that is so common on the internet. Next someone will resign suggesting Gordon Brown is part of an alien conspiracy. The anti-smoking man or something.
Complain about this comment
re: 271: sorry, but you're not right; the speaker refused it not on grounds of time or notice, but purely because he deemed it a "controversial" topic.
Basically the speaker knew that the law only just scraped through the commons down to bullying and bribing by his mate Brown, and that it didn't have a much of a chance in the Lords, so he wanted to give it whatever help he could in the Lords by trying to reduce the impact of Davis' resignation.
You might not like it, but the current speaker has a history of disallowing opposition viewpoints being raised when it conflicts with his mate Brown's own opinion, that is when he's not spending £4000 of our money on taxi trips to tesco's.
It was nothing to do with time or notice; he just didn't want his mate Gordon to have a bad time of it.
Complain about this comment
# 310
Furthermore, the only reason why I want Brown to hang in there for two more years, is to ensure that the Tories are returned (by default) to power in two years time.
This is because my political calculation is that a Tory Government in Westminster will be the final straw for the Scottish people, which will co-incide nicely with the SNP referendum on full indepence for Scotland.
And then, thanks to Alex Salmond, the SNP and the Scottish people, we politically apethetic English will find that we have 'magically' regained our English political identity.
(I wonder just how many English people understand that Alex Salmond is the best political friend we have).
Once we have our England back again, then we can deal with 'Dave' and his motley crew.
Complain about this comment
The media in general are missing the real story about David Davis's decision to force a bye election.
Davis is a leader who knows that the current political punch and judy system has broken down due to lack of conscience. Something had to happen to burst the stifling bubble created by Gordon Brown's non election fever.
Should Labour decide not to run then they will fall for the old legal adage "he that remains silent is deemed to consent". The emperor will then stand truly naked caught in the dirtiest of deals ever done in the name of Parliament.
"Thus conscience make cowards of us all" (Shakespeare)
Bob Beckett
Nottingham
Complain about this comment
This is the question we all need an answer to. Whose best interests is David Davis serving by his resignation?
How will his constituents benefit for example? How likely is it that any of them are to be banged up for six weeks without charge, when, and if, this bill eventually makes it to the statute books? Would they not prefer he kept is position in the shadow cabinet to look after their concerns on the front bench of the opposition party?
Why did he not warn his party leader he might resign if the bill was voted through its first stage? It surely should have been discussed in advance if that was what he was planning to do... before the bill was put to the vote.
I think any person with strong convictions on an issue is likely to be able to have greater influence within the House of Commons than outside it. Unless the media is more powerful than the parliamentary system... and if that is the case then we should all be afraid.
And on that note, I notice another top secret file has been dropped in the lap of the media. Obviously the first "accidental" loss didn't have the intended outcome so another one had to be "accidentally" mislaid on a train. Unless there really is more than one official daft enough to leave a top secret file on the train. Oh dear!!
Complain about this comment
329. At 7:12 pm on 14 Jun 2008, JohnConstable wrote:
# 310
And then, thanks to Alex Salmond, the SNP and the Scottish people, we politically apethetic English will find that we have 'magically' regained our English political identity.
Less than 50% voted for the SNP, and with good reason. Devolution has turned out to be a mess, not the vote winner it was designed to be in Scotland, Wales and N Ireland.
Labour were voted in on the strength of the English vote. The Tories will take years to establish themselves in Scotland, if ever.
Perhaps you could try and stay on-topic please. Leave the xenophobia to HYS forums.
On a lighter note, Nick. Perhaps you could arrange some sort of political debate with contributions from the regulars on your blog. It would interesting to see Charles H in the flesh!
Complain about this comment
If the Conservatives want to force a general election, why don't they all resign and trigger by-elections?
It is time for proportional representation and therefore democracy.
The ONLY democracy in the world is SWITZERLAND.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Your observation/comments are not very helpful to the British Public in any way at-all; are they!.
Had it been a senior Labour MP who'd resigned over this; you would have had something worthwhile reporting.
As it is; it is totally irrelevant.
Complain about this comment
295#
Grandantidote, Oh yes I am relishing this Davis affair. I notice the Conservatives have changed a hard line right wing Conservative for a wet one.
Dominic Grieves has a bad record after the 7/7 bombings, with a statement he made. I do believe it was published in the Sun on Saturday I read it online.
I hope Labour do not justify Davis's publicity stunt by putting up a candidate.
If Labour is to fight this political stunt. They would do well to put up a person who someway or another has been involved in anything anti-terrorist as I am sure even in Davis's own Yorkshire constituency, people are sensible enough to know the difference and fight accordingly. Yorkshire people are reknown for being extremely sensible, some can be gullible , though, and there are not many Conservatives gracing the pleasant countryside of Yorkshire, they have more sense than that.
Bear in mind, more people are afraid of a terrorist bomb going off than there are about being afraid of the 42 days, which is a
stupid excuse for Davis to come up with.
GB won DD lost now he is suffering a fit of pique and behaving like a petulant child.
Mikepo I notice is up to his usual tricks such a shame a lady forced him into becoming a card carrying Conservative.
He was always a closet Tory, the Lady just forced him out. But not before she exposed him in his true colours, even although he accused her of being racist. She is presently in the company of all creeds, colours and nationalities. Even Italians who say capiche quite frequently.
Still there is life in the old girl yet and she is at present charging her batteries at the moment, a change is as good as a rest, in more ways than one even from afar. We even know of a man who knew a man who knew a lady who danced with the Prince of Wales Nudge Nudge wink wink. Thinking cap time now, but should not be too hard, the clues are there. Do not worry about Mikepo taunts to you regarding your grammar, thast all he vcan argue. Nail him with politics and he is wet.
You have risen above taunts once when Dutchy5 used to taunt you. People came to your aid then they will come once again in a few weeks time also.
They say a change is as good as a rest.
Please look, observe put your thinking cap on and you have the answer.
This Davis affair will bring Cameron down to earth with a bang. Cameron is riding high in the polls at the moment not because of anything he has done, merely because GB has gone through a bad patch. I hope this Davis thing is the turning point is it long over-due.
It is years since I have know a politician as lucky as DC ,but even a gambler's luck runs out. One has only got to vist the gambling States in the USA, some States ban gambling altogether,i to see that for oneself. All gamblers end up behaving like fools when they loose, as they surely will.
Cameron will be no exception to that rule, After all his guru Hilton has deserted him fro over the Pond. I do hope you reply to Trudy_Victoria, although unfortunately she cannot guarantee you a speedy reply.
Davis yaps on and on about the Magna Charta, yet he ignores a vote in Parliament, such a silly man.
What is democracy all about if not debate culminating in votes?
Brown won regardless of where the help came from, the Tories done the same thing for years to keep themselves in power.
I really admired David Davis once, I thought he was a straight talking Yorkshire man , more fool me. still they say there is no fool like an old fool and even Yorkshiremen as well as double talking grammar correctors, who like to play the elderly for fools as a game. They forget that they too will become elderly one of these days, if they are lucky enough to survive all that life throws at one, sooner or later.
How sad, but there are some who have long memories and like the elephant never forget and forgiveness is out of the window when made to look a fool by a young man a lady thought so highly off in the beginning. Then he chose to side with a nasty Pup, just to ridicule and for no other reason than they were both Conservatives. There are more ways to kill a cat than choking it on cream.
Shame on him and shame on them. They will both reap what they sow one way or another one of these fine days.
I think there is more to this Davis saga than meets the eye. I will be watching this unfold with relish, thank heavens for changes and the internet which can be picked up anywher around the World quite easily.
Complain about this comment
Grandantidote 323#
It seems the Sunday Press is gunning for Davis, thanks to time lapse we can read it and relish it in comfort, just as you are wakening up to it.
It certainly put a spring in my step. You do not need to look at the web just look at the UK Press today and it will make your day.
Relish it, I am with a vengeance, what lovely reading for a change.
Complain about this comment
I can remember John Major giving a solem promise to Parliament when data bases began to appear, that on no account would one data base be allowed to link with another. Every data base was to be free standing and to be used only for the purpose it was generated. By allowing data bases to be linked the State would know more about citizens that it should.
And who remembers the original justification for ID cards? To stop benefit - in particular housing - fraud.
DD is right to draw attention to this. And to draw attention to the 42 days attitude. I've never understood why we can't just have holding charges and bring charges later. The police do this all the time. Other countries do also. Why is terrorism here different?
Complain about this comment
According to all these blogger David Davis is going to save my freedom's LOL, David Davis is a opportunist coward, it's a stunt from an overblown egotist, if he was chocolate, he would eat himself, he's loving all the attention, Davis thinks he's some hero from a kid's comic book, this courageous? man, offers a by election against a mid term unpopular government, jeez, very courageous
As for it being such an important principle? well i wont be affected by this 42 days exception rule to 28 days rule, in any way, no one in my street will be affected, no one in my family will be affected, no one in my town will be affected. Can i ask of all the Davis supporters how many people will be convicted in a year with this legislation?
Complain about this comment
I suggest the reason why the opinion polls say that a majority are in favour of holding suspects for 42 days without charge is because the public thinks it only applies to ethnic Middle Eastern or Asian Muslims.
Once the white middle class realise that the abuse of these powers will affect them and their family in the same way then their attitude will be different. The reason why this legislation is abused is because your rights under the Human Rights Act do not apply, therefore, there is no chance of the police being sued if they get it wrong. The tougher the powers the greater the trickle down abuse.
Take the case of 82-year-old Labour Party activist of 47 years Walter Wolfgang who was detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act for making a protest at a Labour Party conference. There was a public outcry led by the Sun newspaper. Shadow home secretary David Davis said civil liberties and security should not be confused.
Civil liberties, the need for security, and blatant electioneering should not be confused either. It was Gordon Brown who did the political stunt playing on peoples fears simply to get himself re-elected. I am a Labour voter who supports both David Davis and the Labour backbenchers who saw through this very dangerous game. Can you trust a political party that plays games with your civil liberties? My concerns about Gordon Brown have given way to total distrust and contempt. I never though I would say it but perhaps Cherie Blair was right about this man!
Complain about this comment
DOES ANYONE HERE ENJOY GOING TO CAR BOOT SALES?
Well, you may not in the future with the latest Government legislation. Yet another case of big-brother controlling everything.
According to the Western Daily Press, the latest legislation says that anyone applying for planning permission for a car-boot sale must include a Flood Plan from the Environment Agency, including details of
1 where people would be evacuated
2 acccess provision for emergency vehicles
3 run through scenarios of what to do if the sale is flooded
The cost is £750 + VAT.
I imagine that the legislation applies even if you have the sale on top of a hill!!!
One village organiser says " It would be a shame to stop the car boot sales because the money goes back into the area as the site is owned by the village."
Just another example of rules and regulations gone made.
Complain about this comment
338 fearlessbilly
How do you know no-one will be affected. Beacuse there are muslims in your street, town, etc.
According to "statistics" there will be several peodophiles in your town. Do you know who they are?
The thing about 28 and 42 days is that it can apply to anyone in the UK. Anyone. The fact that it is unlikely to affect anyone you know is not the point.
And if a close friend, for some missunderstanding, say an email communication, with someone who was involved in a plot, was jailed for 42 day, he wasn't allowed to talk to you, nor was he told why he was there, would you feel differently.
Then after 42 days he was released without charge, would you look at him in the same light. Would his other friends. Would his employers. Would it ruin his life.
I'm afraid your comment says to me I only care about myself and my friends, not about anyone else in the UK. That sadly is a sign of the time.
I honestly believe that david Davis does care, and that being true he is someone worth supporting. I only wish that some Labour MPs showed the same principle.
Complain about this comment
Glad to see mikepeko is up and about this beautiful Sunday morning ...Happy fathers day
It is interesting to see the ex editor of the SUN waiting to be bankrolled . If he believed in what he was doing like DD he would dip into his pocket himself, but is it he is just doing it for publicity.
We still have freedom of thought but are steadily eroding our privacy, our democracy. Society needs rules but the power of the state must be controlled by the majority not the minority.
Complain about this comment
This is more about attention seeking than political ideas. Anyone who had thought about voting tory now must wonder if they'd want to vote for a party with a child like this in it.
Let's hope noone stands against him and there's a reallly low turn out so it doesn't get the attention he so madly craves.
He should give up politics and take up a career in acting but please keep it to the theatre as we never go there.
Complain about this comment
Mikepo, i have family who worked in the coal industry, they had their rights to a job, and community taken away by Mrs Thatchers conservative government, That did happen!! PRINCIPLES, don't make me laugh
As for Muslims in my street and town, if they have been involved in terrorist activities or on the fringes of political involvement in fundamental Islamic opposition to my fellow citizens, of all faiths and colour, i would rather they were either caught for their direct involvement, or suffer the highly unlikely event of 42 days in jail, rather than innocent citizens being blown up at an airport. I live near Glasgow Airport.
Mikepo i noticed you failed to answer my last question, as i understand it, no one, not one individual has been detained so far to 28 days !! whats the chance of persons being detained for 42 days ? again how many people in a year will be detained under the exception to the 28 day rule, the 42 day legislation!! how many in a year?
Principles to stand up for:
Iraq war, we need to get out of an illegal war.
How we treat our pensioners, we treat them disgracefully.
Have you had the misfortune to be treated by the NHS in the last 5 years
Corrupt politicians.
The above are just a few real issues, and affect me, my family and my fellow citizens, real issues, real principles, Davis is a Tory egotist, playing games. an attention seeker, loving the attention.
Complain about this comment
So fearlessbilly67 your open minded I doubt it .
NHS yes within the last 5 years fantastic service.
Iraq war Labour politicians
Coal mining 18in seams, worked out pits your are being a Luddite.
Politicians too many and too many layers.
Complain about this comment
I've decided to put my money where my mouth is. My modest contribution will be forwarded to Davis MP c/o Haltemprice and Howden Conservative Association, 32, Main Street, Willerby, E. Yorks HU10 6BU.
Complain about this comment
I agree with 333. This resignation does illustrate a good argument for proportional representation in parliament. It is a much fairer system of democracy and might difuse some of the frustration many of the electorate feel over issues such as the extension of detention before charge to six weeks.
It is one electoral reform which is achievable and might even combat voter apathy. (I wish!)
Complain about this comment
344 FB67
Please read all of this.
I understand your politics and I was against what happened to the miners. It showed total lack of planning.
When Margaret Thatcher wanted to close the mines it should have been announced 3 to 5 years ahead and regeneration / development of new industries done in that time. Then people could have been retrained and would have had jobs to go to. As it is it was a huge opportunity lost, whole communities lost in poverty and stigma, and a political legacy which was avoidable.
I also agree with all of your principles, and it strikes me the Gordon Brown based on how he got the 42 days through can safely be catagorised within the final category.
I have just watched David Davis on the Andrew Marr Show and it strikes me that he is a man who very much cares about civil liberties and has consigned his carreer to the back benches. I vert much admire his stand.
Funnily enough, the same happened to Churchill 1930s because he said Hitler should be confronted rather than sucked up to. And who did the people turn to in 1940 because he was right?
Regarding your comment that no-one has been held for 28 days before being charged, that surely is the point, isn't it.
The security forces act in two ways
1 They arrest terrorist suspects, note I say suspects, based on intelligence and evidence. They do not arrest anyone until they are sure of their facts otherewise other members of a cell would be alerted, so are in a position to charge them quickly
2 They arrest terrorists after an incident when it is too late to do anything anyway.
The problem is, as highlighted by Bill Cash, I believe, is that once someone is charged the police cannot interview/interrogate them further. That is why the length of holding is important.
The simple answer would have been to charge people on the evidence but allow the police to continue interviewing after charge.
I firmly believe that this is an area where there are other solutions but Gordon Brown refuses because it makes him look weaker it that is possible.
Nothing is logical in politics, but I honestly thing that what David davis is doing is above politics and as such he is a brave, even if some think foolish, man. To do right is sometimes very difficult.
Complain about this comment
346 MaxSceptic
Congratulations, so have I. Its a very good cause that will help define the future of my family, friends, and the rest of the Uk population.
Complain about this comment
346
I have contributed too.
NB
I understand cheques should be payable to "Haltemprice and Howden Conservative Association Fighting Fund".
Complain about this comment
There have been some pretty appalling parliaments throughout time. They have invariably been given a name. May I suggest that this current parliament be referred to as the DPP, otherwise known as the Dead Parrot Parliament, this parliament is dead, it is no more, it is, oh you get the idea, or some of may, the more Ostrich like readers will of course say , that Griffin fellow, he's gone completely bonkers, how naive, he's lost the plot etc...
Now we are being told, through sources, that David Cameron didn't want to support David Davis and that really the Tories supported 42 days detention. Isn't this the real point, do we live in an independent parliamentary democracy or do we live with parties where we, the people do not vote directly for the leader but have one imposed on us. This is further proof, if any were needed, that we need to have a directly elected 'President'. Keep the Queen by all means but do not tell me that our soldiers are dying on foreign fields for 'Queen and Country' they are not. They are fighting and dying for an American President!
I go back to when Tony Blair declared that he was going to serve for a full term, Gordon Brown has no legitimacy and must resign now. This is a Dead Parrot Parliament, go Gordon and go now! I would rather die for David Davis than for the Queen, the country is a travesty of a democracy.
Finally, not enough is being said about the liberating of the Afghan prisoners, our soldiers really are fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan for nothing!
Complain about this comment
339 neocromwellian , please, please, please, show me some proof of of Walter Wolfgang being detained under the anti terrorism act.
Complain about this comment
*345 mike the biscuit, you take the biscuit!!
what happened to my pensioners point? you never mentioned that? how open minded of you, LOL
After 20 years of a pit that was closed down by the principled Tories, it was closed again recently, after miners who sunk their own money into it, operated it for 20 years after closure and made a profit, keeping themselves in employment, glad they joined the luddites
However, we digress, this big massive point of principle that Davis is standing up for, which is going to affect us all in a massive way!! i ask again, how many people will either be Arrested and Convicted in a year?
As for a former editor of the Sun standing against Davis, well big ego V's big ego, a stunt turning into a farce right enough, will they be room in the constituency for both their big heads. now Davis wants a fight, well Mckenzie V's Davis in a real boxing ring will do, that is entertaining.
Complain about this comment
Regarding DD, what I find interesting as suggested on the Marr programme is that journalists who spend their time in the Westminster village are against DD and those outside are, on the whole, for what he is doing!!!!
I haven't seen grandantidote's post yet but I am sure he is taking me to task for my post.
Complain about this comment
Good for David Davis - there seems to be at least one voice in the wilderness of politics who is prepared to stand up for something and take personal responsibility in the face of the conspiracy between media and government - the full extent of which is represented by the idiotic puppet of Murdoch being offered up as a 'candidtate' in the Hull ByElection. Frankly, to all of those developing their sophisticated arguments on the subject of freedom and liberty and are in favour of 42 days plus do remember that freedom and innocence are in themselves simple things; it is authoritarianism and guilt and culpability that become complicated. What makes politicians and media (Sun etc) people think that if you dont have proof of wrongdoing with 28 days of detention that a remaining fortnight will make any difference? Is it in this last 14 days that torture and other forms of unacceptable duress become the next big question, along with where on British soil we install the next Guantanamo Bay? If you don't have proof within 28 days, you don't have proof. That is what ordinary ( educated) people know, and that is why they support Mr Davis.
Complain about this comment
*348 Mikepo posted>
Nothing is logical in politics, but I honestly thing that what David davis is doing is above politics and as such he is a brave, even if some think foolish, man. To do right is sometimes very difficult.
Brave courageous???????
Offering to take on an unpopular mid term government in a by election contest, knowing just recently that Labour had a 7000 majority in a by election overturned by his party.
JEEZ, yeah, he is so brave is Davis!!
Now given the foregone conclusion that he will regain his seat, surely Cameron wouldn't dream of not offering this brave courageous principled man his job back in the cabinet?
Davis the principled risk taker LOL
Complain about this comment
Nick I find the negative coverage of this event quite stratling. I mean the guy has resigned on a genuine issue which is of deep importance as to the kind of country we live in.
As for your 10 points Many are clutching at straws heres why
1) The sun newspaper. What total rubbish Murdoch Newspapers invariably support whoever is likely to win so the politicians will them owe murdoch a favour. If cameron is likely to win the Sun will back him end of story
2) It is extremely unlikely Davis will lose given that Labour wont put up a candidate and If Camerons wants this big hitter so much he can always let him back him
3) So what why should this be of any concern to anyone outside Westminster and anyway Camerons position is most secure as no party ditches a likely winner
4)Ok it may be adamp squib but it iwll cost £80K to run this by election chicken feed compared to the 10s of billions wasted on ID cards the 100s of millions in bribes 2 get this odious law through ,
apparently Kelvin Mackenzie of the Sun will stand which will give people a chance to demonstrate if they really in truth do want to live in a police state
5-6 Sorry but those points re interchangable and why should we care
7 I think we really need to have this debate funnily enuff this goes to the very heart of the kind of society we want to live in
8 No one listens to Politicians on these subjects because their polices are more or less identical which means their incompetence is too
9 Davis has resigned from Camerons Team in case you hadnt noticed so thats plain RUbbish
I would however agree that there is quite genuinely a danger for Cameron in that the extraordinarily unpleasant reaction from the Tories Is likely to increase the perception that The Tories are no better than Nu Labour and will be every bit as corrupt incompetent and authoritarian as Blair who they all so much admire but is in fact widely loathed.
The current sucess of the Tories is very much a rejection of Nu Labour not a positive
endorsement of Cameron.
I have certainly been turned off the Tories but mainly because they have demonstrated that they too have no place for people of principle and no room for honest debates
I all probability what Davis has done is boost supoort for none of the above since if you are angry with Tweedledum you wont be looking if you a choice to vote for tweedleDee
Complain about this comment
It might be unwise to dismiss the debate that Davis may start - that of the erosion of personal liberties in this country.
I trust that we can have a debate on this - or will it be totally sidelined by Davis 'bashing' from the media and Labour?
Locking people up without trial is a very serious subject - today terrorists - tomorrow, well who knows!!!
This Government with its army of snoopers has freely granted powers to a whole host of agencies to give out information, enter homes and obtain information has demonstrated that it despises personal freedoms.
Whatever is thrown at Davis cannot mask a deeper debate that is sorely needed.
Complain about this comment
Since labour came to power it has become the prerogative of the police and courts to guide and discipline our children. Meanwhile the treatment of child detainees in police stations has deteriorated such that it is common for children who have committed no crime and have no previous contact with police officers to spend 16-20 hours in solitary confinement waiting for the officer managing the case to come on shift. In the majority of such cases the child has not committed a crime or it is of a nuisance nature previously dealt with by a call to mum and dad.
The most shocking thing is, if I were to treat my child, in the same way as police do, for the same unlawful act, I would receive a prison sentence.
Surely a police state.
Complain about this comment
Am I the only person that sees this as a very worrying incident for Gordon Brown?
Despite it throwing my 60 year old political allegiances into disarray I really would vote for Davis. if it was my by election.
I scour the back benches for someone in the labour party to emerge as a possible new leader - but who?
Where is the likes of Kevin Rudd, or Barak Obama? Someone who speaks of hope and new direction? And integrity?? Most of all political integrity......
Complain about this comment
FB67
I'm sure that if I agreed with everything you said you would find that wrong. So we have to agree to disagree.
What I am fighting for is the right to do what we are doing here on this blog. Giving our true opinions.
Do you think that if Brown gets his way and all emails, internet access, and telephone calls are monitored, people will post their real opinions here. They will be monitored too.
The next step will be stopping opinions critical of the government. The government will put pressure on the BBC to moderate us out. We will both be too critical of the government, me in my condemnation of Brown and you on pension, Iraq, etc.
This is what happens in China.
Then look at ID cards and road pricing. Id cards are already capable of carrying chips that can be used for knowing where we are at any time. Road pricing will know where our cars are at any time. The technology exists.
And it is that technology that will be the undoing of all of us, save our masters. It will be used to its full extent.
I have worked in eastern Europe. Now I think that communism and socialism are fine in theory, equality for all. But some always end up more equal than others. But there in the 70s - 80s the masters had all of the perks, good food, special holiday resort, clubs, etc, while the rest had a life of poverty and fear of being watched.
While not reaching these levels we are going the same way. Its not that we do anything wrong, its being watched in case we do, no mater how small. Dropping litter unintentionally and being fined, parking slightly out of line, reading a list of war dead outside parliament (the so called Mother of all Parliaments), the list is endless.
Complain about this comment
If the security forces and the police pursued serious criminals and terrorists in the same manner in which they persecute pensioners who cannot/will not pay council taxes, or those who do not pay TV licences, or put the wrong rubbish in the incorrect bin, then 48 hours at the most, would be all that is needed to hold a suspect.
In all seriousness, I believe the imbeciles who keep leaving sensitive data on trains, etc. must be either drunks or traitors. THEY are the ones who should be detained indefinitely. In the latest sorry episode of material left on trains, they truly met their Waterloo!
Complain about this comment
359 sizzler
I agree with everything you say.
When I was a boy I threw half a brick at a bully in our street. I hit him and was very pleased with myself.
When my father came home he was told what had happened. It was all up the street.
He took me outside, put me over a chair and gave me his belt, telling me not to cry until I was back in the house. He belted me three times. It really hurt. Everyone was watching from their front doors.
When it was over I cried. But my father whom I loved very much and still miss tremendously just said " Justice had to be seen to be done. Now everyone will forget it ever happened. But if I hadn't done it it would have just festered."
Today, of course, he would have been prosecuted, I would probably have been taken into care, and our happy family would have spilt up.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick. I have a great deal of respect for you,but you really are sounding more and more like a Government spokesperson.
At least you could try to disguise your open support for Labour by taking notice of what the people think and reporting on that basis.
Personally,I think that Gordon Brown may live to regret his stance of ridiculing David Davis over his resignation.The issue is that of the overriding increase in abuse of Civil Liberties as perpetrated by the current Government....something the General Public are very aware of,and it has,perhaps in their mind, now reached breaking point .
Complain about this comment
David Milliband on the Andrew Marr programme today said that the goverment would still continue the validate the Lisbon treaty despite the no vote by the Irish people. When the previous treaty was thrown out by the French people the promised referendum for the UK was cancelled. More double standards by this goverment .
Complain about this comment
Well Mr. Robinson what can I say about your latest blog entry?
Utter rubbish? Fantasy?
Perhaps I am being a little harsh, but to be honest the general opinion of people on this blog must lead you to beleive that the media has go it wrong in this instance. David Davis has gone up in my estimation, as it is rare to see a politician in this day and age stand up for their morals by putting themselves on the line. So often have we seen politicians wax lyrical about "how much they care", only to return quietly to their offices to fill in their expense forms. Time and time again, have the media called for greater sacrifice from our MP's for what they believe in.
What angers me considerably, is as soon as one does put their convictions and beliefs before themselves, they are rounded on by the media who behave like a pack of frenzied wolves.
As well as Mr Brown and his pathetic government (no deals, what a load of rubbish! Does Mr Brown really think we are that stupid to believe him!), I think the media needs to take a long hard look in the mirror and ask themselves what have they done to help this nation recently.
Complain about this comment
#340 mikepko Do you have one shred of evidence to prove your statement is right, it seems that so many of your posts start with, [more or less] I was talking to dick tom or harry and they told me that so and so was true. Lets have a few facts not your hearsay.
341 Contrary to what you say no one will be locked up without knowing why. thats a really stupid thing to say, they have to go in front of a judge every seven days and they have to be represented.
The fact that no one has been held past 27 days does not prove any point, there are three people that have been held for 27 days who have been charged and appear in court today, what if the evidence had taken another three days or maybe six. I have always conducted my life on "A stitch in time saves nine" and "Better safe than sorry" being a retired boatbuilder that makes sense I think. If in the fairly unlikely event that a few people are held for forty two days I would rather that than be watching the news on TV as I was on 9/11 and 7/7 and see disasters of that kind take place again, in GB or anywhere else for that matter. because some one like DD got his way. incidently it does'nt matter if your black or blue white or yellow or any other variation of colours the same treatment will apply and its only for terrorist activities and nothing else some of your fellow supporter are trying to say that it will be used for other things, in their efforts to create paranoia.
368 You think thats its a good analogy to compare the situation between Churchill and Hitler, and David Davis and the will of parliament, I have a strong suspicion that dear old Winston would disagree with you on that one. Regarding your statement 2 is'nt that a good reason to have 42 days if needed.
This is not a game this is about a real and present threat to perhaps thousands of lives and if in the unlikely event that one or two people are held for forty two days, then thats what we have to do.
It was Norman Lamont that infamously said about the thousands of unemployed "thats a price we have to pay"that involved thousands of men women and children living on the bone of their backsides, not a few suspects locked for 42 days but David Davis or the rest of the Tories dont have much to say about that.
Complain about this comment
262 Mighty Angela. I coudnt agree more with your second paragraph, there is no way on Gods earth that these documents were left on a train by accident.
I wrote some three months ago asking if anyone else thought it suspicious that documents had started to get lost, had this have been happening since Labour came to power on a fairly regular basis then you might think it was their mismanagement, but I very much doubt whether the method of keeping these documents has changed in the last twenty years, except for discs of course, and yet there has been a unbelievable spate of these documents being mislayed in the last twelve months and in the most incredible ways. left on lap tops in car left on trains found on rubbish tips to me this is not credible and as you say, is it treason, or is it political espionage.
Complain about this comment
Simple Question.
Will one of the many on here lauding Davis tell me, will this be a bi-election to elect an MP or some sort of referndum on civil liberties?
As I see it, it can only be the former but will be fudged as the latter and that's why it will be meaningless in terms of "opinion" even in Haltomprice never mind the rest of the UK which of course have no vote!
Complain about this comment
326# John Constable
And if the courts find in favour of the government you wont accept the verdict but if they find in favour of wheeler its a sound decision.
Well, will you accept the verdict or not?
Or will there be the usual crackpot allegations of "labour bias" as there is on here re the BBC (not neces