David Davis resigns as MP over civil liberties

[butchersapron]

What's the best way ... or a better way? C'mon ... what should have happened here, given the events of yesterday?

A better way than a tory patrican resigning his seat in order to further his parties interest and using the issue as his cover and conning a load of people into the bargain. Gosh i can't think of a single thing that would be better than that! As someone whose been involved in civil liberties campaigning of one sort or another for a long time i think this approach undermines any sort of independent defence of civil liberties. It effectively abdicates responsibility to politicians and officials, thereby cutting out the real-life networks that were built up in things like the poll tax that gave those campaigns their real power. Forget DD. Don't base anything on a tory tactial manouvere.

 

[Stoat Boy]

The way I see it is that this whole issue of ID cards/28-42 Days detention and so on have to be the central issue for how the next election is fought.

What sort of country do we want to be ? If a Conservative Party had tried to introduce many of the measures that this current Labour Government have done there would have been riots. But because its Labour, who can does scare their voters shittless by invoking Lady Thatcher, they have got away with it and now we have got this stage of 42 days detention without charge. And people getting arrested for having a cake next to Parilament. And so on and so on.

It has to stop. Davies move means that the whole issue moves to the centre stage. It cannot be brushed under the carpet by Labour or its supporters anymore. Those of you who vote Labour have to now make a simple choice. Do you allow them to get away with even more eroding of our civil liberties or do you say enough is enough ?

 

[butchersapron]

Polls time and time again find that education, health, law and order and economic issues are what they vote on - what decides how they vote and if they change parties. There might be interest in this issue but it's not a party or vote changer. To put it at the centre of a tory campiagn would be madness - esp when all the polls say that there's public support for 42 days.

 

[19sixtysix]

This is a stunt but if it kicks this country out of its apathy then good on him.
If Labour does not stand then I'm sure a real labour person may to ensure that the government with its group speak mentality have to respond. I did hope Brown would have swept the this shit away but I was deluded and the labour party is finished as it has no democracy left to put sensible policies forward.

So we are all fucked as the Tories will win as New Labour wants to show Blair was the only man who could win and New labour is all that left in the party.
A new workers party is required and at the moment i cant see a left wing person with the political statesmanship to help get it started.

 

[marty21]

A better way than a tory patrican resigning his seat in order to further his parties interest and using the issue as his cover and conning a load of people into the bargain. Gosh i can't think of a single thing that would be better than that! As someone whose been involved in civil liberties campaigning of one sort or another for a long time i think this approach undermines any sort of independent defence of civil liberties. It effectively abdicates responsibility to politicians and officials, thereby cutting out the real-life networks that were built up in things like the poll tax that gave those campaigns their real power. Forget DD. Don't base anything on a tory tactial manouvere.

in terms of the leadership - davis is yesterday's man imo - he was probably safe as shadow home secretary - but this boosts his presence - not a bad thing to do with an general election coming along, probably in 2009

 

[Louis MacNeice]

You are kidding yourselves. The closest this country comes to a constitution is the European Court of Human Rights.

Of course we have a constitution. And a lot of it is written down in the form of laws, treaty obligations and court judgments. Some of it is based on convention, and at times convention is made law.

It is not collected together in one place. It is not codified. It is not entirely written down. But then again we are hardly alone in that.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Wilf]

Truly win win for them. Had a 5,000 majority which would anyway now be up to twice that or more given NLs unpopularity. Even though there seems to be a slight majority of the population in faavour of 42 days, the campaign in this by election will go his way. Any hint of danger and Davis will widen it out into a populist critique of fuel prices, nanny state, taxes etc. At the end, any majority (if NL even fight it) of well over 5k will be seen as a sweeping victory/nail in brown's coffin. Shrewd move by an unprincipled politician (who would probably be introducing something like 42 days if he had been in power).

 

[butchersapron]

Truly win win for them. Had a 5,000 majority which would anyway now be up to twice that or more given NLs unpopularity. Even though there seems to be a slight majority of the population in faavour of 42 days, the campaign in this by election will go his way. Any hint of danger and Davis will widen it out into a populist critique of fuel prices, nanny state, taxes etc. At the end, any majority (if NL even fight it) of well over 5k will be seen as a sweeping victory/nail in brown's coffin. Shrewd move by an unprincipled politician (who would probably be introducing something like 42 days if he had been in power).

That's it exactly.

 

[Stoat Boy]

Shrewd move by an unprincipled politician (who would probably be introducing something like 42 days if he had been in power).

Which is the sort of piss poor excuse that people use to justify them still voting for Labour.

Its been a Labour Government that got a lady arrested for reading out the names of those killed in the Iraq war. Its been a Labour Government who have introduced a law that means people can be locked up for 42 days. And so on and on and on.

But you keep on justifying your voting by allowing yourself to be consoled by the idea that those nasty Tories would have done the same.

 

[exosculate]

That's it exactly.

No that isn't it at all, DD has a long history of libertarian positions within the Conservative party, one can't simply brush that aside, and I absolutely do not agree that the 42 day thing would come regardless.

 

[butchersapron]

Which is the sort of piss poor excuse that people use to justify them still voting for Labour.

Its been a Labour Government that got a lady arrested for reading out the names of those killed in the Iraq war. Its been a Labour Government who have introduced a law that means people can be locked up for 42 days. And so on and on and on.

But you keep on justifying your voting by allowing yourself to be consoled by the idea that those nasty Tories would have done the same.

You do realise, weirdo, that not everyone who isn't a tory is a labour party voter or supporter - don't you?

 

[El Jefe]

As has already been said, this is just politicking and grandstanding. Principles don't enter into it.

 

[Wilf]

Which is the sort of piss poor excuse that people use to justify them still voting for Labour.

Its been a Labour Government that got a lady arrested for reading out the names of those killed in the Iraq war. Its been a Labour Government who have introduced a law that means people can be locked up for 42 days. And so on and on and on.

But you keep on justifying your voting by allowing yourself to be consoled by the idea that those nasty Tories would have done the same.

You think I'm a New Labour Voter?

You think I'm a voter?

 

[exosculate]

Shrewd move by an unprincipled politician (who would probably be introducing something like 42 days if he had been in power).

Utter nonsense.

 

[butchersapron]

No that isn't it at all, DD has a long history of libertarian positions within the Conservative party, that can't simply brush that aside, and I absolutely do not agree that the 42 day thing would come regardless.

By voting against equal civil rights for gays you mean? I think you need to check his record a bit mroe carefully.

 

[exosculate]

Of course we have a constitution. And a lot of it is written down in the form of laws, treaty obligations and court judgments. Some of it is based on convention, and at times convention is made law.

It is not collected together in one place. It is not codified. It is not entirely written down. But then again we are hardly alone in that.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

An unwritten constitution isn't really a constitution is it!

 

[agricola]

Polls time and time again find that education, health, law and order and economic issues are what they vote on - what decides how they vote and if they change parties. There might be interest in this issue but it's not a party or vote changer. To put it at the centre of a tory campiagn would be madness - esp when all the polls say that there's public support for 42 days.

True, but the vast majority of the population is lead by its nose - by a combination of politicians and the media - when it comes to "the issues that concern us", and its a bit rich for the Government to crow on about how popular this measure is when they ignored the public over Iraq, and are ignoring them this very day over the polyclinic scam that they are so intent on foisting on the NHS (and by extention, us).

Yes, civil liberties may not be the most important issue that comes up in the polling, but IMHO its by far the most important, most concerning and most potentially dangerous thing that the Government has been doing since 1997. If this stunt wakes people up to these dangers, then much good will have been done.

 

[butchersapron]

Here's the courageous civil libertarian record on major issues for his defenders:
For liberty!

 

[Belushi]

An unwritten constitution isn't really a constitution is it!

Yes it is.

FFS I wish people would do a bit of research instead of deciding the only kind of Constitution is the one they've heard about in American TV shows!

 

[butchersapron]

An unwritten constitution isn't really a constitution is it!

Yes it is. It's an unwritten one. There's no defining measure of constititions thta say they must be written down - or more accurately, codified in a single document.

 

[exosculate]

By voting against equal civil rights for gays you mean? I think you need to check his record a bit mroe carefully.

That's a different kind of politics to the anti surveillance type politics, I'm not defending DD on that or anything else particularly.

I am merely pointing out that he has been very outspoken about cameras, databases and detention without trial etc etc etc ....for for a considerable period of time.

 

[Dillinger4]

An unwritten constitution isn't really a constitution is it!

It is, actually.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Of course we have a constitution. And a lot of it is written down in the form of laws, treaty obligations and court judgments. Some of it is based on convention, and at times convention is made law.

It is not collected together in one place. It is not codified. It is not entirely written down. But then again we are hardly alone in that.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Ok, let us test this constitution of yours.

What limits does it place on the power of the government to act by royal prerogative other than the person of the monarch him or herself?

 

[exosculate]

Yes it is.

FFS I wish people would do a bit of research instead of deciding the only kind of Constitution is the one they've heard about in American TV shows!

Its a matter of opinion and not fact....I believe that it doesn't constitute a proper constitution.

 

[exosculate]

It is, actually.

See above.

 

[butchersapron]

That's a different kind of politics to the anti surveillance type politics, I'm not defending DD on that or anything else particularly.

I am merely pointing out that he has been very outspoken about cameras, databases and detention without trial etc etc etc ....for for a considerable period of time.

No sorry, you can't seperate off certain civil liberty questions to a seperate ante-chmaber like that and say that only these ones count. He failed on a pretty importnat one - if that doesn't make you question his libertarian motives then i think it should.

 

[exosculate]

Yes it is. It's an unwritten one. There's no defining measure of constititions thta say they must be written down - or more accurately, codified in a single document.

See above.

 

[exosculate]

No sorry, you can't seperate off certain civil liberty questions to a seperate ante-chmaber like that and say that only these ones count. He failed on a pretty importnat one - if that doesn't make you question his libertarian motives then i think it should.

Homosexuality and Toryism have never been happy bedfellows.

 

[untethered]

An unwritten constitution isn't really a constitution is it!

Is an unwritten rule really a rule?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

An unwritten constitution isn't really a constitution is it!

But most of it is written as I described earlier; so the constitution (even if you don't accept that the unwritten stuff counts) still exists. If people are after an entirely written, collected and codified constitution then they should be clear about it, but saying we don't have one is just a bit silly.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice