Comments for en-gb 30 Mon 25 May 2015 23:39:06 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at Sindy Big Sister (33) - "He will probably be returned to the post of shadow Home Secretary."I would be very surprised if that happened. Cameron very quickly appointed someone else (and not as 'acting' shadow) and has made it quite clear that DD is on his own.So if there is a by-election, he'll be back as a back-bench MP, with no prospect of a front-line job under Cameron. Sun 15 Jun 2008 16:38:17 GMT+1 dennisjunior1 it is sad that david davis is least he is a true politician...:(~i hope you will re-enter the field your dreams down the road, and rebuild our politics to the glory days. Sun 15 Jun 2008 00:00:26 GMT+1 U11204129 What a great post. Just shows all us regular bloggers that WE are the very few in number and importance.This time the many have spoken and it is a marvellous thunderous sound.My fear is that we are about to see a ritual humiliation in British politics (of David Davis) such as we have never seen before. John Major and Gordon Brown will seem to be let off lite by comparison.Et meus, Brute? Well. yes, I'm afraid so. 'Cos this man is RIGHT, but right about this alone.As Tory Defence Shadow he was given access to all the papers pre the Iraq War but somehow couldn't quite fathom that Tony Blair was b*llsh*t*ng.Davies has both party establishments hoping for his downfall, for he will not, except by a miracle, change public opinion decisively.Those establishments will crucify him.No change there, then for someone speaking the truth. Sat 14 Jun 2008 22:51:58 GMT+1 newtactic 107... I don't think all politicians are interested in is their career. But surely they owe it to their constituents, who elected them, to represent them in the House of Commons. And they owe it to their party to give plenty of warning about any intention of resigning their position. Especially an important one such as Shadow Home Secretary. This controversial bill is likely to be altered or even thrown back to the Commons by the Lords. It has only passed its first stage and has a long way to go before it goes on the statute books. These are all the reasons I find it hard to understand this resignation and particularly the timing and the (apparent) lack of forethought about it. It seems to me to show some contempt for the parliamentary system. Fri 13 Jun 2008 19:13:52 GMT+1 simone1980 Thank goodness some politicians are prepared to stand up against the spineless majority now making decisions on our behalf to ensure our 'democracy' is safe.It is shameful, utterly diabolical, that Britain's 1000 year old tradition of Habeus Corpus is to be discarded. Despicable.The government seems to be making a habit of holding expensive enquiries, receiving advice not to go ahead with certain bills, and then go out of its way to disregard such expert advice from experienced individuals such as Sir Peter Foyle.Please, if you do one thing today, watch George Galloway's passionate, intelligent voice in the wilderness pleading for MPs not to vote for 42 days' detention.It is easy for the government to push him aside as a 'firebrand' or 'renegade maverick' who is just out to grab headlines. Remember how Churchill was similarly portrayed in parliament when he attempted to persuade parliament that Hitler was a menace to the security of Europe in 1939? Even as prime minister during that conflict, 42 days' detention was never considered, even then. Fri 13 Jun 2008 17:54:13 GMT+1 Kerouac4fan I expect this has been said before, but: At first I thought there was mutiny in theTory ranks.But he hasn't resigned from the party he'srebelling against Brown/New Labour'smove with the anti-terrorist 42 dayextension.This makes me wonder if behind it isa crafty Tory plot to smear Labour asthe draconian party (which maybe inthis case they are) while making itappear as if the Tories are liberal atheart and squeaky clean, therefore morefit for power (in the next election).You'll remember Martin Bell done this(wore a white suit as a protest againstTory sleaze in the mid-nineties) andthat may have helped get New Labourinto power.An interesting move. Fri 13 Jun 2008 17:51:06 GMT+1 sauermaische Gordon Brown has described David Davis's actions as "a stunt that has turned into a farce". If so, it has only because Gordon Brown has chosen to turn it into one. Fri 13 Jun 2008 17:31:54 GMT+1 sauermaische Throughout New Labour's time in office they have been agonizing over voter apathy. I wonder why voters are apathetic? Today Ireland voted against the EU Constitution (sorry Treaty). So that's over, finished... but our government shows its contempt for democracy by continuing preparations to ratify it. David Davis resigns to fight a by-election on the subject of civil rights and the government party shows its contempt for democracy by suggesting that it won't field a candidate that will argue their case. Can you see a common thread here? Fri 13 Jun 2008 17:27:17 GMT+1 needsanewnickname btw, k (124), I might vote for Michael Heseltine's hair. It's always been rather remarkable. Fri 13 Jun 2008 15:28:50 GMT+1 needsanewnickname Oh, gah, not Kelvin McKenzie.They're all as bad as the other. I'd vote for Spoiled Ballot.Having said that, and not having read the whole thread, I'm otherwise with Norman and mindclearly. Fri 13 Jun 2008 15:27:01 GMT+1 mindclearly Can I just add I think the principle that he resigned his seat over could have been kept in the public eye in a better way than, resigning his seat. Fri 13 Jun 2008 15:18:47 GMT+1 mindclearly (130) Your correct except, there is always the first and the reaction and what happens next and he expects to happen will be entirely different because this is politics in the UK with a very hard and hard to please press. From what I understand as this unfolds further is there is a defining silence from his old boss....Dave is not saying much and thats something DD needs to concerned about. There is being seen to be supportive and actually being supportive. Fri 13 Jun 2008 15:17:14 GMT+1 Norman_the_geordie Regardless of anyone's view on the 42 day issue, David Davis' actions need to be seen for what they are.This is a self serving publicty stunt by someone who is positioning himself as a future Prime Minister.Let's face it, the current incumbent is incompetent, and the leader of the opposition weak and indecisive.I truly hope Mr. Davis' falls flat on his face for such a manipulative move.My vote would go to the guy from The Sun Fri 13 Jun 2008 14:48:04 GMT+1 Dusto-Fages Listening to DD on the radio this morning a thought struck me: - What would Labour politicians have done if this were a Tory proposal from a Tory Government?- What would DD have done if this were a Tory proposal from a Tory Government?Alas, we shall never know! Fri 13 Jun 2008 14:24:42 GMT+1 sauermaische 127. "Good for the DD machine, I think not... DD, I think has not fully thought through what will happen when he resigned".The underlying assumption here is that he cares more about his political career than about his principals. Indeed this assumption is shared by many of the political commentators who have made disparaging remarks on David Davis's stance. The opinion on this blog seems to separate into those who believe that he is an honest man who has put principal before his personal position, and those who believe him to be a cynical man manoeuvring for self advantage... and getting it wrong. The man has risen from a disadvantaged background to become an accomplished manager in industry, and then a senior politician, so he is clearly no fool. Perhaps, he knows exactly what he is doing, and actually believes in the principal he is resigning over. Fri 13 Jun 2008 12:34:58 GMT+1 RJMolesworth No wait.. a lorry just left and one fell off the back and broke open. It was not port inside it was pork. Fri 13 Jun 2008 12:05:35 GMT+1 RJMolesworth I am sitting in a motorway car park and there are lorries with Northern Ireland number plates carry port barrels towards towards the Belfast ferry. Fri 13 Jun 2008 12:03:40 GMT+1 mindclearly (122 saucermaische) The tragic issue is that under either government, centre left or centre right, there is still 28 days which is as mentioned above a fall back position. The senarios discussed on this have not convinced me it is the correct coarse of action, so Blairs 90 days gives you a good idea of what i though of him.... Debate reactivated , yes, good for the DD machine, I think not and celebrity BB could all that he could be looking forward to like georgous geoge did!! DD I think has not fully thought through what will happen when he resigned and if he thought he was being ignored by the consevative senior management before this will only given them a good reason to carrying on doing so.. Fri 13 Jun 2008 12:00:18 GMT+1 lightspout Not surprisingly, Director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti lauds and honours her friend David Davis's stand on 42 days detention, citing his passion for civil liberties. To reinforce all this passion, she cited "another friend" MP Diane Abbott who spoke against 42 days detention in the House. Pity Ms Abbott isn't quite so passionate about the civil liberties of gay men, given that she is quite happy to blithely dismiss 'artist' Bhuju Banton's promotion of the violent murder of gay men as "silly" and "slightly controversial" (recent Desert Island Discs). I suggest Ms. Chakrabarti joins up the dots on ALL civil liberties issues, and not just those her high profile 'mates' selectively espouse. There is no heirarchy of entitlement when it comes to human rights, and I'd expect Liberty's Director to be a lot more circumspect when it comes to hitching herself to the wagon of Abbott's double standards. With friends like these... Fri 13 Jun 2008 11:33:14 GMT+1 utilly I just wanted to add a quick "me too" to the chorus of people who suffered misery under Tories of the 80s and 90s (twice to court over the Poll Tax) who feel moved to voice some admiration for DD's resignation over the 42 days.As a former life long Labour supporter, the Iraq War lost them my vote. The whole ID card thing has put the tin lid on it for me. Fri 13 Jun 2008 11:12:58 GMT+1 Edith Crispin I'm dying to find out how Tory readers of the Sun will vote. Or the Joe and Jane Publics who would vote back hanging and national service and placing all young people under curfew after 9pm. I suspect that is is going to become a Laura Norder tussle between the bombastic MacKenzie and Michael Heseltine's heir. Fri 13 Jun 2008 11:10:13 GMT+1 laidbackliadback Re 95. I suppose a termination at 42 weeks is a death, given that 40 weeks is birth? Nice try to link the two, pity it failed. Fri 13 Jun 2008 11:02:54 GMT+1 sauermaische 117. Of course it's a publicity stunt. And it's worked marvellously so far. He has got the whole country discussing the issue of personal liberties. Would any of us be posting here on this subject had he not? But the point is, it's not a publicity stunt in favour of David Davis as a celebrity, it's a publicity stunt highlighting how our personal freedoms are being taken from us all. Fri 13 Jun 2008 10:53:34 GMT+1 Simon mittfh;You wrote "the fact the person has been detained in the first place indicates there must be some degree of intelligence placing suspicion on them".Like the Muslim family in Forest Gate whose son was shot in a small-hours armed police raid, and who were released without charge and compensated?Like Jean Charles de Menezes? They didn't even bother trying to detain him!Better that 10 guilty men walk free than one man be falsely imprisoned or killed for the sake of bad information. Besides the terms 'police intelligence' and 'military intelligence' are frequently a contradiction in terms.You're right to say that they must be told what they are suspected of, that's the point of Habeas Corpus, "Produce the Body", in this case the body of evidence against the suspect.Horse;It was your 109, which seemed to suggest that 28 days was fine, so what's the big deal about a change to 42. Why make a fuss about it?Plainly I misinterpreted your position. Sorry.If Davis has read many comments on Nick Robinson's Blog or this one, or elsewhere, written by the same Joe Public that's supposed to be in favour of 42 days, then he might draw some satisfaction and comfort from what seems to be the almost overwhelming public support for his stance against that same 42 days.Those against him often seem driven by party politics, than a consideration of the merits of his argument. But then there are plenty of examples of "I never thought I'd consider voting for a Tory, but..." lying around the comments columns (see 71 and 76 above for a couple of quick examples).Could it be that the hacks and politicos have misread/misrepresented public opinion? Surely not!WR. Fri 13 Jun 2008 10:24:40 GMT+1 hannibalspiggins Murdoch / The Manchurian CandidateNo one should be surprised that Rupert Murdoch is fielding a candidate (Kelvin Mackenzie) against David Davis in his campaign for re-election.Murdoch has spent years courting the ‘Big Government’ in Beijing. Maybe the Sun proprietor would like Britain to follow the approach to civil liberties that the Chinese government adopts Fri 13 Jun 2008 10:21:08 GMT+1 Simon bolandista;Your attack seems to be against libertarianism, rather than Davis? You also betray your ignorance of the philosophy.Libertarians are not "out for themselves" as you suggest. The ideal vis-a-vis the State is that the State will make the minimum amount of Laws required to protect the people and take the minimum in resources to do so. It's not a 'Me, me, me' thing. Anyone thinking they are libertarian who grabs what they can regardless of others doesn't have a clue what it's about.Its position with regard to others can be summed up in a line from a Chris Rea song 'Nothing to fear' "If I leave you, leave me alone". That each may live his/her own life in the style they wish, free of unwanted interference from others and crucially having absolute respect for the law and for the equal rights of others to do as they please in turn.It's an admirable philosophy in many ways, acknowledging the rights of others and being treated equally yourself in return.It's not the preserve of any political body either. People normally link it broadly to the Right, which generally advocates small Government and a reduction of the State. But you can be a Left libertarian, respecting the lives and rights of others is not the preserve of any party, indeed many genuine Socialists and Social Democrats are profoundly respectful of the dignity and freedom of human life.It comes down to how much you advocate big Government, how much you wish to take from others, both in liberty and taxes, how much you think that the State should regulate the lives of citizens and interfere in the rights of the free.WR. Fri 13 Jun 2008 09:56:55 GMT+1 U10783173 White Rat - Not sure why you address your remarks to me as I totally agree that the push to get to 42 days is a pointless exercise and will in the long run be counter-productive. I think that the extension to 28 days was likewise unnecessary and will prove as useful as the diabolical identity card business that is threatened upon us. Davis intimates that resigning and standing again is the only way that a 'debate' can be started on this. What a lot of tosh! It doesn't say much for the effectiveness of the Opposition on these points if he feels he has to resort to such a stunt. And I wonder if he isn't having some regrets having seen some of today's commentaries. Fri 13 Jun 2008 09:33:51 GMT+1 mittfh Let me get this straight.David Davis resigns, thus forcing a by-election.He'll then re-stand as a Conservative for the same seat.Given the fact he is shadow Home Secretary, his seat is likely to be a fairly safe Conservative seat. Even safer since the Lib Dems (their nearest rivals) aren't going to contest it. Even safer still if Labour decide not to waste time and money contesting it.Especially given the fact David apparently didn't let anyone (let alone party management) know his intentions, is it just me or does anyone detect a whiff of publicity stunt?-oOo-As for the detention limit, both 28 days and 42 days seem rather large. What would be a courageous action of a government would be to overrule MI5 and allow intelligence to be used in open court. There might not be enough intelligence to formally convict and sentence someone of terrorism charges within a few days of detention, but the fact the person has been detained in the first place indicates there must be some degree of intelligence placing suspicion on them. Surely they have the right to know what 'suspicious' activity landed them in detention?I fail to see how disclosing the results of intelligence can reveal anything terribly secretive about how the intelligence was obtained. I'm sure many people assume the intelligence services are probably capable of electronically tapping into telephone conversations without needing to place physical devices on the line, or intercepting internet communications.-oOo-On the other hand, 42 days before being charged and brought before an ordinary law court is considerably better than 5 years without charge in jail before being brought before a closed military tribunal - then possibly sentenced to death. Fri 13 Jun 2008 09:13:00 GMT+1 Simon Horse;This is a paraphrase of an answer given on 'Question Time' last night; "Having legalised abortion in England, Scotland and Wales Parliament has set the limit at 24 weeks. Why 24 weeks, not 42?" Because their advisors and 'experts' decided this was appropriate given the information at hand, perhaps.People with attachments to this very Government, not their opponents, who might be thought to be 'experts' in the field of prosecuting crime, such as the DPP and the former Attorney-General have declared openly that this measure is not required. Why are they not being heeded? Is their opinion biased or valueless?It is right that the police can arrest people who are suspected of committing crime. It is right that they can detain them for a finite period of time for questioning and further investigations. There is a point beyond which it is no longer right or just to detain them. It would seem that Davis drew his line in the sand between the acceptable 28 and the unacceptable 42. Who can speak to his conscience and tell him that he's wrong?Liberty discovered that the two cases which have got closest to 28 days detention before being charged were actually ready to charge after 6 days and 14 days respectively, but the police held off doing so. There is not even a solid case for 28 days, that's why it must be renewed by Parliament annually.Tony McNulty described 28 days as 'an exception to the normal 14 days' last night, then went on to describe 42 days as 'the exception to the exception'. How many layers of exceptions do we need? Will 90 days be the exception to the exception to the exception? What about a year or two as a fourth-layer exception?Internment, or detention without trial, doesn't work. Of all the people on this Blog I don't need to remind you of that. It fans the flames of division and leaves a group of people feeling like the state is targetting them, thus adding to the problem that it seeks to counter.WR. Fri 13 Jun 2008 09:08:00 GMT+1 mindclearly (107) I was not pointing at DD directly as he has been an MP for some considerable time and any poor consituancy MP regardless of the faithfull following will have been kickout long ago. There was a reason for asking what I did and this is that I do view the perks, to call them, MP recieve is quite extrodinary when compared to what people in the commercial hardlands of real life recieve. On the 28 or 42 days I think DD position is honerable and I agree with him but there are ways and means and there is something elce, but I still wonder if he actually considered for a minute that this could all backfire on him personally. Fri 13 Jun 2008 09:03:40 GMT+1 U10783173 110 - ". . it's about all the other encraochments on our civil liberties as well."Sorry, I don't agree. Much as I am against Identity Cards, the existing 28-day powers, etc,, I think this stunt is all about David Davis and his ego! But a big mistake I fear, as I doubt that Cameron will ever have him back in any postion of influence. Fri 13 Jun 2008 08:57:10 GMT+1 astroGoldfish David Davis has soared in my estimation. I don’t think I’ve ever agreed with him on anything before but I’m 100% behind him on this. I have become increasingly frustrated with political journalists who see Westminster as some sort of political soap opera about personalities and relationships. The BBC focused most of their coverage of the 42 days detention vote as some sort of test of Gordon Brown’s political virility. At last someone is trying to get a proper discussion of the issues that really matter and will continue to matter long after the current crop of politicians and journalists are forgotten. Fri 13 Jun 2008 08:56:31 GMT+1 bolandista Davis is a trenchant libertarian, which is why he is a Tory. He has brought himself to this sorry position by following his philosophy to its logical conclusion. According to his philosophy, we, as individuals, are to look out for ourselves, no matter how strong or weak we are within society, as opposed to the governments position of using the power of the state to protect us all, irrespective of our standing within society. He has, I am sure, regretted voting for 28 days because it goes against his way of thinking. When I first heard he had resigned I just couldn’t help laughing, he reminded me of that famous Spaniard who fought windmills. My second thought was to stand against him without campaigning to allow the seventy percent of his constituency, who support the government on this, somewhere to place their “X”. Having been delayed by the BBC not sending me an email authorizing me to join this blog, I have changed my mind yet again. No one should stand against Davis. This would; a) allow him to get back into the house where he belongs having been elected in the general election to represent his constituency, b) negate his strategy, having no one to argue against and return him unopposed, and finally, c) expose him as a 21 century Don Quixote.He is finished as a politician. Cameron will not wish his bid for power to be tarnished by a libertarian with such trenchant views, even though most Tories are in awe of the silly man. This awe warns us all of what is in store for the UK should the Tories be the next government, libertarianism. Fri 13 Jun 2008 08:13:41 GMT+1 Patbruce David Davis is entirely right. This government has slowly but surely eroded our civil liberties in an insidious attack on democracy. The process has been in small incremental steps, but the end result is draconian. It has to be stopped and he is to be applauded for bringing the problem to the forefront of our thinking.I wish the Press, for once in its vain glorious life, would praise a man of integrity and courage and stop trying to denigrate him. Perhaps it (the Press) does not recognise a man of principle - and that is a very state of affairs as well. Fri 13 Jun 2008 08:00:19 GMT+1 sauermaische 109. You'd have to ask him. Perhaps you should encourage the BBC to organise a phone in or something so that you can have your opportunity.I would suggest that there is no clear number, that perhaps he was unhappy about 28 days but allowed himself to be persuaded, maybe against his better judgement. But as David Davis said on TV last night, it's not just about the 42 days it's about all the other encraochments on our civil liberties as well. Fri 13 Jun 2008 07:59:24 GMT+1 U10783173 I wonder at which number between 28 and 42, David Davis felt the erosion of liberties became intolerable? Fri 13 Jun 2008 07:48:19 GMT+1 Tomhollings Resigning his seat was not brave and not couragous. It was a cynical move by a headline grabbing politician. With a majority of 5000, it would take a major swing to labour for him to be unseated. He knows full well that this will not happen. Fri 13 Jun 2008 07:47:51 GMT+1 sauermaische 101. Your comment carries the underlying assumption that all politicians are intersted about is their career. While this is obviously true of much of the filth in Westminster, people who have never done a real job in the real world, who went of from their PPE degrees to become pariliamentary researchers, party functionariers and then politicians, it is not necessarily true of all of them. David Davis obviously thinks that this issue is bigger than his career.The same comment applies to you 104.105. Read my post 102. This is about raising the issue, making the ordinary people of this country who mistakenly trust their government to work in their best interests, sit up and take notice. How does an individual generate a national debate, David Davis has caused this issue to dominate the news for 1 day now, how many of his statements as Shadow Home Secretary has had nearly as much media attention?103. Do you really think that being able to write on an international website compensates for being under constant video surveillance, for potentially being detained without charge for 6 weeks, for not being able to protest in parts of our capital city, for the merging of government databases... the lists goes on?106. Your post suggests that all MPs are interested in is what they personally can get out of the system. I would agree with you in the case of most MPs, but since yesterday, David Davis has clearly demonstrated that he is not one of that number. Fri 13 Jun 2008 07:42:54 GMT+1 mindclearly I had to wait before postiong on this as I was surprised at the actions of what I considered a well respected MP. So is DD actually saying in the under currents, Tory senior management I am no wlak over and here I am with my head above, as your political comentators are suggesting or is he eying up a spot on the next celebrity apprentice as he could be without a job is Kelvin Mc is successful??!! BTW Question I would like answering, if he does not get back into politics as an MP, when does his pension which MPs benefit from start and what would be the rate he will be recieving ie full pensionable pay or 2/3rds? or has the MP fund been hit like the local goverenments with ammendments like everyone else in the country?? Fri 13 Jun 2008 07:05:59 GMT+1 biglsmith The Labour Party has alerady made the point that this is more a waste of money than a point of principle and I think they're right. Equally, the opportunity for the subsequent election to be some kind of local referendum on 42 days could only be valid if Mr Davis were to leave the Conservative Party and stand against a new Conservative Candidate. Otherwise, the election will amount only to a Conservative constituency re-electing its popular MP - which says nothing about 42 days! Fri 13 Jun 2008 05:36:37 GMT+1 dennisjunior1 David Davis:It is sad that you have to leave politics..but you have convictions. Fri 13 Jun 2008 02:30:44 GMT+1 evenmorelovely 102. You talk about the 'constant erosion of our civil liberties' - on a global website dedicate to freedom of expression! Thu 12 Jun 2008 23:53:13 GMT+1 sauermaische What's its all about? Its about allerting the silent majority who take little notice of politics, and trust the government of the day to run it all for them, while they get on with the important things in life, to the fact that they are not as free as they were 10 or 20 years ago. Its to motivate all those persons who recognise the constant erosion of their civil liberties, but are passive because they take the very reasonable attitude of "heck what can I do about it". Its about getting an issue that our rulers want to quietly sweep under the carpet out into the open, and get the whole nation talking about it.I've just finished watching "Question Time" on BBC1 and the way the rival politicians have gone out of their way to put the boot in and represent the issue as a selfish publicity stunt rather than address the issue which the event raises rather proves the point. Thu 12 Jun 2008 23:04:48 GMT+1 newtactic I don't think David Davis will lose his seat in a by election although some may think he has a screw loose in tendering his resignation without warning his colleagues and the rest of the Conservative party he might resign if he did not agree with the outcome of the vote. He might also have waited to see what the Lords will do with the bill. Is this perhaps a matter of "act in haste, repent at leisure"? Thu 12 Jun 2008 22:24:09 GMT+1 U10783173 What a load of absolute piffle! David Davies is outraged that civil liberties are being eroded but found it quite acceptable to vote for people to be detained for 28 days without charge? I need an explanation for his sudden conversion.Brave and principled stand? With a 5,000 majority and no effective opposition in his seat? Another explanation please. I bet David Cameron is fit to be tied, with this making the headlines. Thu 12 Jun 2008 22:23:24 GMT+1 HarrietWimsey As someone from the North of England who grew up during the 1980s, I developed a visceral loathing of Thatcherism and its proponents which had, I thought, deterred me from ever voting Conservative for any reason at all. Period. Now I wish I was one of David Davis's constituents. I'd vote for him. My own (Labour) MP slunk into line over this monstrous legislation - I'd appreciate the chance of a vote in a referendum on 42 days, however localised. Thu 12 Jun 2008 22:17:07 GMT+1 pmMaggie I can't believe a politician has done something surprising and principled. Lunch time today we actually stopped in our tracks and listened open mouthed to David Davis. I can't remember the last time we did that. Bless him for putting his head above the parapet. Bless him for caring about our freedom. I only regret that I can't vote for him. Thu 12 Jun 2008 22:10:03 GMT+1 MellMeredith It's all very well DD stepping down and standing for re election, but who is going to pay for it?Why should 'we' pay for him to prove his point?It would be even better if nobody stood against him. Then he would have proved nothing and wasted everybody's time and money.Mell Thu 12 Jun 2008 21:46:46 GMT+1 evenmorelovely If a leader of the Conservative Party (eg David Cameron) resigned, you'd think fair enough; if a Prime Minister (eg John Major) resigned, you'd think fair enough.But if John Prescott had thought resigning would force the people of Hull's wrath would bring New Labour to its knees,you'd think 'is this the Twilight Zone'?What was David's (admittedly deep) strategy? Thu 12 Jun 2008 21:38:07 GMT+1 Rachel Blackburn "how can he support 28 days but oppose 42 days" - RachelGThe same way somebody could support abortion at 28 weeks but oppose it at 42 weeks perhaps? Quite.I doubt he really like 28 days either but acknowledges the occasional necessity. 42 days though is purely Brown's posturing to look "tough on terror". Remember last year that 90 days was the magic number we needed - yet somehow Mr "We won't compromise the safety of this country" only now needs 42. So was he lying then or lying now? Or both? Thu 12 Jun 2008 21:11:48 GMT+1 spidersandsnakes I'm with you 100% DD - this government is controlled by the Stasi. Well done and best of luck... Thu 12 Jun 2008 21:04:12 GMT+1 Rachel Blackburn "Let's remember this is a potential keeping in detention of assumed terrorists," - kniphofiaAnd apparently forget this is keeping in detention without charge of *innocent* people?Yes - innocent, until proven guilty. That's how the law works in this country, or at least used to. Or did you forget that too? Thu 12 Jun 2008 21:03:41 GMT+1 newtactic I just wanted to say that David Davis is unlikely to lose (not loose) his seat in the now necessary by election. Although it is possible he has a "screw loose" in taking this action. We do not live in a police state. As far as I remember, the nearest we had to a "police state" was when they were deployed in large numbers to battle against the pickets in the Thatcher years. Fortunately the police and the law are completely separate institutions from Parliament and will remain so. Don't forget it was the police who investigated the "cash for honours" allegations. And as for Magna Carta. Read it. You'll find the rights granted were very limited. The freedoms and rights were only for those with land and those who could read... sadly there wasn't much in it for us serfs and peasants. Thu 12 Jun 2008 20:56:49 GMT+1 sauermaische If Gordon Brown hasn't bribed the DUP, then he's had someone else do it for him. The DUP will never form a government in London, so the only time they get the power to get their own way is when an incumbent government is over a barrel. They would be abandoning their responsibility towards their constituents if they had let this opportunity pass. Thu 12 Jun 2008 20:19:52 GMT+1 sauermaische What's wrong with 42 days detention? If you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to fear; and there has never been a miscarriage of justice anywhere, ever. Thu 12 Jun 2008 20:10:35 GMT+1 DI_Wyman r those his own teef?anyhoo, well done DD you have at the very least, stimulated Froggers, new and old! Thu 12 Jun 2008 19:44:01 GMT+1 sauermaische In Whitehall, they are digging up the pavement, narrowing it to about 1/3 of its previous width and putting in a ~5 foot security wall. What's it supposed to protect against? Not a van bomb, that's for sure. I've seen blast walls around the police barracks in Northern Ireland and they are much more substantial edifices. If they are not there to protect from van bombs what are they for? Parcel bombs? They could by lobbed over them.Could it be that their real purpose is to protect the ministries from rioting citizens?This country has been living on credit for 10 years. Older readers will remember how the balance of payments used to be reported on the news every month. Have you seen the figures recently? Why not? They have been solidly in the red for 10 whole years. What happens if the credit dries up? Of course that could never happen, just ask any former director of Northern Rock. There are too many people on this island, it cannot feed itself, we have to buy food from abroad... but what will we do it with if we have no readies? We could always use Gold. After all we have plenty of that in the Bank of England, don't we? Is the prospect of rioting citizenry so far fetched? Protests need ringleaders, protests can be disrupted if the ringleaders are in gaol, and now they can be held for a full 6 weeks. Thu 12 Jun 2008 19:38:33 GMT+1 gallantSocrates Is this little story just another 'Red Herring' swimming in very Blue Water - because did you all not know that David Davis is really Andy McNab just taking a few more weeks off to write another novel. And as 'K' asks: what do these people stand for now - apart from a smaller State, more Privatization and locking up the Working Class who don't go along with ruthless Capitalism, in its present form. (I can never understand how going back to the 18/19 century economical is progress, can you?)....Who are in in essence nothing more than Political Prisoners if the mass media told the truth about our Class divided society where the Rich are getting very Rich while the majority are not doing so well. In fact I did read a book many years ago called the Rich are getting Richer and the Poor go to Prison...mostly about the USA experience but still very relevant to Little Britain..With apologies to Eddie and Lord Sir Alan Sugar of all Barrow boys United (I don't watch such tosh) for making the odd spelling mistake on these blogs...well I did only have 6 years formal Education, left school at 14 and did not go to Oxford...BrianBrian V PeckPS: Be careful profoudSatita you may end up on a MI5 hit list, like me!!!! Thu 12 Jun 2008 19:30:50 GMT+1 JeanVicT K (26) Your last paragraph sums it up so well: impulsive, incoherent attention-seeking stunt. And you are not alone in not knowing what it is to be a Conservative: the Shadow Cabinet are out of touch and out of sinc with their own members - they are in favour of the 42 days! On the wider issue, we are right to be concerned and watchful of our Civil Liberties, but we are not pulling a suspect in and locking them up for 42 days: a person could only be locked up for 7 days at a time, and only if a senior judge was convinced that it was necessary. Thu 12 Jun 2008 19:15:57 GMT+1 Macreinhardt DDs' resignation may be a planned political stunt, and yes he is unlikely to loose his seat, and yes he is still ultimately a member of the gravey train mob who presume to know better, but atleast he has had the courage to pull the pin and explode the grenade that may finally wake up the British public from their pathetic apathy and misguided belief in locking people away, filming people, and terrorists on every corner!!!. Remember what you guys did in the 18th century? Sent ordinary people to the gallows and to Terra Australis, we already have the highest incarceration rate in the EU. I say good on him for sticking up for what is right, regardless of motive. Thu 12 Jun 2008 19:03:36 GMT+1 JeanVicT Yes, barriesingleton, David Davis is standing as a Conservative, David Cameron has said he will be canvassing for him ...but the party won't pick up the tab. Now who's a dither! There is no courage attached to DD's stand: before making his annouement he spoke to the Liberals and ensured that they would not be putting up a candiate, so his safe seat is even safer. Where's the courage or, indeed, the point, in that? Bit of media attention for David Davis? Sounds about right. Thu 12 Jun 2008 18:45:51 GMT+1 sauermaische On the World at One, one "David Hill" who was described as "Tony Blair's director of communications" commented: "[David Davis] sounded slightly unhinged".So this is how someone who was a Labour "insider" views a man who stands by a principal. And he's right. What is this man Davis doing in politics if he cares about more than his salary, his expenses and his pension? Just as well he's resigned, perhaps now he will lose his seat and someone who knows which side his bread is buttered will get elected, put their nose into the trough and not do anything that upsets the cosy little club in Westminster. It's just as well for the annoying little turd that he isn't a member of the Government, they wouldn't tolerate heresy like this the way this bloke Cameron seems to be doing. Thu 12 Jun 2008 18:36:02 GMT+1 Bloghound Brilliant - well done, David. If I had rafters I'd be cheering from them right now. Shame, though, on David Cameron for so quickly distancing himself and damning you with faint praise. Shame also on those ministers who claim to be 'baffled' by your statement. Does Magna Carta mean nothing to them? Did she die in vain?What we need now is for this to snowball - LOTS of MP's resigning their seats and forcing by-elections on these issues. It's time the electorate were given the opportunity to rise up in democratic revolt against Gordon Brown's New Totalitarianism. 42 days today means our we'll have our own little Guantanamo tomorrow. Doesn't it make you proud to be British? Thu 12 Jun 2008 18:32:20 GMT+1 Gillianian Jean (22) I wholeheartedly agree with you. At the last election, Mr Davis had a majority of 5,000, and judging by the results of the latest local elections, he is VERY unlikely to loose it.His decision wasn't announced until a deal with the Lib Dems had been struck. Big Sister (33) I too believe he is playing a safe game, and I would add that he has written his own rules for it.Rachel G (77) Your last sentence is spot-on. All this talk about ''taking a risk'' is nonsense. David Davis is making a stance, not taking a stand. Thu 12 Jun 2008 18:08:07 GMT+1 determinedmaggiej I ,myself, am greatly heartened by david davis' decision and agree with every word of his statement, though I have never voted tory. He has restored my faith in British democracy and expressed for me what I always thought 'britishness' was about. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:54:40 GMT+1 misbeat Hoorah for DD, at last an MP who actually takes seriously the job his electorate have entrusted to him. For years I've watched party politics turn our democracy into a an elected dictatorship complete with a surveillance system which the most tyranical dictatator would envy. We have been sleep walked into a police state for the duration of this Labour regime, started by Blair and continued by this latest horror and all done by instilling fear into the populace. If Blair hadn't got the vote to illegally invade Iraq (also done using threats to MPs and lies to us) No 10 wouldn't be able to use the scare tactics it has used so shamelessly against us since 2002. It isn't the subject matter that's important, it's more the fact that here is an MP who is prepared to put his beliefs and the electorate before his back pocket, his career and party politics.I see the move as a great politcal coup on DD's part cos Brown will be damned if a Labour candidate doesn't stand for election and completely humiliated if he does. He will realise that the majority of people don't like the the idea of their rights being insidiously eroded away and the result of this bi-election could trigger a vote of no confidence in Brown and the call for an early election.If that happens Brown will have no one to blame but his own pompous, egotistical self. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:53:35 GMT+1 Fifi I'm delighted to see how many first-time froggers are commenting on this story here. It shows that - stunt or not, grandstanding or not - the issue has acquired the profile it lacked before the vote took place.Electric Dragon ... good to see you back, mate. Where have you been for so long? (Not locked up on suspicion of holding opinions, I trust?) Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:50:10 GMT+1 RachelG As Big Sis and others have said this is not brave. It is not risking his career. He is certain to be reelected, possibly unopposed, and quite probably resume a shadow cabinet job. I'm sure he feels strongly about these things but how can he support 28 days but oppose 42 days - where is the principle in that? He would have had more credibility if he had resigned his shadow cabinet job and campaigned to get his own party to commit itself to greater liberalism if it is elected. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:38:28 GMT+1 saccovanzetti never voted tory. never liked david davies. but stunned that i am impressed with a tory shadow cabinet member. integrity, balls, risk taker- whether its a stunt or not, this man is standing up for his beliefs- and that is pretty much an unseen commodity in politics today- hence why so many people don't bother. Go go! Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:29:10 GMT+1 RJMolesworth Maggieinhamstead (53)"How about a gathering at Runymede to protest? "I like it. Great idea. Froggers of the world unite you have nothing to lose but your chains. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:29:10 GMT+1 Chris Ghoti Fifi @ 20, the speech Davis made yesterday in the House of Commons was along much the same lines, wasn't it? And did it convince (or fail to convince) his party about how they voted? I thought the Conservatives voted against 42 days' detention without charge anyway.As for anyone saying 'nothing to fear if you have done nothing wrong' about this, if a very high proportion of the people held at present for 28 days are released without charge (not even a motoring offence), are they fearful thereafter because they were guilty and it just couldn't be proved, or are they perhaps people who had actually done nothing wrong and are afraid because they were imprisoned for no reason they know of, and now have no security whatever that it won't happen to them again, or some other innocent person they know?I somehow doubt that the police are making no effort to bang these prisoners up legitimately for *something*, even if not a terrorist offence, because I can't think of any reason the police would want to make it clear that they were failing in such an important matter. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:27:22 GMT+1 Macreinhardt I completely support Mr David Davis in his protest resignation against the insidious erosion of our hard fought for civil liberties. As an Australian who has lived in the UK, I have been shocked by the slow erosion on the privacy rights of British citizens, and the plethora of CCTV cameras and new legislation that will force an ID card on me and ultimately the British public: I for one have no intention of obtaining any such ID card, I would rather rot in jail than give up my right to be the only owner of my DNA. Mr D Davis you have given me hope that polititions do have moral courage, and if I was a member of your constituency, I would give up my time to help you win your seat back.Let us never forget that once a right is lost, it is extremely hard to get that right back, and history shows that once legislation is in place, "mission creep" insidiously rears its ugly head. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:25:38 GMT+1 Rachel Blackburn Oh, and a big "well done" to David Davis. I'm not sure that what he's doing is "sensible" in terms of possible risk against possible gain, but then I suppose that's what really makes it a clear that it's a decision of principle and not one of opportunism.And I really have to laugh when I hear the Government quoted as saying they don't understand his decision - after all, it's a point of principle so they wouldn't, would they...? Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:24:02 GMT+1 cybergal110 I hated the Tories through the eighties and nineties, but now I will vote for them on the basis of their rejection of the ludicrous and shocking ID cards. David Davis has shown himself to be a man of principle and I admire him for that. DNA testing, CCTV, it is all going too far. Government should concentrate on less glamorous and expensive tried and tested solutions, like keeping police officers motivated by honouring pay rises. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:22:16 GMT+1 Rachel Blackburn Personally, I think it's a sign of just how right David Davis is about the unchecked growth of authoritarianism and loss of civil liberties under Labour that a BBC Presenter should think the simple right of a MP to resign his seat should somehow represent a "loss of authority" on the part of his party leader.It's a sad reflection on BBC-world that one MP following his conscience with the full backing of his party leader is attemped to be spun as a lack of authority for the Opposition Leader whereas 30+ MPs voting against a full party whip is presented as the Prime Minister regaining his authority... Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:20:49 GMT+1 RJMolesworth Big Sister (33)There is always a risk. If no one else does, I might stand against him. Formidable opposition I hear you say.I would stand against him, not because I disagree but because I do, though my platform would be against him, naturally. Should I win I would resign my seat after my maiden speech and force another by-election. Like the Irish government and the Lisbon referendum, the constituents would keep having the election until they made the right decision.However, I think the only way he can lose is if the the former member for Finchley stands against him. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:19:19 GMT+1 cringletie I left my post ages ago, no 31, why hasnt it been authorised Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:16:56 GMT+1 starlilolill A man of principles and integrity! Well done David. Would a general election be forced if all MPs who voted against the 42 days did the same as DD? Now there's a thought! Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:15:11 GMT+1 oldgreysquirrel Don't be personal. Mr Davis may get more publicity. But more important is that he is pushing the issue of State intrusion into more publicity and public debate. High time. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:07:31 GMT+1 barriesingleton BRAVE FOOLHARDYNESSCameron has loudly dubbed Davis's action 'brave'. Was it Sir Humphrey who told us that was code for foolish? Ah! Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:05:22 GMT+1 Peter Bolt How can "the intelligentsia" ever undesrstand someone who resigns for reason of conscience or principal. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:01:40 GMT+1 paultoner Good luck to David Davis and shame on New Labour to have to be shown how to safe-keep the hard won rights of the people of this country.If the Tories can commit to reversing last night's result, it will surely mark the end of any illusions that the British electorate might have that New Labour are the champions of the worker or the custodians of any socialist legacy. Thu 12 Jun 2008 17:00:29 GMT+1 The Stainless Steel Cat ystavani (55):Really? Mickey Rooney's getting married again? Well done to him! More on that please Eddie! Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:59:38 GMT+1 Lord Elpus What a great stunt! David Cameron is keeping his head down until he sees which way the wind is blowing. Mean while, I'm looking around the papers to see where the bad news is buried. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:57:09 GMT+1 invisiblejuliab What a complete waste of time and taxpayers money. So the democratic decision was not the one he hoped for but it was a democratic decision. Personally I think it is wrong that he is allowed to resign his seat and then contest the seat again, unless of course he funds the whole episode himself. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:55:54 GMT+1 profoundSarita Treason never prospers.What's the reason?For if it prospers, it is no longer treason.Perhaps, only perhaps,Mr Davis's Actions will successfully show up the UK political system for what it has becomeover these last 35 years.A self-serving club for the ignorant and the utterly corrupt.(Although you could see the initial trauma that set up this potential back in the 17th century).It may all be too little, too late.We all shall die slowly to the cries of:Who could possibly predicted this?God be with all, anywhere the world over who attempt to live their lives in honour and with virtue. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:55:25 GMT+1 Norwich_confused How many MPs of similar principles would it take to force a general election? Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:52:11 GMT+1 saintTonyBuckley It is totally splendid that David Davis should take a stand against the creeping authoritarianism of successive governments. Governments are now in a position to crush any serious popular movement. This is intolerable. They are there for our benefit, not to control us. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:51:59 GMT+1 Andrew_Southampton As a Conservative supporter throughout my life I have despaired of the party so many times in recent years, but David Cameron and his strong team, including Davis, have restored my faith with a sensible and decent approach to politics. The team has been united and I believe it still is united.Social Conservatism is here and it is here to stay. It has been strengthened, not hurt as many BBC commentators have been saying all afternoon by Davis's actions today.David Davis is an honourable man, I support his stance and would happily travel from Southampton to Yorkshire to assist in his re-election.Let's support this brave man for standing up for something he believes in, something that Gordon Brown and his weak, discredited colleagues could never do. Davis hasn't bribed and cajoled to win a vote, he has stood up for what he believes in. Three cheers for David Davis. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:51:32 GMT+1 steelpulse A brave and personal decision. Why didn't Mr Cameron just say "You are on your own, mate!"? Hello!Of course I mean Mr Rooney's decision to marry Coleen in Italy. OK? Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:48:19 GMT+1 nedguy I never thought I'd ever hear myself say this about a tory.... David Davis is a hero. He has put his finger, and his carreer, on exactly the issues that have been most frightening me when I consider my son's future.I am ashamed and appalled at this revolting government, which I once voted for. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:46:41 GMT+1 MaggieinHampstead Well done to David Davies and also the Labour 'rebels'. But I am beginning to think that the two main parties have exchanged places in the politcal spectrum. Mr Brown 'buying off' would-be rebels and the DUP ranks up there with some of the worst excesses of right wing authoritiarian regimes in countries without our distinguished history of democracy and (supposedly) being in the forefront of human rights. How about a gathering at Runymede to protest? Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:46:39 GMT+1 jonhlon Listening to the reaction from so many different people it surely is clear that Mr Davis is emotionally unsuitable for a cabinet post or even a shadow cabinet post. he clearly is not a team player, and I, for one, a very concerned about an minister taking such a decision when he was clearly in a real state. Also, I can't get over how vain he appears. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:43:47 GMT+1 oldgreysquirrel Thank you Mr Davis for saying what I have been thinking for some time. Get rid of this would-be National Socialist state of Airstrip One. The state should serve the citizen not the other way round. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:43:12 GMT+1 Jon_Lee I congratulate David Davies on his principled stand. It is about time this government was checked. The vote on 42 days had little to do with counter-terrorism. It was about Gordon Brown’s ego. That is not a sound reason to sign away 800 years of hard won freedoms.Don’t forget, New Labour has used “counter-terrorism” laws to expel members of its own party from a conference. It engages in character assassination of anyone who speaks out against it. It has passed laws that allow local council officials to check if your child is entitled to attend a school.We have more CCTV per head than any country in the world, and a DNA database in which the overwhelming majority of records are of innocent people.Enough is enough. It is time to take a stand, and I say this as a former serviceman (24 years service), who has lost countless comrades to terrorism. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:42:44 GMT+1 beachbuggin Finally! someone bringing a civil liberties issue in to the news.. The labour govenment has done nothing for this country except erode civil liberties. They put up camera's, take away the right to protest, propose the biometric ID (which is the most fascist proposition ever) and now this.. 42 day imprisonment for no reason (and they criticise Mugabe!).With a government like this one, why would any 'terrorist' feel the need to get out of bed, we're terrorising ourselves.. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:42:25 GMT+1 U12122585 Well done David!I was screaming at Gordon Brown on the television last night when I heard the result (a lot of screaming was done along with the Apprentice final).We have ahd our human rights cruely ripped away from us. We say America is cruel to terrorists with Guantanamo Bay - but at least, mostly, those people have been charged. We've gone one step further than Guantanamo Bay - how disgraceful. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:42:02 GMT+1 Lady_Sue Wow. As I type: 34 through to 43 "comment is awaiting moderation". This David Davis issue is really stirring it up. Good on you Eddie - really great interviewing tonight. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:41:34 GMT+1 Fossilized Now if a few dozen more MP would do the same it might mark the final demise of Brown and his cohort of right wing yes-men. Pleaaaase! Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:40:03 GMT+1 Westonblogger I salute David Davies for making a stand.More MPs should take note, this government is taking the country towards an Eastern block style socialism under the guise of public safety. MPs should stand up for our democracy not just tow the party line for the sake of their positions.Well done David. Thu 12 Jun 2008 16:38:45 GMT+1