David Davis resigns in Cameron spat

Haltemprice & Howden MP and Shadow Home Secretary David Davis has resigned from parliament triggering a by-election.

It seems that Davis was committed to repealing 42-day detention as a manifesto pledge, yet was over-ruled by David Cameron. Other members of the Shadow Cabinet were believed to be briefing against Davis this morning over the issue.


There is a suggestion that Davis (who is not a toff) will contest the by-election as an independent, in order to prove his point.

In Haltemprice & Howden, the Tories are vulnerable to a LibDem swing. The Liberals would require less than a 6% swing to take their seat and their candidate David Nolan has experience of three previous General Elections.

The sizeable Labour minority in the constituency would have to calculate what would best upset Cameron's ascendancy in the polls. Voting LibDem or for an Independent David Davis - or sticking with Labour and leaving a factionalised Tory Party to rip themselves up.

David Cameron's most sensible strategy would be to back David Davis' re-election - even as an Independent. Davis would be pressurised to take the Tory whip before long - yet would be on the backbenches for the next decade. Cameron could this way tar Davis as a primadonna without causing a split in the local party that could reverberate nationally.

Or he might have another old mate from Eton who fancies the seat.

Labour has an interesting strategic opportunity in this by-election. While I must clarify I absolutely abhor this 42-day detention measure, I can't deny it is a Labour policy. If Labour selects a candidate who is pro-42 days, we would be the only party contesting the by-election in H&H on that platform (presuming the DUP doesn't stand). In essence, we could take Davis up on his offer of turning the by-election into a referendum on 42-days. While that could upset our core vote, we could very well achieve a direct swing from the Tories on the issue and achieve a respectable increase in our share of the vote.


Display: Sort:

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#1)

News 24 tells us it will not be a well funded campaign by the Tories though the Fib Dems aren't running against him.

It shows that 42 days was a very clever "political" decision by Brown despite as Alex points out being the wrong thing to do!

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#2)

Alex

In all the political machinations and calculations perhaps we ought not lose sight of the fundamental issue. The truth is (and you and I clearly share this view) that David Davis was right about 42 days and our Labour Government was wrong.

You seem to be calling for a public referendum on 42 days, but from the wrong side of the argument. Such a defeat for Davis by an anti-libertarian Labour candidate would simply strengthen the authoritarianism of the government. While this might benefit Labour in the short run, it could be very bad for our democracy.

If we field a candidate I would hope (impossibly I know) for a Labour candidate who believed in civil liberties...

One shouldn't get carried away here, but we might even witness a realignment of British politics along more of a libertarian-authoritarian axis. Potentially such a phenomenon could split Labour just as easily as the Tories.

We are always moaning about wanting principled politics and politicians of substance, and despite huge political differences with him... who could criticise Davis on these grounds now?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#3)

I don't think even Brown had the guile to see this coming. A Labour fiasco has somehow turned into a political embarassment for Cameron. But I'm not complaining.
The Labour candidate has to be a moderate, not a 42-dayer please; and lets fight on our record. This Labour Govt has done more for Human Rights and the Liberty of the Individual than any other, so Davis hasn't got a case. And the true defenders of Liberty are not our MP's but the Judiciary, much to the chagrin of the Govt.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#17)

Well, it's true that the government put through the Human Rights Act 1998, but, frankly in Davis resignation statement there was nothing he said with which I disagreed, and our government has unfortunately eroded our civil liberties in a number of ways - most importantly the abrogation of habeas corpus.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#4)

Surely the best response is to not field a candidate at all - The Lib Dems have now confirmed they are not going to, which makes a mockery of the whole stunt.

If we don't stand anyone, because let's face it there's no way we are going to win in a safe Tory seat, then we make the point that actually this is a cynical, money-wasting, insult to democracy.

After all, it's a very empty gesture to cause a by-election when you know you are going to win the seat back.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#5)

I hope that we will not stand.  Lets make the idiot look more like an idiot than he dose now.

It will be David Davis and the rest of the fruitcakes

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#7)

H&H is not a safe Tory seat, it is a marginal where the LibDems are a threat.

David Davis may share my views on one single issue but there are about 200 other issues where he is beyond the pale. We are the Labour Party. We don't stand candidates for our own aggrandisement, we do so to protect the vulnerable.

If the LibDems are not standing, then they are making a grave tactical error, aligning themselves ever more closely with the Conservatives. If Davis is standing as the Conservative candidate, then we can campaign on a serious platform

  1. That Davis should pay the cost of the election rather than the Taxpayer (maybe contribute to our costs too). This is about his ego not about policy.
  2. Campaign on national security and civil liberties. If that's the debate he wants, then we should campaign on our record, which isn't great on liberty but actually quite strong on security and public safety.

If it's us against the Tories on this agenda, then we should be campaigning hard and for a win.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#8)

You're playing right into his hands by doing this.

He knows perfectly well he'll win it. He did not need to call a by-election for any proper reason and it will cost the taxpayer a great amount. If Labour and the LibDems both don't stand, it will make him look like a complete idiot and it really will be seen as a wasteful opportunist stunt. That's the line we should be taking.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#19)

Alex

You propose "That Davis should pay the cost of the election rather than the Taxpayer (maybe contribute to our costs too). This is about his ego not about policy"

What do you mean by this?

If a vacancy occurs in a constituency then the electors have a right to an election - it's as simple as that. Who should compel an individual candidate to shoulder the costs of an election? The government? 

Who should prevent an MP resigning and standing again (which used to be a standard practice) - the government?

I think you need to rethink this one a bit!

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#25)

Alex, mate, it's not really a marginal is it. The Tories have a 5,000 majority that is notionally set to double at the next election (various electoral calculation sites have the Tories' vote increasing by 8% and the Liberals decreasing by 3.5% at the next election). Even more relevant is that with this being a highly prominant byelection the Tory vote will go up. Why??? "Because Sire, the poor, you see. He gives to them what he takes. So, well Sire:They love him!"

Also - you gotta think it through if we were to stand a candidate and argue that Davis should pay. Surely we would have to back that up with us paying for our share? What about when we got Mandelson to stand down so he could go off to Europe, or Paul Boateng going to SA??? They weren't even close to being honorable reasons for a byelection.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#31)

I don't agree with making people pay for byelections they cause - even raving egomaniacs like Davis.

Bur before you attack the Labour Party please get your facts right. Paul Boateng stood down at a general election and the rules of the European Commission are that no member of a national parliament may serve - so any politician appointment will cause a byelection. I fail to see how that means any appointment is in any way dishonourable.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#6)

This is a self-indulgent PR stunt by Davis which will cost the British taxpayer dearly.

We should not play any part in it.

He's only doing this to get a dig at Cameron - so let him continue doing this on his own.

Gordon must be thanking the lord that finally he's had a bit of luck at last!

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#9)

This is self-deluding nonsense. There is no evidence that this is a Cameron spat, other than Labour/BBC spin. 

If Labour don't field a candidate on this issue then the 42-days "argument" is lost - if they do he or she will be crushed. 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#10)

Argument lost just because we don't want to massage Davis' ego? And waste taxpayers money in the process?

Don't be silly. Bear in mind over 70% of people supported 42 day detention, so I'd hardly say the government lost the argument at all.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#11)

If Labour don't field a candidate on this issue then the 42-days "argument" is lost - if they do he or she will be crushed. 

You can hold that opinion if you like, personally, I think the whole thing is a stupid PR stunt.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#14)

NB - if the Tories hate 42 days, and think they will win a general election then why not just put the repeal in their manifesto and repeal the Act after the election?

Why this stunt? Your claim that if the 77,000 people in this constituency vote for Davis this proves that the argument for 42 days is "lost". That supposes that the views in Davis' constituency counts more than the views of all the other voters in other constituencies as regards 42 days. Wrong.

The only way to test the argument for 42 days is in a proper general election with repeal of 42 days in a Tory manifesto, and voters everywhere having their say.  I'm sure you know this really.

Perhaps Davis has pulled this stunt because Cameron has told him he has no intention of repealing 42 days? Why else make this protest? 

You seem upset that most Labour people don't want to stand a candidate. Methinks you are a Tory troll who is disappointed that we arn't playing!

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#12)

I gather that Dominic Greaves has announced that the Tories will repeal 42 days should it become law and they win the election.  This seems to have been forced on Cameron by Davis's actions.  But it makes the by-election even more unnecessary and foolish. 

Look at the scenario.  The Govt passes a law which is opposed by the opposition.  The opposition pledges to overturn it after the next election. This is business as usual.  No need for byelections at least not for an opposition member - if Diane Abbott had resigned to fight an election on the issue it would make more sense (and be a lot more interesting). The day I ever hear her supporting anything the Labour Government has ever done will be one I remember. 

Labour should ignore the whole thing and keep challenging Cameron on what his policy would be to deal with suspected terrorists in the circumstances envisaged by people who support 42 days.  If the polls are right, this is not good news for him.

One thing I am fairly certain of is that Cameron would rather Davis hadn't resigned as it now turns the spotlight on him and his policies.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#13)

Whatever DD's reasons for calling the by election we should contest it. Not sure yet whether we should allow DD to make 42 days the sole focus of the election but clearly it will be a feature of it and in that sense we MUST have a candidate who supports the Government line (as a majority of Labour MPs did).

Can't see this being anything other than bad news for the Tories. Equally though, let's not kid ourselves that the average Jo in the streets gives two hoots about DD (assuming they know who he is).

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#15)

We never won this constituency even in 1997 when Tony Blair was at the height of his powers. Therefore contesting it is a complete waste of time. We'd just be playing patsy in someone else's stunt (and wasting the time and money of activists). Let Davis face UKIP and the Monster loonies. 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#20)

Absolutely - Davis believes this will split the Labour party and its voters from top to bottom and be a platform for a Tory crusade about traditional liberties etc.  We can turn the tables, deny him the oxygen of publicity and expose this as cynical and self-interested manoeuvring that exposes a rift in the Tory leadership.  We can even take the high ground by defending the integrity of representative democracy against abuse and manipulation of by-election procedure. 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#22)

You don't think there's a civil liberties problem then?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#16)

If you listen to Davis' resignation speech, he is doing it because of the whole gamut of attacks on civil liberties - CCTV, ID cards, DNA databases, habeas corpus. It's not just 42 days. Eventually it's going to have to stop. The question is, where are rank and file Labour party members going to stand when the buck stops?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#18)

I read it, it's was a mess of cliches worthy of Henry Porter.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#21)

CCTV, ID cards, DNA databases all good then? Habeas corpus dispensable?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#26)

Davis doesn't give a toss about habeas corpus - if he did he wouldn't have voted for 28 day detention, would he?

CCTV - it really helped track the 21/7 bombers as well the 7/7 lot. It assists in other crime prevention. No one in the public is bothered about being photographed, indeed people do anything to get in front of a camera.

ID cards will be voluntary. The govt has never proposed a DNA database - it was some talking head that proposed it and useful fools all like to pretend it's Labour policy. it isn't.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#28)

The DNA database already exists. Anyone who is arrested goes on it and stays on it.

Are you crazy? (#29)

"CCTV - it really helped track the 21/7 bombers as well the 7/7 lot"

Oh yeah - CCTV protected us from the 7/7 bombers (52 dead)

Incompetence protected us from the 21/7 bombers - not CCTV


"ID cards will be voluntary"

Until they become compulsory starting in 2009, fully compulsory by 2017.


"The govt has never proposed a DNA database"

Mr McNulty said there were no plans to introduce DNA profiling for everyone in the UK, but "no-one ever says never".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6979138.stm


Snowflake5 - I think you need to get out more....

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#32)

Yes, yes, yes and no.

 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#34)

Bishophill

Yes, you are right. I am a loyal Labour Party member and I found Davis' speech moving and absolutely right. I agreed with virtually everything he said. We can't allow our Labour party to continue down this authoritarian path and pursuing a right-wing tabloid agenda.

There was a time (up to 1983) when our party logo had "Liberty" emblazoned on it.

Original Labour Party logo

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#23)

no Labour candidate to stand - just a 'stop this guy's ego' candidate...

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#24)

It strikes me as illogical to put this down to David Davis' ego. He is now known as something as a loosecannon, and his political potential is likely irreversably damaged. For example, William Hill, the bookmakers, have just lengthened the odds of Davis becoming Conservative leader from 4/1 to 14/1.

It seems to me that Davis is very serious about his opposition to 42 days, and so in a sense this is clearly a publicity stunt, but I am rather convinced that he sees it as a stunt for his cause, rather than himself. If he wished to promote himself through resigning, then he was clearly mistaken.

And given I wholeheartedly reject this government's authoritarian tendency, I'm inclined to support him if he seeks to move the political agenda towards something which is more civilly libertarian.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#27)

Have you seen the BBC Have Your Say on this?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#30)

"Have you seen the BBC Have Your Say on this?"

What I have seen is solidly behind Davis

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#37)

The BEEB edit/censor them, and have an agenda.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#44)

Have your say has always been heavily populated with Tories. It's worse than the Telegraph.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#45)

LOL - at various times the people of HaveYourSay have been convinced that Kilroy was about to be PM and the BNP elected to government! They are one of the most unrepresentative message boards. And being BNP supporters in the main, no doubt they are delighted that the BNP has endorsed David Davis!

I notice no-one here has mentioned Conservative Home - they did a piece supporting 42 days before the vote, and their comments indicate dismay that Davis has behaved in this way. Probably a better indicator of what conservatives are thinking than HaveYourSay.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#47)

"I notice no-one here has mentioned Conservative Home - they did a piece supporting 42 days before the vote, and their comments indicate dismay that Davis has behaved in this way. Probably a better indicator of what conservatives are thinking than HaveYourSay. "

For evidence of what Conservative really think... see http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/06/65-of-tory-memb.html

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#33)

I agree with those who say that Davis ego should be punished. If he wants to make this a referendum on national security and civil liberties, then lets make it that, not party political. The libdems aren't standing a candidate, so neither should we. We* should support an independent candidate who offers a contrast to Davies on these central issues without it becoming party political. Some one like Lt Col. (retd.) Tim Collins, does any one have his number?

*of course, those of us in the Labour Party opposed to 42 days should be free to support Davies.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#40)

I would have a little more sympathy for Davies if he hadn't decided on 28 days,you can't have it both ways you are either for keeping our liberties or your not..its that simple.He also wanted to bring back hanging in 2003 which goes totally against our biggest libertie which is the right to life.I don't think labour supporters should be backing Davies at all..they should however be taking their case us with labour peers in the house of lords..thats the way to beat the bill if you dont like it,we should not be stroking Mr Davies ego for him in any way.  

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#35)

Dominic Grieve has made it clear that the Tories would repeal this 42 days nonsense (if it becomes law, which is doubtful). So bang goes the theory that Cameron over-ruled a pledge on this. 

Wishful thinking leads to strategic disaster. We have to face up to reality - 42 days is an un-necessary bungle as bad as the 10p tax abolition.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#36)

"42 days is an un-necessary bungle as bad as the 10p tax abolition."

nonsense. Its actually (if you look at the polls) a rare example of us in step with the public on a policy.

The suggestion made earlier that we shouldnt contest H&H because we didnt win it in 97 and its a safe tory seat is bonkers. On that basis, why bother in Henley either?

I accept that the circumstances of this by election are unusual and therefore there is good reason to question whether to field a candidate. We are the Government of the day and a national party - we should contest every seat.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#38)

Just Labour: "nonsense. Its actually (if you look at the polls) a rare example of us in step with the public on a policy."

If you ask the public whether they think that terrorist suspects should be locked up for 42 days without charge, they are going to say yes because the question is loaded. The question which needs to be asked (but has not) is whether the public supports locking potentially innocent people up for six weeks without charge. It is the latter question which forms the root of the opposition to 42 days.

I also think we should take much notice of the polls. Good governance doesn't mean winning elections, it means taking tough decisions which you know quite well could lose you elections.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#39)

Hardmant is quite right. The polls are very misleading in this respect.   If the proposals are properly explained the support evaporates. If Gordon really believes that 67% of the public support his policy on this, then why doesn't he field a pro-42-days candidate against Davis?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#46)

In fact David Davis' first victory in this may well have been to extract a pledge from the Tories that they would repeal the 42 days legislation.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#41)

The BNP have just endorsed Davis (and said they won't be standing against him) but on th other hand Kelvin Mackenzie of Sun-rottweiler fame is considering standing.

I pity the people in this constituency having these numpties foisted on them. The only hope is that people vote Monster Loony as a raspberry to everyone wasting tax-payers time and money.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#48)

everyone wasting tax-payers time and money

 

 According to news reports, Brown intends to push through the ratification process for the Lisbon Treaty despite the Irish having stomped on it. So who's wasting money now?

 

And I have to say in general, the idea of Labour supporters attacking Tories for wasting money is a bit like Stalin calling Churchill dictatorial. 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#42)

If we put up a candidate against DD who is in favour of 42 days then there may be a huge problem in getting activists out to support our (wo)man. Plus, with the Liberals not standing we will get (deservedly) thrashed. I doubt GB will allow the party to select a candidate who is opposed to 42 days, so the sensible thing to do is not put up a candidate.

While the by-election is going on, perhaps some of our spineless wonders of backbench MPs might find a vertebra or two and tell the whips that when this comes back to the House this time they will do the right thing and reject this stupid, stupid measure. Is it any wonder the Tories are ahead in the polls? Perfectly reasonable people are now asking if they can be any worse than us and, frankly, it's getting harder to be motivated to argue with them.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#43)

The CLP already have a PPC who, so far as I know, is opposed to 42 days.  I don't think there'd be any justification for imposing a different candidate.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#49)

Have we leant NOTHING from the October general election debacle? We should have announced 5 mins after the LibDems that we are also not standing as it is a ridiculous waste of time and public money. Instead, 2 days later Davis is challenging us and we look shifty, indecisive and opportunistic waiting to hear if McKenzie stands.
We are allowing Tories the initiative exactly as we did in October. Whether we stand or not, we need to announce it NOW while we have autonomy, not prevaricate.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#51)

Exactly. I thought the same.

Why Gordon has to drag it out forever I don't know.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#53)

I think formally it has to be the decision of the NEC - but Gordon should urgently make clear that he doesn't believe we should, and come out on the offensive about why a stunt in just one constituency can't be allowed to trump the democratically expressed view of MPs elected from every constituency.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#50)

There seems to be two possible (extreme) scenarios.

First, the voters believe this is a huge waste of time on a non-issue, do not turn out to vote and DD gets returned on a much reduced absolute majority. DD will look like an egotistic clown and his career will be ruined. Further dilution of peoples rights continues apace.

Second, a large number of voters believe DD, turn out in force voting not only against 42 day detention but also the increasing uncontrolled dilution of people's right by a small political elite. DD returns with a much larger majority. The view that the government is not listening is re-enforced, further eroding Labour's vote.

Sorry to be pessimistic but there doesn't seem to be much good that will come from this for hardworking  Labour voters.

Can't think of any positive scenarios. 

 

 

 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#52)

To put that across, it seems that an ICM poll comissioned by the Daily Mail show 57% of people against 42 days.

69% saying that his actions were principled [Not every day you see someone throw away the third most powerful job in government]

Davis is on course for an enormous leap as he is now at 59% an 11% swing towards him from 48% at the 2005 election.

It does seem that NarrowlyUpbeat's view on the matter is more accurate according to the polls.

It also seems, that despite the MEP scandal and the "Nannygate" and Davis resigning.... The Tories are still holding at 18% according to ComRes and 22% according to YouGov. 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#54)

Opinion polls might well show that most voters also support David Davis's call for re-introducing the death penalty.  But that wouldn't make it the right thing to do.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#55)

So why did the government go for 42 days then? Which supposedly saw the "majority" of the British people support the measure, if the Government line is to be beleived?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#56)

I'm not justifying 42 days.  I'm saying that the rights and wrongs can't be read off opinion poll data.  Voters can be incredibly inconsistent and self-contradictory.  Which is why parliament - which has a responsibility to look at the whole picture and not individual measures in isolation - is the body that we elect to make such decisions.  It's also why this single-constituency referendum is a stunt.  Voters in Davis's seat aren't representative of the nation as a whole, they aren't 'typical' etc.  All voters will have a chance to excercise their judgement at the next general election, and will have to balance the significance of 42 days in the context of the whole performance of the government.  You might be right that we should worry about this.  But our job as the governing party is not to be led by the nose according to which way opinion polls shift.  We should do what we believe to be right, have the confidence in our arguments, make the case and try to lead public opinion. 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#57)

Oratorhunt

Two points

1. I think you are ignoring the fact that this issue of 42 days has never been put to the electorate, it was not in the manifesto, and it has been foisted upon a perhaps unenthusiastic party by the leadership, and then pushed through parliament by various means of which some appear dubious and shoddy.

2. If, as you say, it is our duty as the governing party to "have the confidence in our arguments, make the case and try to lead public opinion" then what better opportunity, for those who have pushed through this shameful policy, than to use the coming by-election for that purpose? 

Even you don't want to justify 42 days. And on this issue we need to think about what is really important for our democracy, now and in the future. Personally I think, on this issue, Davis is right and our government is wrong.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#58)

This is a decision which affects the whole country.  A few thousand voters somewhere south of Hull can't ajudicate on everyone's behalf - they're not representative of society as a whole.   The time when everyone can have their say is a general election, and if you want to oppose what Labour has done, that is your democratic right.  But don't be conned by Davis - if habeas corpus is so important to him, why does he believe its OK to put someone in jail for 28 days without charge?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#62)

"A few thousand voters somewhere south of Hull can't ajudicate on everyone's behalf - they're not representative of society as a whole"

Which is why it should have been in the manifesto.

I support the Labour Party but in this case David Davis is right and we are wrong.

Why he spoke for 28 days I can't say - maybe he didn't believe in it, or maybe he has changed his mind, you would have to ask Davis - but clearly habeas corpus is important to him or he wouldn't have risked his political career on defending it. But speaking personally the real point is that habeas corpus is important to me and to millions of fellow citizens (or "subjects" if you will). It prevents arbitrary imprisonment and persecution by the state and it works to prevent torture.

People have short memories. It is not so long ago that the UK was condemned by the European Court of Human Rights for torturing IRA prisoners in Northern Ireland. So let nobody say that we do not need to worry about torture. That is one of the reasons habeas corpus is so necessary.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#59)

Can we dispose of this nonsense that "a few thousand voters should not be allowed to dictate to the country" about 42 days.  All the LibDems, all but one of the Tories, and 36 or so Labour MP voted against this measure, and everyone knows there would have been over 100 Labour rebels if Gordon hadn't twisted arms and done extraordinary deals.  It was passed due to bribery of the Unionists with hundreds of £millions.  At a parliamentary level it has no democratic legitimacy at all.  The only reason that Gordon is doing it is out of political calculation based on opinion poll data (and to curry favour with The Sun).  It now seems that the opinion poll data are highly suspect - when the arguments are explained people don't support 42 days at all.

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#60)

Where is your evidence of bribery of the DUP?  The majority of MPs backed the government, and David Davis threw his toys out of the pram.  Or saw a chance of getting his smug face splashed across the tabloids. Either way, the democratically expressed will of parliament backed the government (and I, to repeat, did not support 42 days).

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#61)

What do you think would have happened on a free vote?

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#63)

Everybody knows that they have been bribed. See eg http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4116811.ece

And this was not the "democratically expressed will of parliament" - it was a shabby deal by MPs who represent less than 30% of the electorate - and many of them were armtwisted and bribed by Gordon.  Whatever it was, it was not democratice 

Re: David Davis resigns in Cameron spat (#64)

Oh, if a Murdoch paper says it, it must be true.  To be honest, I think the DUP could only vote that way if they were to avoid looking hopelessly inconsistent in their attitude to internment in an Irish context.

I agree on the fact that the composition of parliament doesn't reflect the electorate due to our FPTP voting system - but that does not make it any more legitimate to contract the whole decision out to a single FPTP contest in N Yorks

On a "free vote" you'd have had some more Tories backing 42 days, and some more Labour against it.  But this is not something the government can simply be neutral on.  *If* it is a key part of the fight against terror - and like you I wouldn't go along with it - it is entirely proper to have a whipped vote.