ICM poll finds big H&H boost for Davis
June 15th, 2008
Mail on Sunday
…and Labour MPs say they will support the Tory’s stand?
An ICM for the Mail on Sunday taken on Friday of adults in Haltemprice and Howden, shows massive support for the area’s MP as he seeks to resign his seat and fight a by election over Gordon’s move to increase to six weeks the length of time suspects can be held without trial.
The main findings are summarised in the panel above. Asked how they would vote in a general election H&H electors said, with comparisons on the last general election - CON 59% (+11): LD 26% (-11): LAB 12% (-1).
Those interviewed split 57% to 32% saying they supported their MPs decision with 69% to just 23% saying they felt Davis’s decision was “principled”. The findings are even more striking because the fieldwork took place on Friday when the media view of Davis’s action was almost universally negative.
The paper also reports that a Labour MP who rebelled on the 42 days, Bob Marshall-Andrews, has pledged his support for the Davis campaign - a move that could land him, again, in serious trouble with his party. The Sunday Times says other Labour MPs could join him.
Under the heading, “Suddenly, Labour is not laughing at David Davis” the Observer’s Gaby Hinsliff writes “..What was a crisis for David Cameron is now becoming a serious headache for Gordon Brown, who must now decide whether to discipline his rebellious MP and turn him into a dangerous martyr, or ignore him and risk others joining in, turning a by-election that Brown dismissed as a farcical stunt into a cross-party uprising. Is British politics seeing the emergence of something genuinely new? Perhaps.”
There’s little doubt that the Davis move has touched a raw nerve right across the political spectrum that cannot be categorised in the normal Right-Left pigeon holes. All this is helped by Davis’s image - with his SAS background he looks like an old fashioned authoritarian Tory but isn’t.
So where is this all going to go? It’s hard to say but perhaps the biggest losers will be the “smarty-pants experts” in the so-called Westminster village - and that will be no bad thing.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
off/topic - I’ve always wanted to be the first poster on a thread - I’m still in California - anything happened politics wise in the last month?How did the Tories do in that byelection at Crewe?
Mike, you deserve a Knighthood for keeping this site so upto date at all hours ( I doubt Clegg will be nominating you for a peerage). I think you are spot on to highlight this poll and article as I think today is the day that the MSM starts catching up with the public mood.
oh and any one who has visited the constituiency will know its far more of a “Mail” place than a “Sun” one. I wonder if Dacre will give full throated support. I heard hague comprehensively hang davis out to dry on PM on Friday. I can’t help but wonder if they will be begging to have there photo taken with davis by the end of this.
“Davis appears to have got off to a *much* worse start than the love-in on the online forums (and my own feedback from constituents) would have suggested.
by Nick Palmer MP June 14th, 2008 at 10:46 pm”
The man is infallible.
I must admit when I first saw the resignation news I thought wow that’s a brilliant idea. Then I came here, read BBC analysis and saw the headlines and thought oh no, this is turning out badly.
Now I can’t make up my mind. Part of me says the public likes to see a principled stand on an issue - Robin Cook certainly benefitted from though in a very different way. In two minds now…
1. Congratlations on your virgin first post Vino. Mine was saying Obama had no chance when he was 50/1!
In answer to your question..nothing at all! Hope you’re having a good time. The UK is no place for Labour supporters right now. I’m off to France……and I may be sometime!
Incidentally this has to be the most fatuous poll ever conducted since Brian Souter’s Scottish poll on section 28. What would anyone expect a poll of Davis’s own constituents to say after all this publicity? The Sunday Newspapers are I suspect much closer to the mark.
He’s asking a stupid question and he might get a stupid answer
7. But, Roger, the Sunday papers are starting to whistle a new tune: that Davis’s move is popular. Check the Observer.
Told you this could happen - he might well turn into a folk-hero.
You of all people should have sensed this coming. You’re an advertising man. You spent your entire career promoting Kit-e-Kat - that’s your life’s achievement, slightly raising the profile of Kit-e-Kat in the northwest. So you can spot a narrative.
And the narrative is perfect.
Rugged son of a single mum, from a council house, gives up guaranteed job as Home Secretary to defend British freedoms. Meanwhile the craven Sheriff of Nottingham, sorry, Gordon Brown, dithers and dawdles, unable to decide whether to fight.
Davis’s enemies can’t even paint him as a terrorist-loving softie. He’s ex SAS.
So. He has the story. He has the issue. He may get the resonance.
The problem for Cameron surely is, that Davis could look a stronger leader type than he is.
Davis’s enemies can’t even paint him as a terrorist-loving softie. He’s ex SAS.
Davis was a member of the SAS territorials, not the regiment proper, he was only licenced to strangle people with piano wire at weekends, Oh! and bank holidays.
Roger at 7 thats a ridiculous and silly thing to say. Whoes constituients would you have them poll ? Bristol East ? the Rhonda ? Its them thats going to vote. Its a perfectly respectable sample size, ICM and taken when the publicity was at its most critical.
Sean T is correct. there is a reason certain myths are deep rooted. people like certain stories and davis is playing into one of the oldest.
7. I’m really quite annoyed now. You won’t find a more tribally anti tory person than me but I nearly cried when I heard his statement. I was all for getting on the next train and burning my little yellow membership card in front of his office.
Of course it only lasted a day but I think the reaction to this has been quite genuine.
I’ve decided that davis is Obama and cameron is Hillary on this.
Other comment this morning includes -
Janet Street-Porter IoS - “David Davis is the new voice of the people”
Henry Porter Observer - “A magnificent gesture that we must support”
“Davis’s enemies can’t even paint him as a terrorist-loving softie. He’s ex SAS.”
The Republicans in America have been successfully painting decorated Democrat war veterans — John Kerry, anyone? — as cowards and traitors for many years now.
re 12. and…
Shami Chakrabarti MoS - “Why David Davis is right to make a stand”
Methinks the media narrative has changed.
Looks Like Davis will be back in his old job in about 3 weeks time…..
Think of farmers markets, growing your own veg, the rebirth of real cider, tescos stocking local milk and cheeses. Its the quest for authenticity.
Go and listen to George Galloways radio show (which is doing phenomennally well) and listen to the Thatcher fans ringing in and saying what an honour it is to speak to a conviction politican.
Then you get why this is resonating
14. Porter-Chakrabati-Street Porter. Seriously Mike are you joking??
17 cont….I bet his wife supports him too!
Roger. I thought you’d frogged off.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-effect-cuts-into-tories-poll-lead-847452.html
David Davis cuts into Tory poll lead
Thanks, PfP, for your reponse.
“Poor Mr Davis unloved and driven by pique”
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/alan-watkins/alan-watkins-poor-mr-davis-ndash-unloved-a
22. Sorry my link didn’t work. Alan Watkins in the IOS
Roger, can your analouge mind not see the cultural context of this? the three journos you dispparage are hardly Tories yet they are cheering him on. This can still go tits up if no one serious stands against him but
1. he’s going to have hords of young people from outside the party turning up to his HQ with the coverage to boot
2. he’ll raise the £100k election limit on line in hours when he launches his website next week.
3. he’s going to have luvvies glaore on a tory campaign in a way we haven’t seen since red wedge
24 Red Wedge …. now that brings back memories. Will Billy Bragg be out supporting Davis?
The first reaction of many establishment MPs in the labour party seems to have been one of glee. Is it not instructive that their thoughts appear to have been based upon westminster Chess calculations, that any tory resigning was inevitably about personal ambition causing splits in the high command, and that anything unplanned, a little eccentric and unspun could only damage the tories? There is a huge world beyond the M25, the M60, the M42/M6/M5 and the A720 and they are utterly out of touch with it.
But it goes beyond Labour, this is, above all, revulsion about the whole concept of professional politicians. It is professional politicians, who
have had little experience in the real world who have been so gullible and malliable to signing away our rights won over centuries.
As for the Tory high command, they will inevitably sit and watch and see which way the wind is blowing before showing their hand on this to any great extent. Would anyone but a fool not do so?
oh and when hes been relected after a once in a generation result he’s going to make the most electrifying speech in the commons since Howe and Cook. he won’t lead for the opposition when the lords ping pong back 42 days. But its the fact he’ll be speaking from the back benches that will make it so electrifying.
and your tawdry, bought 9 vote majority is going to turn to dust. and then so will brown.
Aslan will over come the white witch and christmas will come to narnia.
Of course this is all cheap politics and a light year away from a fairy story but what you don’t understand roger is the power of the story he has tapped into.
My donation will be in the post tomorrow.
re 20. Roger - but the Tory lead in the ComRes poll went UP by 4%.
It was only by comparing the finding with the poll before last they they were able to come to any sort of conclusion at all.
This is not party political - it’s about the libertarians against the authoritarians in both main parties.
Those who value freedom against the Magna Carta salesmen - of which Gordon has now become.
19. Cretian. Later today……..
8 SeanT. Perhaps if you had employed the likes of me some years ago the name ‘Sean Thomas’ might have some resonance by now and you wouldn’t have to spend your time on Koh Samui hunting out minors.
“It’s hard to say but perhaps the biggest losers will be the “smarty-pants experts” in the so-called Westminster village - and that will be no bad thing”.
Surely our own smarty-pant expert from Crosby should also be mentioned in despatches?
“… if former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie – who is preparing to stand against Davis in the by-election next month – thinks he can win over local people, he should think again. “He said on the radio this morning that he didn’t think David Davis was a good MP for Hull,” said Donoghue [licensee of the Minster View Hotel in Howden]. “Well, this isn’t Hull. He’d better do some geography before he comes up.”"
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/opinion/Not-the-way-to-do.4186874.jp
MIke - you are so right about this. What will Brown have to offer to rebels when it comes back to the commons a second time? How many more billions will have to be ploughed into the grubby mitts of shameless Labour MPs to get a majority a second time?
It wont play well in the media
Mike “Davis move has touched a raw nerve right across the political spectrum that cannot be categorised in the normal Right-Left pigeon holes.”
Try Right-Wrong - and you might get it.
And Horse, my cheque will be in the post tomorrow too. Remember folks, makeout those donations for x pounds and 42 pence….
29. If you don’t think this is political Mike read Watkins article in the IOS. I’m with the libertarians but this is a ludicrous issue on which to make a stand.
If it was against the 28 days I’d be behind the barricades with them. But what’s the difference between 28 and 42? And after Guantanamo which STILL exists this is potty! Why isn’t Davis campaigning for sanctions on the US? Guantanamo is an affront and that really would make sense.
“Dear Supporter Thank you very much for your e-mail in support of David’s campaign. We have had an incredible response from people of all political persuasions who believe that David is right to stand up for what he believes, so please excuse the impersonal nature of this reply. Donations towards the cost of the campaign can be made to this office, cheques payable to H&H CA fighting fund, and sent to:- Haltemprice & Howden Conservatives at 32, Main Street, Willerby, Hull. HU10 6BU. David’s website daviddavisforfreedom .com will be going ‘live’ early next week. Kind Regards Duncan Gilmour, Chairman, Haltemprice & Howden Conservatives”
Iain Macwhirter Sunday Herald - “Quitting may be lunacy … but it’s inspired lunacy>
- “Davis is reawakening a powerful tradition of libertarian individualism that goes back to William Cobbett and beyond. He may be a bit daft, but sometimes it takes a fool to see the emperor’s lack of clothes.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertarian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Cobbett
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Davis_%28British_politician%29
This Davis thing is ‘Passports to Pimlico’ sort of stuff, ‘Magnificent but it ain’t war’
The issue isn’t important, on one hand polls show most people support the 42 days on the other hand someone putting two fingers up to the political establishment is always popular.
Why Davis is doing what he is doing, is more important than what he is doing.
Over the next few days, the press will start to winkle out the, ‘Real Reasons.’
33 “What will Brown have to offer to rebels when it comes back to the commons a second time?”
Kas, still not convinced that Brown will be in the COmmons whenit comes back! Cameron’s first question on Wednesday:
“The Prime Minister is on the record in the media last week as saying that no bribes or inducements were offered to any member of this House to secure their support for the 42 days vote. Would he similalrly confirm to the House that neither he nor any of his whips or other staff held any such talks or reached any such arrangements with any member of this House?”
Repeat question five times, as Brown detonates with an exponential number of megatons at each asking.
If Brown says “No” - then he is at risk of a Ulsterman standing up and saying “Wait a minute there….” - and is out for lying to the House.
If Brown says “Yes” - then he is a grubby political salesman of our ancient and cherished freedoms - and David Davis gets 94% of the vote in H&H.
If Brown refuses to answer - then it will make fantastic telly a la Paxman v Howard! And Brown is open to the charge of dithering with the truth. “The voters must make up their own mind on the inability of the Prime Minister’s inability to answer a simple question with a yes or a no…”
re 35. My sense Roger is that you are a libertarian right up to the point that it might impact on the fortunes of Labour.
You should know that my active involvement with the Lib Dems ended nearly ten years ago over a due process, rule of law issue. The council group of which I was a member sought to deny a senior employee the right to due process. I was told it was a whipped issue. Reluctantly I voted with the group and have had nothing to do with them ever since.
‘Labour’s poverty scandal’, by James Cusick, Westminster Editor, Sunday Herald
“Labour’s self-declared convention in 1997 was to describe poverty as being those households with less than half the average income. But a decade after Labour promised to halve child poverty, the government’s own figures showed 3.8 million children living in poverty. And a year after Brown entered No. 10, despite a re-commitment to the target, the numbers are up and increasing. The head of Barnardo’s calls it “demoralising and shameful”.”
http://www.sundayherald.com/oped/opinion/display.var.2342309.0.labours_poverty_scandal.php
35 - Yes but he isn’t making a stand on how many days you should be arbitrarily thrown into a jail whilst plod decides to look for any evidence to justify it. He is making a stand on a wider freedom agenda. He is standing against the database state, the surveillance society, the emergent technological tyranny. He is saying in a loud clear voice it isn’t just those with something to hide who have something to fear. He is standing up for freedom whilst it is still a flame and not an ember.
Have any serious Tories come out against the outrage that’s Guantanamo? Of course not that’s what Labour are for….but just a minute they’re so far up Bush’s backside they can’t either.
So what do we spend our time doing? Arguing whether the police should have the power to hold people for a month and a half rather than a month. Frankly it’s pathetic. And for a country where our two main parties are hand in glove with the US it’s also hypocritical.
It’s distressing to see posters defining what is and isn’t a genuine “Tory” by the “standards”(?) of Thatcher’s government and hence denigrating any position which seems to go against this utopian ideal as not genuinely Tory. It was the LIBERTARIAN Thatcher government which introduced a variety of MIND CONTROL measures to silence anyone it disagreed with much to the discomfort of more traditional Tories. Blair and Brown merely became her standard bearers carrying on the fight into the present day.
42 “He is standing up for freedom whilst it is still a flame and not an ember.”
That is very good. Mr Davis might want to acquire that one….!
45 - He can use it with my blessing.
40. I can understand that Mike. I’m also at my wits end with Labour. I hardly recognize them anymore. The only thing that keeps me in the slightest interested is a genuine fear of a return to the values of Thatcher. And in the sense that ‘my enemies enemy is my friend’ Labour are still the best chance to keep them out. But it’s getting difficult.
‘Wendy Alexander faces Holyrood ban after watchdog’s guilty verdict’
“A spokesman for Alexander angrily hit out at details of the secret report being leaked, saying: “This is obviously a politically inspired leak and it fits a pattern of the SNP’s smear campaign against Wendy Alexander. It is a disgrace that the report has been leaked before the standards committee has seen it. As far as we are aware, only the clerks and the convener of the standards committee would have seen it.”
It is now up to the [Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments] committee, which is comprised of seven MSPs, to decide whether it accepts the findings and recommends a punishment. Of the seven, three are Nationalists while two are Labour. The Liberal Democrats have one MSP, as do the Conservatives.”
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2342376.0.wendy_alexander_faces_holyrood_ban_after_watchdogs_guilty_verdict.php
So, according to “a spokesman for Alexander” (not Jackie the Hutt then?), all of Wendy Alexander’s troubles are down to an SNP “smear campaign”? Aye, right! Nothing at all to do with Wendy Alexander’s own words and deeds? Dearie, dearie, dearie me. It is a wonderful insight into the tiny, warped, paranoid mind of the cretins that run the Scottish Labour Party. I suppose that all of Dougie Alexander’s problems, and Gordon Brown’s problems, and Alistair Darling’s problems, and Des Browne’s problems are also down to “SNP smear campaigns” too then?
So, perhaps the electors of Haltemprice and Howden are going to have the opportunity of voting for a Scots hero? Lucky them!
“Westminster was awash with rumours last night that Glasgow baggage handler John Smeaton was being urged by Labour to stand as an anti-terror candidate in the forthcoming campaign. The claims were rubbished by Downing Street.”
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/politics/Davis-byelection-bid–is.4186928.jp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Smeaton_%28baggage_handler%29
49 I believe Smeaton has already denied it.
30. lol.
Whereas, of course, YOU are a legend. When I trawl Soho I often hear the ad agency guys talking about you:
“Roger Wotsname, You Know, Old Bloke With the Beard.”
“The Kit-e-Kat Guy?? Didn’t he retire?”
“I thought he was dead.”
@4:
lolpalmer
I’ve heard several commentators mention a comment by Dominic Grieve’s that the London bomb attacks were understandable. If he did say it this might prove to be a bigger problem for Cameron than Davis going. Could a senior politician really have said something that stupid?
To be fair to you Roger, you are a wheezing old geezer, and it must be hard to grasp new paradigms at your advanced age. So I’ll stop baiting you. For now.
Moreover you are hardly alone in Not Getting It. I think DavisGoesBonkersGate is a classic example of how the blogosphere and the netroots are, these days, often ahead of the curve, compared to MSM (apologies for jargon; it’s 92Fahrenheit here).
The instant reaction on pb.com, on hearing the Davis news, was Wow, golly, what does it mean, he could screw up but he could be a hero, he gets my vote anyway - etc etc. Numerous people said this, on here.
However the MSM (and a few Labourite pb-ers like yourself) instantly came up with an entirely different analysis - how cynical, what’s he doing it for, Tory splits etc.
Now we have the interesting spectacle of the newspapers and major media running to catch up with the story - which is being led by the blogerati.
Morning all, well I have been saying since Thursday that David Davis resignation woul turn into a personal triumph and give a boost to the Tories and I’m sure many of you south of the Wash dismissed my remarks as the rantings of that highland idiot!
Looks as though I was proved right! I also said on Thursday DD may very well end up Deputy PM to David Cameron post General Election
Nick Palmer, this is the 3rd day I have challenged you to resign and fight a by-election in Broxtowe which you consistently claim on here will see you defeat the general swing of the nation because of some secret weapon.
You are the proud architect of the £3000 a day bribe which helped save the totally discredited Gordon Brown so put your job where your mouth is. Resign and lets see you hold your seat!
51. One day Sean you and I can meet in Groucho’s and I’ll put my Cannes Lions on the table and you can put your Pulitzer prizes down and we’ll count….meanwhile the Ad festival starts tomorrow in Cannes so anyone wanting to see a bunch of preening Peacocks knows where to be…..
56 Roger. I’ll join you and seanT and put my ARSE on the table too !!
50.
Thanks coldstone, but what is your source for that?
He is much in demand, apparently. Smeaton has also been asked to become an actor:
“Hero baggage handler John Smeaton has turned down a role in a Bollywood movie about the Glasgow Airport terror attack.”
http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/06/15/baggage-handler-hero-john-smeaton-snubs-bollywood-movie-of-airport-attack-78057-20607163/
Politician? Actor? What next?
54. “Bloggerati!!” OK you can bring your “Worst Sex In A Book” award as well
56. Hmm. With all due respect, I don’t think you can compare a career in advertising to a career in writing.
In fact you can barely compare a career in advertising, morally, to a career as a Tescos checkout girl. How did George Orwell describe your industry? -
“Advertising is the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket.”
That’s why advertising is so highly paid. Because it is meaningless and degrading. But each to his own. I wish you well at Cannes!
Back ON topic, when are Labour gonna decide whether to fight H&H? Does anyone know? Gordon isn’t… dithering… is he?!!
57. That’ll be OK Jack. It is ‘Members’ only!
53 Roger, you seem inacapable of differentiating between when something is “understandable” and when it is “supportable”. It is quite possible to fathom out the reasons for somebody’s actions - indeed, it is essential in our politicians if they are to legislate to prevent it. It does not in any way mean that Grieve is anything other than condemnatory of the actions of terrorists in our midst.
You come across like the Catholic Church, railing against Galileo for pointing out we live in a Sun-centered solar system, just because the actuality was in conflict with their way of viewing the world.
@54:
It’s hardly new though, is it?
Nick Robinson, clueless hack that he is, shows a pattern of behaviour that’s pretty consistently like this:
1) Guido/Smithson/Dale/Recess Monkey/ConHome/etc. break a news story.
2) Nick Robinson announces that his sources tell him it’s not true
3) Story turns out not to be true
4) Robinson analyze story, says that nobody cares/it doesn’t matter/will hurt Cameron/will help Brown
5) Lots of people care/it does matter/it helps Cameron/hurts Brown.
6) Robinson announces that he’d always said that’d happen.
And you know, Robinson’s slow, backward, ham-fisted incompetent idiocy is no more or less pronounced than most other MSM commentators when compared to the bloggists.
re 59. Tell me- does the “worst” here apply to the book or to the sex? With SeanT it could be either.
60 - Yes but to fight this election would take courage, a quality that it seems is easier to write about than to display.
@64:
Well, which would *you* rather do with SeanT?
Labour need to put someone up. At a time when an unelected Prime Minister who ducked an election is pressing ahead with the ratification of a treaty without holding a referendum, Labour are coming dangerously close to looking like they regard any type of election as a stunt.
They would be well-advised to go with their current candidate even if - especially if - he is opposed to a 42 day limit. They should argue that the office of MP is not and never should be about a single issue.
I am completely in two minds about David Davis’s actions. I’m sure he’s doing this for ambition and for internal party reasons but it is very impressive. Andrew Rawnsley’s column in the Observer is particularly good today.
64 Mike, are you suggesting you have, er, “road-tested” SeanT?
64. You decide: here is the infamous “passage”:
(Be warned!)
http://tinyurl.com/yobav6
6 Roger. “The UK is no place for Labour supporters right now. I’m off to France……and I may be sometime!”
Running away - Another example of Labour “Courage”!
Still, you’ll feel at home in the land of the Surrender Monkeys.
Davis could foment a Labour rebellion that fells the 42 day detention Bill, Gordon Brown and the Lisbon Treaty all in one fell swoop. Cameron’s problem will be not David Davis himself, but the fact that Davis might have carried out the action that lances Labour’s boil. But if it was going to happen anyway, it may as well happen now. Brown will be the fall guy. Who will replace him?
Not a New Labour retread like Milliband surely -
From today’s Timesonline -
In Britain, leading Labour figures pronounced the Lisbon treaty dead and urged Brown to halt the slide towards European integration.
Gisela Stuart, the former Labour minister who sat on the panel that drafted the original European constitution, said: “The treaty is dead. If it was right for a ‘period of reflection’ after the Dutch and French voted no, it is appropriate for the UK to pause after the Irish vote.”
67 - Doubtless the office of MP is not about a single issue. However I am with Lord Acton who said “Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.” So Davis could say that he is standing in defence of the principle that guarentees all others.
56. Will you compare penis sizes as well?
Can I just make it clear, Mike Smithson and I have never had sex, not unless the esteemed founder of pb.com makes a habit of shaking his little bootie in a plaid miniskirt, down at Playskool on soi 4, of a Friday evening.
Yet another dire poll for the Scottish Lib Dems today:
ComRes/Independent on Sunday
Westminster voting intention - Scotland
Sample size: 88
Fieldwork: 11-12 June 2008
1. Lab 34% (-5%)
2. SNP 26% (+8%)
3. Con 19% (+3%)
4. LD 10% (-13%)
Giving, according to the Electoral Calculus Scottish seats calculator:
1. Lab 38 seats (-2 seats)
2= LD 7 seats (-4 seats)
2= SNP 7 seats (+1 seat)
4. Con 6 seats (+5 seats)
5. Speaker 1 seat (n/c)
64. From what I’m hearing from Koa Samui I’d guess both!
4. Nick Palmer is the new Roger…
…and meanwhile the old one is behaving like a verbal muckspreader today, spraying sh*t in all possible directions.
Think Mike may have missed some of the comments on this, not surprisingly as there have been a zillion posts. Mike, like some others here, likes Davis’s theme, and there’s no doubt that Davis has tapped a vein of enthusiasm in a section of the electorate. But…
1. There is no Labour Party rule banning MPs from supporting non-Labour people unless they are opposing Labour candidates. That’s what the last two paragraphs in the Observer piece are about (they’re tucked away at the end for journalistic reason, I assume - the story falls down if it’s made clear). If Labour doesn’t stand (and we won’t), Bob can support Davis against the OMRLP or whoever as much as he likes. If he just had extreme right-wing opposition, I’d support him myself.
2. Post 29 saying “It was only by comparing the finding with the poll before last they they were able to come to any sort of conclusion at all.” isn’t correct - the Indie story is based on the 7% slump in the Tory subsample after the announcement. Mike would be right to query whether small subsamples in the midst of a blaze of media publicity are significant, but they’re not basing it on the dodgy comparison with the poll before last.
3. Mike doesn’t mention the YouGov finding that only a third of voters think that Davis has acted out of principle - and this was taken in the midst of intensive media coverage of Davis’s speech.
30% said they didn’t know - we can debate which way they’ll break, but if nobody interesting stands against him, the view that it’s a pointless stunt is presumably likely to grow.
4. The constituency poll is OK for DD but hardly overwhelming - 85% in 2005 voted either Tory or LibDem, but despite the LD endorsement only 57% agree with his action, and a third of his voters disagree with his basic thesis that we’re a nation of snoopers.
This isn’t to say that Labour has benefited from the move in the short term - as most of us predicted, the Tory lead hasn’t changed significantly regardless which poll you look at. If there is an impact it will be on Cameron’s personal rating and on the tensions that arise when Davis returns and expects to be rewarded by his party.
Sean Is playskool still going? Havent been there for years.
On the subject of byelections H & H seems to be taking focus off Henley.
any news from Henley?
rogerh
75 Stuart. Sample Size 88 !!!!!!!!!!!!!
75/81 figures look pretty dire for SNP also
78. Point 1 - “If he just had extreme right-wing opposition, I’d support him myself.”
Just to clarify, if Kelvin MacKenzie stands and there is no Labour candidate will you campaign for Davis?
75 - have you ever considered aggregating the subsamples from different polls by the same pollster over weeks/months to get a larger subsample?
79. It is indeed.
Bangkok is oddly changeless in a way. The whole city has been transformed in twenty years (I lived here for a few months in 1987), and yet you can still find the same bars, the same hotels, the same cat-houses, with the same mama-sans and the same dodgy neon signs. Within the whirl of Asian dynamism, things persist - more than they do in big western cities, maybe.
I find it quite comforting.
OK enuff blithering on, I have a novel to finish. Kapkap.
re 13. ““Davis’s enemies can’t even paint him as a terrorist-loving softie. He’s ex SAS.”
The Republicans in America have been successfully painting decorated Democrat war veterans — John Kerry, anyone? — as cowards and traitors for many years now.”
The reason they can do that is that no-one doubts the Republican party’s commitment to and respect for the US military. By contrast, the Labour party can’t even be bothered to assign one of their number to the post of Defence Secretary and have scandalously underfunded the forces whilst demanding more of them than any government has since world war 2. Any attempt to mock him as a part time soldier by the Labour party would lead to the response: how many of you have ever put your head above the parapet? The answer to which would be deafening silence.
Besides which, Kerry took part in the winter soldier nonsense which scandalously defamed the US military, so the Repubs have a point.
55: Easterross, this is getting silly - I answered your original suggestion, and I answered your repetition of it by referring to the previous answer. To repeat: no, because (a) I don’t do stunts and (b) my ’secret weapon’ (your words not mine) is simply some local things which give a reasonable chance of doing a bit better than the national swing. If the Tories are 20% ahead nationally, I’ll certainly lose.
And although I wouldn’t post here if I was thin-skinned, I object to your describing my support for compensation for detainees who turn out to be innocent as taking a ‘bribe’ - you can oppose compensation for them if you like, but a bribe means that I’ve taken money myself, which would be a criminal offence.
84 I did this a little while ago , Stuart didn’t like the results very much as it showed the LibDems too high for his liking .
The focus now is on dithering, cowardly Brown. Is he going to bottle the byelection? Is he going to discipline Bob Marshall-Andrews and Ian Gibson and any other Labour MPs who come out in supoort of Davis? Will he show leadership or do a Macavity?
In other news: Murdoch disowns Mackenzie. Over you you Gordo!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026487/Poll-reveals-huge-public-support-David-Daviss-decision-force-election-Government-terror-laws.html
What about the rest of the country. That is where it matters most especially when there is money involved.
The H&H figures reflect his constituency obviously, his patch and thus potentially represent nothing in the wider environment.
I object to your describing my support for compensation for detainees who turn out to be innocent as taking a ‘bribe’ - you can oppose compensation for them if you like, but a bribe means that I’ve taken money myself, which would be a criminal offence.
Or, Nick, and HERE’S A THOUGHT, you could not lock the innocent up for 42 days without charge in the first place. It was a political bribe for you. The monetary bribe is to the innocent victims of Labour tyranny.
83: Matt, I can’t see myself supporting Mackenzie, but unless it’s a straight fight between Davis and an out-and-out fascist, I don’t plan to campaign in H&H for anyone.
Enough posts from me for a few hours! - real work to do.
89
The only political constant in this world is that given a decision, Brown will make the wrong one.
re Nick 78. I did refer at some length in my post last night on the YouGov poll to whether DD was acting out of principle.
On the general issue both Labour and the Tories have big splits between the authoritarians and the libertarians. I suspect Nick fits into the former.
87. Nick how are you going to explain to your Guardianista constituents that your party is now more authoritarian than the BNP?
82. Mark Senior - “figures look pretty dire for SNP also”
Err… ok Mark. Whatever you say!
SNP +8%
LD -13%
Both equally “dire” according to Mark Senior. Ha ha ha.
Tell me Mark:
1. When did a Scottish voting intention poll last show an increase in support for the Lib Dems, since the UK GE 2005?
2. When did a Scottish voting intention poll last show a decrease in support for the SNP, since the UK GE 2005?
“The constituency poll is OK for DD but hardly overwhelming - 85% in 2005 voted either Tory or LibDem, but despite the LD endorsement only 57% agree with his action,”
Nick Palmer was elected in 2005 with the support of 29% of the electorate, 42% of those bothering to vote. Underwhelming, no?
87 - But Nick this compensation only kicks in on day 29 as far as I am aware. So you can be held for 28 days be uncharged and innocent and get nothing, but if you are held for one more day you start getting compensation. Why? If more than 28 days were as essential then the situation between day 28 and any number of days beyond it up to 42 should be identical? That one concession blew the argument for more than 28 days completely out of the water. It was a squalid and shabby.
91. The law of averages suggests that some of that money will go to wpuld be terrorists who there just wasnt enough evidence to charge, despite best efforts.
96 - Stuart, can you tell me what the point is of extracting a sample size of 88 from a national poll? It is utterly, utterly statistically meaningless.
Note that Basher has been fairly quiet about his military service - doesn’t hide it, doesn’t wave it (no Portillo speaches). That makes it kind of hard to attack.
I expect some idiot will start making stupid attacks based on the fact that he was in the TA SAS. That should insult every TA member serving in Afghanistan and Iraq nicely - including TA SAS…
As to the MSM reaction, I remember an account of a journalist (quite a lefty) having a chat with Oliver North during the Iran-Contra scandal. North was wondering why his many enemies were desperate to prove that he’d had an affair with his (extremely pretty) secretary. The journalist explained that they knew that if they had been in his place, they would have stolen all the money and slept with secretary - and they felt really upset that North hadn’t….
O/T from today’s Guardian -
‘Refusing to take Ireland’s ‘no’ for an answer, politicians in Berlin and Paris prepared for a crucial EU summit in Brussels this week by trying to ringfence the Irish while demanding that the treaty be ratified by the rest of the EU.’
A rerun of 1992, after the Danish ‘no’. The EU again revealed in its true shape as an imperialist, authoritarian project driven by naked power ambitions and with no respect whatever for democracy. No wonder Brown, Palmer et al. admire it so much.
88. Mark Senior - “I did this a little while ago , Stuart didn’t like the results very much as it showed the LibDems too high for his liking .”
Oh dear! Yet another blatant “untruth” from Mark Senior.
I had a whale of a time when Mark Senior last aggregated the Scottish sub-samples from GB-wide polls. He made a complete dick of himself, as always. Even Mark’s analysis showed the Scottish Lib Dems at about two-thirds their level of support at UK GE 2005. And I seem to remember he had the SNP vote up by at least 50%. Why on earth would I not like those results very much?
But Gordon insists no deals were done - not even with Nick Palmer. Who is being economical with the truth?
96 I seem to recall one of these Comres mini subsamples for Scotland had LibDems at 22% not long ago , just as meaningless as the ones you choose to selectively quote .
I’ve enjoyed reading dear old Roger get increasingly rattled throughout this thread but I’m now starting to feel sorry for the poor luv. It sounds like his world is crashing down around his head.
Headline: British Prime Minister bows to German demands in Munich.
ISIRTA: British Prime Minister bows to French and German demands in Brussels.
@130:
Nobody. Though Gordon Brown is lying, obviously.
Brown - ‘I have here in my hands a piece of paper…’
101 - It is getting silly isn’t it that the EU elite seem to adopt a Henry Ford position on public opinion. You can vote anyway you like as long as it is ‘yes’. If you vote ‘no’ we will assume that you really meant to say ‘yes’ but just didn’t understand the question properly. I think the problem with the eurosceptics is that they have a quaint attachment to ‘the rules of the game’ that doesn’t afflict the europhiles. The eurosceptics might want to look at their tactics as it is clear you cannot play by rules that are changed every time the other side gets a result they don’t like.
The one thing DD had better have is a spotless private life, certainly if KM runs.
The press are ruthless in exposing anything that they think reflects badly on anyone in politics, regardless of party.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4138808.ece
Spelman in a little more bother.
104. Mark Senior - “… just as meaningless as the ones you choose to selectively quote.
Au contraire. I do not “selectively quote” any Scottish polls or poll sub-samples. I publish every single titbit of statistical information to do with Scottish politics that I can lay my hands on. (That is also my reply to James at 100 by the way - we have a paucity of political polling north of the border at present - I wonder why……)
To my knowledge I miss very, very few indeed: only if I am on holiday without internet access, or far too busy with work/family to surf the net.
110. Yes there is sometimes a naive belief among eurosceptics of the milder sort that somehow public opinion might naturally ’stop’ the EU project or force ‘reform’. It’s hopelessly wrong. The only thing that will stop it will be aggressive action by member states to reverse the power grabs of the last twenty years - think de Gaulle’s empty chair, Thatcher’s rebate negotiations, multiplied by four or five.
It’s questionable whether the political class in the UK (or any other state) has the stomach for such action, addicted as they are to the huge wads of cash and massive prestige/power gains the the EU affords them.
106, ouch, that’s clever and painful (if you’re an evil one-eyed Scotsman).
Davies annoyed by Davis…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/wales_politics/7453486.stm
104. Mark Senior - “I seem to recall one of these Comres mini subsamples for Scotland had LibDems at 22% not long ago… “
Err…. so your reply to my query then is: NONE.
Yes, that’s right folks: not one single solitary poll shows the Scottish Lib Dems as anything but down, down, down.
David Davis is very impressive on Andrew Marr. Incidentally, Nick Clegg gave a good performance too.
Davis on Marr was excellent. The commentariat have called this totally wrong. Mike is right. The country is fully behind him. The Labour Party will have to put a candidate or look like cowards.
111. I think 6 months of a leadership campiagn dealt with that.
It all seems to be unravelling for the msm. Davis could end up as a hero backed up by a right-left concenus against 1984 government. That won’t harm the Tories and should Cameron handle Davis right on his return, it won’t harm him either.
112 - It isn’t an adequate answer to my question though, Stuart. It may very well be that polls aren’t being commissioned in sufficient quantities for your liking in Scotland. That doesn’t lend statistical validity to a sample size of 88.
‘Secret files reveal bitter Labour infighting over flagship policy on free personal care’
“Apart from general obstructionism, the DSS, headed by Labour MP Alistair Darling, tried to scupper free personal care by withholding £23m in attendance allowance that was paid to Scotland in benefits.
A letter from [First Minister] McLeish to Darling made clear his concerns about the UK government’s stance: “Our opponents will say this is £23m taken from people in Scotland and spent on increasing benefits to people in England. I do not need to spell out for you the comfort that would give to those who oppose the devolution settlement, question the goodwill of the Westminster government or who argue that conflict between Westminster and Edinburgh is inevitably within the current settlement.”"
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2342362.0.secret_files_reveal_bitter_labour_infighting_over_flagship_policy_on_free_personal_care.php
DD is against ‘the snooping state’.
But it must be possible to support CCTV cameras, and be against 42 days and ID cards?
ID cards won’t work, and 42 days is daft. CCTV cameras do work, and make a positive contribution. I feel safer in town centres with them switched on.
Or is ‘I support what works’ as out-of-date as Blairism?
@121:
CCTV cameras do work
[citation needed]
116 Whilst Milliband is a doe-eyed bunny caught in the headlights.
Utter lightweight - and he holds one of the four great offices of state in one of the Security Council permanent members.
Brown’s need to remove all threats has left us without a single statesman in the cabinet.
re 116 & 117. I thought that Nick Clegg was impressive this morning - this has been a real test for him - a Lib Dem leader saying that the party will not contest a by election where they were so close last time.
121
wasnt there a report recently that suggested that the quality of most cctv footage was so bad, that it was useless as evidence?
I said the other day that a wide coalition could form in support of David Davis. Well the bandwagon is now rolling and on board so far are well known faces from all sides of the political spectrum inc Tony Benn, Tony Robinson, Eric Heffer, Ian Gibson, Bob Marshall-Andrews, Shami Chakrabarti, Henry Porter, Janet Street-Porter, etc etc
As Davis really gets into his stride more will join up and those cynical, out-of-touch hacks from the MSM will have to eat humble pie as this campaign strikes a real chord with a disillusioned and increasingly angry electorate.
The big question now is how Brown is going to react to this. He’s well behind the curve at the moment. Will he, characteristically, bottle it and snipe pathetically from the sidelines via his stooges and shills or will he rise to the challenge.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for Gordo.
@125:
In places where it looks as if CCTV has worked, it’s nearly always a case of regression to the mean. Falling for statistical fallacies is perhaps no surprise though. Oh look, Labour are mathematically incompetent on top of everything else.
119. James - “That doesn’t lend statistical validity to a sample size of 88.”
I do not claim that any single Scottish sub-sample of a GB-wide poll is statistically rock-solid, or even all that close to the real situation, BUT I would argue very strongly that taken as a whole, if you look at a lot of the Scottish sub-samples over a long period of time, then a very, very convincing picture begins to emerge:
SNP vote strongly up on UK GE 2005
Conservative vote slightly up on UK GE 2005
Lib-Lab vote strongly down on UK GE 2005
Is anybody out there on pb.com really doubting those crystal clear conclusions? If you are, please provide some good evidence. I would love to see it.
(James, I worked in market research for several years. I am not completely ignorant of the art and science of quantitative research methodoligies and reporting.)
124 Agree Clegg was good. He must however order his peers to stop the Lisbon charade going through the Lords next week. He came across as sensible and honourable on the issue…. he must now walk the walk and not let the nutter Shirley Willaims rule the roost.
My first hunch was that Davies made a bad mistake and if I were Cameron I would have hit the roof however I feel he has had a mixed bag in terms of the press and may have just got away with it with no seious contender in the field I expect a reasonable win win for Mr Davies.With three good By Election wins in a row the Conservatives will now beon a role that may be virtually unstopable!
118 “Davis could end up as a hero backed up by a right-left concenus against 1984 government. That won’t harm the Tories and should Cameron handle Davis right on his return, it won’t harm him either.”
If DD wins this on a wave of popular support, I can’t see any other option than to welcome him back with open arms as (shadow) Home Secretary.
As well as being tactically sensible for DC, it weds that popular support to Cameron’s election campaign and his first term in Office.
Might I toss in a rather appropriate quote I dredged up from Woodrow Wilson.
Liberty never came from government. The history of liberty is a history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of governmental power, not the increase of it.
124 - Ironically, if the Lib Dems put in a decent performance in Henley and reduce the Tory majority a bit, might it not increase the pressure on Clegg in that people will think “maybe we missed a great chance with H&H”?
I have to say though, I have only detected support for Clegg’s position talking to activists in Henley yesterday. And Davis probably wouldn’t have stood down had Clegg not promised to give him a clear run so the point is somewhat moot anyway.
121. It’s the scale of cctv that’s the argument I think.
126 - Er, hasn’t Eric Heffer been dead for over 10 years???
(Or do you mean Simon Heffer: it would be fun indeed to think that they might be somehow related?)
136 - 17 years.
135 Oops, yes, Simon not Eric rip, of course! thanks for correcting me
130 Davis, not Davies! See my comment 114…
135/136 - and in a strange irony, when compared to the current NuLab crop (and Roger’s disappointment upthread), Eric Heffer proves the old maxim:
The only good socialist is a dead socialist.
121 I haven’t read the report, but apparently the Insitute of Criminology, Cambridge has concluded that CCTV works well in car parks, but does not lead to crime reduction elsewhere.
http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/research/cpt/situationalprevention/
128 - I would broadly agree with the conclusion whilst noting that the nature of many of the Lib Dem seats in Scotland (large rural seats on the whole, big personal votes, a lot of tactical movement in a four party system) makes them somewhat more likely to hold them.
Your trouble is that you don’t just quote the figures but then extrapolate them into seat totals in many of your posts. That really is utterly meaningless as you take figures you admit above are unlikely to be close to the real situation and then pass them through a filter which is itself unlikely to be closely reflective of a relatively complex four party system with a small number of pretty diverse seats.
When the East Germans liberated themselves, 10% of the population was employed to spy on the remaining 90%.
How many, including Labour’s immigrants, are employed to spy on the British people?
The artist formerly known as Nige seems to support DD.
Re: Poltics Home?? Are they having a w/e off? The homepage is unchanged since Friday evening!
7 You should know Roger, you are an expert on stupid questions and stupid answers.
How are you Bradford & Bingley shares doing?
You are Roger. You are stupid. You are Legend.
142 - What an absurd question. Is working for the Stasi really equivalent to working as a security guard at Tesco monitoring the CCTV?
146 Is it?
146 Can he get you arrested for throwing an apple core in a car park? Smoking in a car park… Say something politically correct… hold a lift door open with your foot… Put a teabag in the wrong bin…
In Eastern Germany Spies targeted decent people for political reasons.
In Britain (primarily England) spies & high vis jacket Stasi target decent people for no reason.
Today’s ComRes findings:
“Do you agree or disagree with the following statements…
Nick Clegg is a better leader for the Liberal Democrats than Sir Menzies Campbell.”
Great Britain:
- Agree 42%
- Disagree 25%
Scotland:
- Agree 33%
- Disagree 38%
Can Nick Clegg perform as well at the next UK GE in Scotland as Charlie Kennedy?
NO WAY!! Clegg will not be in the vicinity of Kennedy’s impressive performance in 2005. Different league altogether.
O/T. From the Huntsman’s blog. Another sign of the two-speed Europe to come?
http://thehuntsman2007.blogspot.com/2008/06/something-rotten-in-state-of-theeuro.html
148 - Whilst I share your concerns about civil liberties, you undermine everyone’s case by being hysterical about it.
If you argue that being in Britain is like living under the Stasi, people will think you are mental and it will alienate people who broadly agree with us.
Good morning all.
I have just finished watching the Andrew Marr Programme, which was very interesting.
I must admit I have been a little unsure about how the David Davis decision would play out. I think in large part this is because it was so surprising and out of the norm - something which Davis’ himself acknowledged was a main reason for the Westminster village thinking he had lost it.
My view now is that this move by Davis should turn out either positively or at least neutral to both Davis himself and the Conservative party. Why do I think this?
First of all there has been an adequate enough gap created between the result of any by-election and the wider party. Cameron has made sure this is seen as a personal issue and Davis’ has maintained his support for the wider party policy. If the by-election goes badly there is a gap there which Cameron can use as a buffer zone and if it goes well he can get onboard. Furthermore Labour are in such a rut that I do not think this issue alone will damage the Conservatives.
Second, Davis has tapped (deliberately or not) in to the new prevailing discourse: The Westminster Village versus the rest. It has become more and more relevant over pay and expenses and is symbolic of the common political elite versus the people narrative that has and continues to frame how we tackle the European Union issue. It seems to me that Davis is going to benefit from a number of issues coming together at once. Labour unpopularity, Conservative popularity, Liberal Democrat absence, distrust of political elites and so forth.
Davis looks likely to get support from random Labour MPs, celebrities, musicians and so forth and in doing so I think, purely by association this can help the Conservative brand decontamination further. To see a prominent Conservative (which most people recognise Davis as) with some big names and fighting for the interests of the people will have powerful and I believe positive wider ramifications.
Finally, how will this impact on the other parties? Well I think Labour face a bit of a risk. By calling Davis’ move a stunt they are responding with a Westminster mindset. But to many I think they will look like the Labour government and the PM dodging another fight/argument. The public may support 42 days, but I think they also expect this argument to be defended and made. This by-election can fit the “Brown the ditherer and bottler” narrative. For the Liberal Democrats I think they risk further marginalising themselves and the Conservatives will have another example to “love-bomb” key LibDem-Conservatives marginals.
Paul Harris in the “Observer” on McCain’s troubles with evangelical voters :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/15/johnmccain.uselections2008
If Labour attacks Davis while not standing in the by-election they will manage to look stupid in two ways at once.
Can Gordon Brown resist the temptation?
Coldstone, if you are still out there:
“John Smeaton is being lined up as a shock election candidate to fight David Davis, the Scottish Sunday Express can reveal.”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/48383/Smeaton-lined-up-as-MP
Have you got a source yet to counter this?
On David Davis- a couple of days to think, and after my initial show of cynicism, I have come to the conclusion that…….drum roll….
DAVID DAVIS is a modern day HERO, and could possibly change the narrative of British politics. He may influence the dialogue of politics in a similar way to Obama. Davis now needs to keep a healthy distance from the Tory leadership, and bide his moment in the future. His time will come.
Now before becoming a fully paid up member of the DD appreciation society I do need to know his views on the very important topic of badgers!
Did Marr bother to ask Milliband if Brown had the backing of his Cabinet when he was ‘alleged’ to support EU Treaty ratification, regardless of the Irish vote?
Is it true that China holds suspects for up to 35 days?
Nick Palmer Labour’s problem is a mindset which reduces everything to money.
Any problem and the first reaction is throw money at it.
Anything anyone finds problematic in what the government does give them money as compensation. Banged up unnecessarily: give them money then it will be alright. Shot by mistake: give the relatives money and it will be alright.
Might it not be better to do the right thing in the first place.
re 144. They usually do have the weekend off.
Only PB is 24/7 52 weeks a year.
151 Hysterical?
Thats what Murdoch & Brown are saying of Davis.
Some interesting thoughts from James M, but I would differ on the question of possible benefits for the Tory “brand”.
In this election, Davis is playing it both ways. He is standing as a Conservative candidate, but on just one issue (or group of issues). Because he is not standing as a lock-stock-and-barrel Tory, it is possible for non-Tories to support him, either actively or (in the case of the Lib Dems) but not opposing him.
Obviously, when he wins, Tory spinners will try to present this as a great triumph for the Cameron rebranding exercise. But it isn’t.
I am still convinced that Davis’s revolt is as much a protest against the authoritarian advisers who surround Cameron as it is against the authoritarian tendency at the heart of the Labour Party.
The danger for liberals is that any move towards Tory cheerleading, either during the election or afterwards, risks undoing any good that that Davis may do in the fight against authoritarianism. It would be good if, for the purpose of the election, Davis were to describe himself as an “Independent Conservative”. It would probably gather him more support.
James@146: “Is working for the Stasi really equivalent to working as a security guard at Tesco monitoring the CCTV?”
Clearly not. Tesco have much better data about the people they’re watching than the Stasi…
Not even Hitler had 42 days
152-James- I think Tories on here are looking at the Davis matter from the wrong angle. That he will make his stand, come out the stronger, and then be welcomed with big bear hugs by the Cameron leadership.
What Davis has done is much more profound, I think. He has cut himself loose from the spinning, calculation, PR focussed way of doing politics now.
Davis is an appalling spinner anyway, and useless at doing anything pre planned. That is why he was trounced by Cameron in the leadership election.
But what Davis has you cannot buy- a natural flair, unspun, his own man, guts, and it seems now strong convictions. And he is the opposite to the PR, the manoeverings, the calculation that dominates politics today, and this will resonate with the public because they are sick and fed up with it.
155. David Davis supports 28 days detention.
It’s a stunt!
164 Get you Gabble. Have you ever been right about anything?
If Brown wants to know anything about Britishness he should look to David Davis. Bloody wonderful stand and my cheque is on its way. Good luck David.
Interesting thread this morning. Taking this much more seriously…. What we need to see is a national poll that ask’s this question;
Would You Like Labour To Defend The Anti-Terror Policies By Fielding A Candidate At H&H Bye-Election?
Abyone know if any of the pollsters are polling at the moment? I should imagine they are. If they ask this question, and if theres a strong public demand for Labour to put up a proper candidate, Brown will quickly come under pressure on this, IMO.
162 - You have won the “most absurd post of the month” award and, given the level of competition, can be thoroughly proud of your achievement.
165 Gabble was right about his name.
It was an inspired choice.
156- seems a long time for China.
Apparently someone can be tried, convicted and shot (and kidneys whipped out) within 2 hours. Now that is efficient justice!
160 - Interesting comments.
I am not convinced that whether Davis is fighting this by-election on a single platform of issues or not will have an impact. In the fast moving news cycle the story is going to be “prominent Conservative fights for freedoms and gets wide support”. Whether those supporters disagree with everything else that Davis’ believes in could well be ignored and marginalised.
If the by-election plays out well Davis as a Conservative could well help the Conservatives broadly. They get another by-election win - a win is a win and will be seen as such and the winner - a Conservative will have been supported by a wide group of individuals who would not normally back the Conservative Party. Indeed whether these people would back the Conservatives in a General Election is more or less irrelevant - the fact that they feel ready to do it even now, rather than sitting back and watching developments, is a positive development for the Conservative Party.
163 - I agree with your final paragraph. But this will, I think, by association have a positive outcome on the Conservative Party as a whole in addition to the conclusions you draw.
Re missing papers - didn’t Yes Minister have a guide to the verb to brief on the lines of ;
I make unattributable comments.
You leak.
He is charged under Section 30 of the Official Secrets Act.
re 164. The one sure thing about this is that “it’s a stunt” line, developed by my old BBC and NUJ colleague, Denis ManShane, has been one almighty flop. It got Labour off on the wrong foot right from the start and it’s going to take some time to recover.
The B and G on the keyboard are very close, Did G(b)abble to a typo in selecting his name?
I see from the constituency poll that the only party to suffer in the initial reaction are the lib dems who are against 48 days and agreed not to stand.
Does this mean currently 11% of the LD vote would be ok with voting for an indie DD but that 26% will refuse to temp transfer allegiance.
BTW talking of emerging narratives, isn’t the biggest bottler in all of this David Cameron by refusing to back this stand. (another conclusion from the Rawnsley column - if I am to join Mike in selectively quoting from today’s Observer)
re 176. Any quote is bound to be selective by its very nature.
177 - something we both recognise
re 176. On your main point I agree. Cameron should have totally embraced this rather than give DD wish-washy support.
174. It is undoubtedly a stunt.
If Davis had resigned without first ensuring his main opposition would not contest, then I may have thought differently.
The Labour party’s line has been that ‘this is a stunt therefore we will not contest’. I’m the opposite, I think Labour should stand on a broad platform and show Davis’ campaign up for what it is.
176. As the smoke clears and the Tories begin to see Davis’s gamble paying off, expect Cameron to become more supportative.
Cameron has played this just right, IMO. He is the leader after all and has to be careful about taking undue risks. Nevertheless, he’s left himself enough wiggle room to either come out for david Davis or to virtually disown him, depending on how this plays out. Thats smart, IMO. And as someone pointed out the other day, Cameron will be much more politically nimble at being able to adapt to this as it unfolds than the Clunking Fist!
180. Do we actually know that he informed Clegg before Cameron? As far as I’m aware, we still haven’t had a full time-line for events? I have read he informed at 7pm, but I’ve never read exactly when he informed Nick Clegg?
179 Had he done so though what would he say the next time a Colleague felt this strongly. He’d have had a hard time explaining first to them and then to the Media why he endorsed Davis’s action but not this. He has done as much as he can by promising to campaign while avoiding opening the door to similar action(s)in the future at some point possibly.
“It’s hard to say but perhaps the biggest losers will be the “smarty-pants experts” in the so-called Westminster village - and that will be no bad thing.”
Well said, Mike, well said!
176 I think Cameron is right to stand apart from H&H & Davis. In any case this helps the narrative for Davis. As a Lone Champion for Liberty he can attract the likes of Chakrabati, Bob Marshall-Andrews, Henry Roots, Helena Kennedy (& the old Charter 88 bunch). If it had been an officially planned Conservative campaign then the charges from the likes of Gabble MacShane & the Sun would have been more effective and the cross party support far less.
Cameron politically needs to distance himself so that other shadow ministers recognise there will be a cost to breaking away and operating outside collective responsibility. Davis will be welcomed back but he’s now a loose cannon so major responsibilities on which the fate of the Cameron opposition & government depend will be kept away from him.
172- James M- I think having someone like DD in your party will do the Tories any harm at all. May frustrate the leadership to high heaven, but will not damage the polls one iota.
An anecdote about Davis and his inability to spin.
When Labour were putting the boot in on Blair (the open letter)- the Tories had obviously had prepared a briefing- something like “in this time of terrorism, soldiers being killed in Iraq, bla, bla the Labour party is only concerned with quarrelling and personalities”- trotted out very effectively by a line of the shadow cabinet who all had obviously been briefed.
When it came to Davis- couldn’t do it- mixed up the pre rehearsed lines, and it all came out jumbled.
I think Davis’s inability to do pre preparation has unfairly led to the lazy tag. It certainly cost him the Tory leadership.
Davis is a natural
I liked the “Tory lead falls to 22%” headline…..
Obviously that’s it for the Conservative party - might as well all join the Lib Dems
This is a good poll for Davis but whether his stand helps or hinders the Tories’ General Election chances is still far from clear to me. Clearly people admire Davis individually but will that convert into increased or decreased support for the national party? The next few polls will be interesting.
Nick Palmer states in one of his posts today that Labour will not field a candidate. The risk for Brown and Labour is that they appear cowardly and weak, not prepared to fight their position on 42 days. The risk for Davis is the by election campaign becomes a quaint ridiculous circus and that he struggles to make his case to the electorate at large.
My guess is that no great political harm will ensue for either party. But it’s a distraction Cameron could do without. He was doing just fine before this. It has introduced an uncertainty that he could have done without. Fascinating stuff though.
185. Ted:
“If it had been an officially planned Conservative campaign…”
“Cameron politically needs to distance himself…”
Are you in some sort of self-denial?
This is, now, an official Conservative campaign and Cameron has promised to support it in person.
Re impact of Davis on the doorstep. To counteract the reports from this site’s main Labour MP.
“I dont vote they are all the same”
Me. “Well David Davis is not.”
“Yes you are right there, I may vote for the Conservatives.”
181 - I agree and it’s probably good “training” for him as well. After all, when he’s in the lead/doing well in the election campaign, I would n’t put it past some Tory “supporter” to come out with some “helpful” intervention - although they’re unlikely to be as high profile as DD.
Heard MacKenzie talking about the fear people have about getting blown up on the tube. With due respect to all those who have been affected by terrorism, I feel my personal safety is much more at risk from a repeat of last year’s floods.
Almost one year on, hundreds of people are not back in their homes, authorities are arguing over which budget vital survey work should be paid from and government is not providing money for the basic work of maintaining ditches and drains.
What has this got to do with 42 days? It is all part of the intriging mix about liberty and personal safety where the Government is theorising about possible future events but not attending to the here and now of proven problems.
187 Imagine every day of the contest with Davis calling Brown a coward, imagine every day with Blears and McNumpty calling it a stunt, imagine every day with some luvvie coming out in support of Davis……. it wont play well for Labour. They will have to fight
Tyson, we’ll get you into the tory party yet.
As for badgers I believe DD’s position is that they are large burrowing mammals with a bad temper.
186 Tyson, it’s good to see your change of heart.
Like Network Rail, you normally get there in the end.
188 he supports it but according to Labour it highlights splits in the party because the official tory position is to repeal 42 days and Davis’ position… is to repeal 42 days.
the confused and dithering Labour response just seems to be giving Davis a free run at making his case. Labour seem to be hoping it drops off the radar but that’s quite a big hope; as we go in to the summer and a normally quiet political season interest in politics might be kept alive by DDs campaign.
whatever Nick Palmer says I think Labour will have to do more than keep saying it’s a stunt. Even if it were a stunt it doesn’t mean it will fail - stunts often succeed. Labour by next week will decide to put up a candidate - but not the PPC as he’s opposed to 42 days.
It may have happened 9 years ago but the tory lies are fresh.
“MP’s nanny on expenses until 1999″
“Tory chairman Caroline Spelman, who is under fire for paying a nanny with MP’s funds, was making the payments for longer than she previously stated.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7455172.stm
As a gambit or tactic, I agree that this by-election, possibly hyped up in the silly season by journalists with nothing better to write about, is unlikely to do much harm to the Tories and they are stealing Nick Clegg’s libertarian clothes. If Mr Clegg does not actually canvass personally for Davis [b]in this by-election only[/b] then the Lib Dems will lose out from hs decision not to put up an ‘even cleaner and more libertarian’ candidate to run alongside Davis wit 42 days as part of a wider liberal/libertarian basket of goodies. Even if you accept the dubious premise of a by-election being a one-issue-event-with-the issue-chosen-by-the-guy-who-calls-it, there is another question as to which candidate is the best person to champion that cause. No Liberal can concede that Davis’ overall credentials give him appropriate sole proprietorship of these issues.
But the more interesting question is still this. If you are a member of a political party and you have risen and fallen with the waxing and waning of the fortunes of that party then, when you have a ‘brilliant idea’, no matter how brilliant an idea it is, and you go to your party leader and you outline your brilliant idea and then he thinks and says ‘interesting but no thanks’ and then you tell him that you are going to do it anyway, transferring the focus on that important issue away from the party position and onto yourself, what does that say about your committment to the democratic priciples of that party? “Ah, but this issue is more important than my party loyalty” you say. But only YOU are deciding that YOUR take on what to do about this issue is the right one both on its own merits and taking into account the wider interests of the country and/or party. You are therefore very likely to be thought of as a hopeless narcissist and a very loose cannon indeed.
The question then arises as to what the Conservative Party does when the loose cannon returns in n weeks time triumphant with his mandate and having personally made a fool out of Gordon Brown rather better than David Cameron, he of the shoes in the limo behind the bike, ever has. My guess is that there will quickly be a time for one senior Tory parliamentaruy spokesman to have an illness of convenience or some other ruse to bring Davis back into the front bench fold. “But this goes against what you have written above”, you may say. Indeed it does, except for my view of the Cameron psyche. Far better to have a loose cannon pointing (this is a family blog) out of the tent than pointing into the tent.
Not putting up an H&H candidate could look very very poor for Labour. Indeed it could look disastrous - tying in with their refusal to halt Lisbon ratification, and of course the non elections and the denied referendum.
Labour - the party that denies you a vote whenever it can. Labour - the party too scared of the electorate to fight. Labour - the party that runs away from the people.
This is the route to electoral suicide come the GE. It’s just gonna get people angrier and angrier. At some point Labour have to say OK, we are democrats, let’s accept the verdict even if we lose.
People will respect that. An honest defeat. But voters despise cowardice, lies and evasion, and will punish it.
It’s strategic mistakes like this which could turn a respectable defeat for Labour, at the next GE, into a catastrophic and party-destroying rout.
195. kingbongo: “…the official tory position is to repeal 42 days and Davis’ position… is to repeal 42 days.”
Wrong.
Davis’ position is to repeal the 42 days. The official tory position is to repeal the 42 days if there is no supporting evidence.
Anyone want to give me Even money that Labour don’t field a candidate in H and H? I bet they won’t. £100 at evens or smaller stakes considered?
199 - You are wrong Gabble (quelle surprise) Davis and Camerons position is that they will repeal 42 days unless in the interim a compelling case develops for retaining it. Neither foresee this compelling case being advanced as no-one has come up with anything like a compelling case hitherto. The position is the same.
197 Don’t see why he has to be that circuitous. He can just have a reshuffle. Davis will no doubt get something just extremely unlikely to be Shadow Home Secretary.
200 Mean odds at evens given the rack record of GB.
Beyond all the politics of it for a minute, what I sincerely hope Davis achieves with his widening coalition is to ask the questions why is Britain a world leader in authoritarian measures? (most CCTV, Biggest DNA database) Do they actually work? (CCTV or streetlighting, DNA of criminals rather than innocent people) If they don’t work for the purpose intended why do we persist in introducing and extending them? (Is it just about party politics or is there a european dimension as well as other vested interests?)
If these questions actually get answered then David Davis would truly be a hero.
203 *track* even.
199 Just heard a very clear explanation from Mr Grieve of the Conservative position. He said they supported the 14 days which is the normal maximum detention before charge with the safeguards bought in around that, however they are supporting 28 days, which is a temporary extension annually renewable, on the basis that there is evidence that this is required but if circumstances changed that could change. They oppose 42 days as there is no evidence it is required and as for whether it would be repealed there is currently nothing to repeal as it hasn’t been through the full process yet.
206 Ted - heard where?
30 - that is a disgusting comment
143. “The artist formerly known as Nige seems to support DD.”
He also invited him rather obliquely to join him at 5.00 pm today on the Stop the War Coalition’s march against Bush which the anti-libertarian police state insists on re-routing for reasons best known to themselves. I do not imagine that David Davis, as a backer along with most Conservatives, of Blair’s dishonest and illegal war, will be in a rush to have an early tea to get out for this event. To paraphrase a Texan Governor of the past:
“I knew Charlie Kennedy. Charie Kennedy was a friend of mind. You’re no Charlie Kennedy Mr Davis.” I consider it was far braver for Charlie Kennedy to ignore his advisors and go on the anti-Iraq War march than it is for David Davis to do what he is doing now. Or saying that he is intending to do.
168. Hitler kept the German Criminal and Civic codes from the Weimar state. In the Nazi state, charges were brought very (perhaps too) quickly.
201. Just to get this right.
It is your assertion that Shami Chakrabarti, Tony Benn, Bob Marshall-Andrews etc etc are all lining up behind the proposal that the 42 days limit should only be scrapped if David Cameron thinks it is OK to do so?
You’re mad, you are.
207 Radio 5 - summary my own.
211 - How can you make such a deductive leap from what I say to what you suggest. There are one or two posters on here who have neurochemical issues, I am not one of them. I leave it to others to judge whether you are.
208.
Floater, is Roger suggesting that SeanT is pb.com’s very own Gary Glitter? If so the lack of evidence suggests some immediate censorship is needed by the management to avoid a ‘putting on the wRitz’.
211. Gabble. I believe John Redwood is supporting him too. All Davis needs now is for Teresa Gormley, Bill Cash and that man with the ice cream vendors jacket to come out for him and he is ready to go into battle.
203. Punter. Feel free to offer better odds on Labour fielding a candidate in H and H.
214. Roger has actually made this fairly outrageous allegation twice. Coz I am the forgiving sort, and cause I do dish it out myself, and because he’s an old fool, I have ignored it.
I think it reflects more on him than me. Up to Mike S if he wants to have a “quiet word” with our man in Villefranche-sur-Mer. I’m cool.
Back on topic, well, ish, I actually think the government is backtracking over the Treaty Ratification:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0615/eulisbon.html
That sounds to me like reality may have sunk in, down at Number 10. Lisbon is dead, and this is some rare good news for Gordon.
They just don’t want to be the ones who say “it’s over” to Sarko and Merkel. Who wants to spend the day ducking the crockery in Brussels?
It’s odd that Davis’s big moment has led to Clegg doubters starting to be impressed by him.
I note in one article I saw today that Geoff Hoon is pushing for a Labour candidate but Gordon is against. As Hoon was the guy who raised the “leadership” issue on the Saturday ‘everyone but Gordon’ conference call after C&N perhaps Gordon is ill disposed to accept advice from that source.
Problem is that most politicians/activists are thinking in terms of the by-election, who will stand? what shares/majority? whereas Davis and co are thinking in terms of publicity for a cause. A failure for Labour to stand won’t necessarily stop the campaign as that can be used in publicity. The Government so far has failed to engage on the issues preferring the classic New Labour tactic of going for the messenger.
162 “Not even Hitler had 42 days”
Either that was a wind up in which case - nice one. Even those of us supporting DD can appreciate a good wind up posting.
Or you are serious in which case I suspect there is something fundamentally wrong with either your historical knowledge or your moral compass.
I won’t even start to bother to explain why that was - at face value - the most stupid posting of the year to date.
30. Sad, sad post. Roger, rather than being ‘an institution’, should probably be inside one.
A final prediction from the man who gave Obama no chance…..
Davis-his ego fuelled-will go much further than the current Conservative leadership on detention without trial and all sorts of things and when the press start embarrassing both he and the Cameroonies Davis will cut himself adrift and stand as an independent!
At that point-if he reconsiders hanging and bullwhipping gays-he might even get my support!
215 I was suggesting that you would have to offer far better odds on Labour fielding a candidate. As Mr Smithson has shown GB doesn’t ‘do’ contests.
221 - Oh dear God. Since when has Davis advocated hanging homosexuals or bullwhipping them? He is the MP for Haltemprice not the Ayatollah of Hamadan.
221 - Roger, would you just stfu and let the grown ups have a sensible discussion.
Love mike’s comments about the ’smarty pants’. The bursting the commentators bubble is something we have commented on here before. PB.com once again sees a pattern emerging at is earliest.
]
The effect as Mike says is no bad thing. British public opinion should not depend on afew newspaper moguls and that is something we can all unite on [we will leave David Roe out of this discussion in fairness
However well DD does in this campaign, the Tory memebership [who vote on the leadership] are easily spooked.
They don’t like a gambler.
If this comes off they will say, ‘Fine, but enough is enough’. You can’t scare a party, making it feel nervous to its stomach [ which he has!]and then expect them to want you to lead it.
Even if it comes off DD may be a hero to the public …but a maverick to the party. There are alot of DD voters out there thinking, ‘thank god Cameron won’.
Where it might be a problem for Cameron is that I doubt the press will understand [or want to] that party members and workers want a steady leader [esp the shell shocked Tories] and wil, if DD returns triumphant] latch on the anything Davis says as a symbol of something more.
Cameron’s intial public reaction was the right one; they will give him room to do what he wants to deliver his message, but the chosen method of delivery is his choice and not theirs. I think the electorate is sophisticated enough to know that a party leader would never want to encourage his limited number of MPs to keep resigning.
What I find so interesting about these ‘principled’ people who have suddenly discovered civil liberties (does anyone remember what happened to so many ordinary law abiding people during the miners’ strike?) is how selectively they choose their causes for intervention. Possibly the greatest abuse of human liberties in this country - in thousands of cases of every week of every month of every year is in the secret family courts. In the face of hightened conflict betweeen family members one would hope for some priority given by the state family justice system to making good decisions insofar as that may be possible. In fact, nothing is further from the truth. There are some brilliant judges (District and High Court), family lawyers, CAFCAS workers, social workers, youth advisers and advocates involved in this process. There are also many many lazy, disorganised, self-serving ‘professionals’ whose approach to both honesty and the welfare of children is at best an expedient side issue. For most children (and parents and grandparents and guardians) there is no quality control at all and nobody seems to be at all bothered by this just as long as the state processes the cases. Thousands upon thousands of cases which should be appealed never are because of the further delays, disruption and psychological trauma it would cause on top of the damage already done. While no fan of the ‘purple powder people’, I understand fully the reasons which propel them (those of them who are not nutters) to extent to which they feel they have to employ non-violent civil disobedience. The number of children involved in gross injustices through this system will be vastly greater than those who would ever lose their freedoms through the 42 day detention were it brought in.
It would seem that the professionalism of those involved in our family courts allows the bad to be shielded by the good much as it used to be in the 1950s among doctors. Professionalism is not, however, the last refuge of the scoundrel. The true last refuge is politicians who will not take on professions.
(I write from my experiences of work in the family law field, not as a parent, which I am also)
Can someone clarify Labour Party rules? If Labour put up a candidate against Davis and some Labour MPs support Davis I assume they will be disciplined and lose the whip. If there is no Labour candidate, can Labour MPs do what they like and support Davis with impunity?
Re 227
Nick Palmer answered this earlier. As long as there isn’t an official Labour candidate, Labour MPs can campaign for DD as I understand it.
227. Actually, Fernando there are wider issues here, too, due to yet another state-centralising trick which has been sneaked into legislation. The registration of political parties act has given immense power to one individual within each political party to allow (or disallow), directly or via a set of appointees who (s)he can remove at whim, any individual to carry the name of a political party on the ballot paper. Thus there is no way that any dissidents, even if they have left the party, would be allowed to have ‘Labour but against detention’ on a ballot paper, should that be their wish, unless they went through all the rigmaroll of registering a new political party name - and even then there would be an opportunity for the Electoral Commission to respond to pressure to disallow the new name.
222. Punter. I understood you. On whether there is a Labour candidate in H and H, I would back Yes at Evens and No at 4/1. How do others see it and anyone prepared to offer some odds?
226 Agree with you on secret family courts - which are an example of the compromising the basic principle of presumed innocence, open justice, juries and the other protections. Solutions to the issues of privacy and welfare of children within the traditional systems of justice were not looked for just as in 42 days the use of electronic intercept evidence, post charge interrogation, weight of evidence needed for charge were ignored.
It is possible to have fairness and equity in these areas, limiting the injustices, without compromising the base tenets of British liberties. That is the challenge - but desire for headlines, to be seen to be taking action and short term political benefit drives solutions which override those principles.
12 - Mike, you just nicked most of the links I posted last night.
Coldstone at 38 - “The issue isn’t important,”
And that, my friend, is why your party deserves to be slaughtered at the next General.
53 - Roger - ‘Explicable’ not ‘understandable’, break out your dictionary.
78 - Nick P - You are at your best when you refract your views through the people, that you are trying to claim that the *media* firestorm against Davis is evidence that he is wrong is not even on the same page of believability.
O/T - How insane is this proposal, doubtless we will see it come south rather soon. How can you operate a two tier licensing law?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7455391.stm
228. But how ridiculous and embarrassing is that gonna look? NickP has already said he will support Davis if his only opponent is the BNP. What if the only opponent is Mackenzie? Who will Brown support then? The guy who thinks Hull is “a shocker”?
The public may be a little mystified by Davis’s quixotic act. They will be totally bamboozled by a government that refuses to stand and fight for what it believes, a government whose MPs are actually campaigning for a Tory opponent of the government.
This could turn into a farce - for Labour. This is why I think they have to stand a candidate. It just looks too weird and bad otherwise.
78 (Nick Palmer) Wrote: “There is no Labour Party rule banning MPs from supporting non-Labour people unless they are opposing Labour candidates. …..If Labour doesn’t stand (and we won’t), Bob can support Davis against the OMRLP or whoever as much as he likes. If he just had extreme right-wing opposition, I’d support him myself. ”
Nick, as I see it the problem your leader has is this. The electorate neither know nor care about the minutae of the rules of the Labour, or any other, party. All they will see is several Labour MPs supporting openly a Conservative party candidate in a by-election fought over Government policy, and not being disciplined for it. I suspect that would be a catastrophe for Brown.
However even if he does put up a candidate, it is not inconceivable that one or two backbench MPs support Davis anyway. The polls say their seats are doomed in 2010 and, conceivably losing the whip over something the grassroots members think Brown is wrong on, probably won’t do them any harm at the next election.
Either way, as I see it, Brown has to make a decision quickly and stick to it, the longer he dithers the more he will be damned if he does and damned if he dosent. He seems to have already done himself damage by delaying thus far as it has allowed rebel backbenchers to declare in support of Davis.
154
R5 this morning, someone contacted Smeaton and he is reported to have said, ‘Not interested, in fact I’m apolitical’
124 I thought that Nick Clegg was impressive this morning - this has been a real test for him - a Lib Dem leader saying that the party will not contest a by election where they were so close last time.
Mike - equally, he may have decided that discretion was the better part of valour, realising that the LibDems had every chance of going backwards in the H&H By-Election, which would have done his reputation no good at all.
Still, full marks to him for spotting this possible elephant trap at a very early stage and for at least showing he is capable of taking a decision.
234 - I actually would quite like Kelvin to stand and watch him torn to pieces over his support for locking up innocent people for 14 months without trial, charge, evidence or anything concrete other than suspicion and allegation.
Is everyone relishing the prospect of Shami Chakrabati, Dianne Abbot, Bob Marshall-Andrews, Tim Collins and David Davis draped in Tory colours opposing the Suns battle bus full of page 3 girls, Kelvin the Idiot and George Pascoe-Watson waving the flag for Labour Party policy?
I know I am.
Oh! and another thing it’s Davis (English) not Davies (Welsh)
As here!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davies
232
Ah! I don’t have a party, I have a preference, and it isn’t for the Tory Party. I’m quite happy with 42 days, in fact I’d probably go along with KM and his 420 days. My eldest son was on the tube on that day in July, if anything had happened to him, it would be 42000 days!!
According to Andy Burnham on the Politics Show - the Labour government’s message and vision for Britain is very clear!
I dread to think what his definition of obscure is…
221 Roger - Iain MacWhirter has the best reply to that post
“Davis is a right-winger who supports the death penalty and hates Europe, but you don’t have to agree with everything he stands for to agree with him on 42-day detention. That would just be tribalism.
241 was he in full drag make up?
155 - Tyson - what was that a few days ago about me being naive? Can I point out that, for at least the second time, you’ve come around to a point of view that you attempted to ridicule me for earlier?
How about ‘Tyson’s Law’? Whatever he has a go at me about he is bound to support on further reflection?
240
And yet that wouold be pointless and would actually result in far more 7/7 attacks.
This is the point that supporters of 42 days - or even 28 days - miss. It would have no appreciable effect on preventing terrorist attacks, is not wanted by almost all of those who are actually charged with dealing with such attacks and would in fact alienate the very people who we need to be supporting us (the law abiding majorities amongst the Asian and muslim communities) so that they would, at best, no longer be willing to help the police for fear that one of their innocent neighbours or family might get banged up without charge. At worst it will create more terrorists.
At the saame time Brown is still refusing to consider post charge questioning and the admissability of phone tap evidence in court. Moves that mistify people until you realise is aim is not to prevent terrorist attacks but simply to look for the best way to trip up the Tories. The public are a mere inconvenience to Brown and the only reason he would be worried if some of them got blown up was if they might have been Labour voters.
Andy Burnham completely floundered on the politics show - clearly feels Labour should stand a candidate, cannot say so because of the great ditherer. Thinks Labour has a very clear vision and mentioned free swimming as an example. He also feels Labour showed great courage over 42 days and could have just folded - hmmmmm. He was also making a rather lame attempt to paint Davis as soft on crime over CCTV and the DNA database. William Hague was good on the treaty but clearly bemused by Davis decision and as negative about it as he could have been without causing ructions. I think DD is getting a lesson in tough love from the rest of the party - tey will make him earn their support for his stand.
241 - Re: your son; and there lies the problem. Just as the GOP in the US, labour has got itself into the invidious position of being the knee jerk reactionary party, using the imagined pain of others to support ever more authoritarian measures.
Who is likely to be better judged to pronounce on security issues? It is most definitely not people who have been in the middle of a terrorist attack, as they may want personal revenge and disproportionate responses. Politics needs cooler heads than those who seek revenge or to profit from the anger of others.
234 - O/T. I actually think it’s a good idea. Pubs are the best places for young people to be ‘educated’ into a drinking culture, far better than buying bottles and cans from an off-licence and drinking them in the streets. Anything which supports pubs against supermarkets gets my support.
This is brilliant. Davis resigns, my immediate reaction was “good on you”. The media’s immediate reaction, sheltered as they are in the Westminster village was “what the hell is he doing?” because of their inability to see anything outside the prism of power and the search for power. People won’t like this, they told us. They like 42 days. They like CCTV and ID cards.
But it actually turns out that the people are pretty impressed with what he’s done. Cue frantic reverse ferrets (oh how appropriate) in today’s comment sections.
re 241. So what about your son - I fail to understand the point you are making. Gord’s move on 42 days had nothing whatsoever to do with dealing with terror - it was all about trying to embarrass the Tories. And just like his 2007 budget “surprise” of the 10p tax abolition to embarrass the Tories it’s ended up with a massive extra burden on the public purse. This time more money for Northern Ireland that wasn’t budgeted for.
It’s this approach to governing which is behind his dramatic collapse in the polls.
Tinkering around with basic human rights for short term political advantage is an outrage.
248
Imagine a Tory Government is in power, there is a dreadful terrorist attack, what does it do then, be more libertarian?
The press and others will be calling for action!
I remember Dr Rhodes Boyson MP after an IRA bombing saying, ‘This is the death of Liberal England’ and calling for authoritarian measures.
249 - Can you not see the dichotomy of pushing the age limit for buying cigarettes and alcohol whilst also trying to push down the voting age?
234. James Burdett - “How can you operate a two tier licensing law?”
We already have three different legal systems in the United Kingdom. That is not new: Scots and Irish (since 1922 Northern Irish) law has always been separate from English law.
How can you operate a two tier licensing law?
http://www.infoscotland.com/alcohol/displaypage.jsp;jsessionid=A83B2547E8828768900691D6EC08F13E?pContentID=67&p_applic=CCC&p_service=Content.show&
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licensing_laws_of_the_United_Kingdom
250 - Actually, quite a few have dug themselves into a deeper hole than that, the need to write articles in the Sunday’s early being a major contributory factor. Some are perhaps wishing now that they hedged their bets rather than immediately going with the media line as of Thursday/Friday morning.
248 Interesting Times piece on the support Obama is getting from disillusioned Republicans including inter alia Nixon’s daughter.
254 - Thats not two tier per se, its just two different laws used in two different jurisdictions
251 And there you have it. Another cheap political stunt blows up in the face of the most inept politician in modern history
DD consulted Clegg and only resigned after being assured that the Lib Dems would not stand against him I read. Presumably, had Clegg said no way then that would have been the end of it. Does anyone else think the real loser over this is Clegg himself? When DD returns to parliament on his charger won’t he be seen as the champion of civil liberties? The Tory PR machine no doubt will cite this and the all-party support he has received as evidence that the party has changed and is now the party of the centre. Where will that leave the Lib Dems? Any comment yet from Chris Huhne?
237. Thanks coldstone.
241. Governance by fear or anger isn’t a good way to govern.
252 - How did we finally get a resolution in Northern Ireland? It wasn’t by getting tougher and tougher and at least Major and others realised that.
If you’re scared of the press or if you agree with their knee jerk politics, as you appear to claim, then either way it’s pretty disgusting.
253 - Yes. Personally I’d prefer the drinking age in pubs to be 16 (as it used to be de-facto, before everybody started getting paranoid about ‘binge-drinking’) and push the off-licence age up to, oh, I dunno… thirty-something.
The Spelman explanation seems to be suffering a bit of slippage:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4138808.ece
Payments to the nanny went on until 1999, and covered periods in which she (the nanny) lived in Kent raher than Meriden. And Spelman had a constituency office with telephone and fax at a separate address.
Looks as if this has been released to come out while it was buried under news from Ireland and Haltemprice.
Did anyone else notice on the last story of the Politics Show the logo of the Department for Schools and Children? I never knew it was a rainbow - it looks so tacky!
“R5 this morning, someone contacted Smeaton and he is reported to have said, ‘Not interested, in fact I’m apolitical’”
Let’s see him try saying that when Labour forces him to carry one of their damnable ID cards next year.
I feel certain 259. tyat the LDs are increasingly sidelined at the moment. The DD ‘event’ is assisting this and they risk being badly squeezed if the Labour core hardens up.
262
The classic way in which parties operate when faced by terrorism is shown by the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Introduced by Labour after the B’ham bombings, passed throught both Houses in 24 hours.
Don’t remember much opposition!
Then opposed by Labour when in opposition, reinforced by the Tories, to Labour protests.
Mrs T, even introduced a ban on IRA and SF people being interviewed, leading to the ludicrous situation where actors dubbed their voices, that was pretty Libertarian.
I served in Aden during the Mad Mitch period, I can assure you, not much though was given to ‘Human Rights’ or detention 42 days or otherwise. I also worked at Marble Arch through the IRA campaign in the West End, so I’ve seen a fair bit of terrorism in my time.
242, Mascara Man was more amusing than usual, though by accident rather than design.
He had the appearance of a man knowing he’s talking nonsense and knowing the audience knows, but unable to do anything else. His explanation for ratification was about as compelling as a proposition from an octogenerian[sp] nymphomaniac.
268 - You sometimes have to supress a pang of pity for the New Lab young generation who could be heading for their penison before Labour is back in the ascendant.
267 - All of which either exacerbated the problem or had negligible effect.
267 Yes there have been plenty of stupid mistakes, surely the thing to do is to try and think through policy rather than repeating the mistakes and blaming the tories.
I’ve been trying to think of a betting angle resulting from the Davis issue. It has certainly mixed things up and made predicting the future more uncertain. So I have just laid The Tories to win Henley at 1.05 on Betfair giving me 20/1 the field.
The LDs are not going to contest H and H, Clegg is likely to get a political boost for this “mature” decision, the majority in Henley is certainly bridgeable and the LDs traditionally have a great record in by elections. LDs 8/1 with Ladbrokes, 14/1 with Hills, 16/1 with betfair but only to £3.
It worries me that so many people here are using the word “libertarian” in such an unabashedly positive sense.
PS. I note Hamish Howitt, Blackpool publican and anti-smoke campaigner is saying he’ll run in H&H. Here is my take on it:
http://stonch.blogspot.com/2008/06/hamish-howitt-is-back-and-still-twat.html
273. Maybe they’ve read Locke, Burke and John Stuart Mill and you haven’t.
The term Libertarian was hijacked by elements of the right who are anything but, people like Chomsky disprove that they have succeeded.
re 272. StJohn. A goodish bet - I’ve put some up at 1.04
267 So has Patrick Mercer don’t forget. Hopefully this won’t turn into a look how many people I’ve seen killed contest.
267
I don’t see any criticism of the Tories! I’m highlighting hypocrisy. POTA was a classic example, brought in by Labour, then opposed by them. Re-inforced by the Tories who extended its powers.
When in power governments faced by major terrorist incidents, will not respond by saying, ‘The answer to this is to be more Libertarian’ believe me they won’t!
279 - Which is why Davis needs people’s support against Westminster cynicism.
86: “The reason they can do that is that no-one doubts the Republican party’s commitment to and respect for the US military.”
Which is odd, when you consider that the entire Bush administration and pretty much all senior GOP in Congress dodged the draft.
The exception, of course, was John McCain. Perhaps the guilt and self-loathing this brings out in his colleagues is why he’s not too popular.
280
I’m a cynic, and proud of it! I think there’s more to Davis’s action than meets the eye.
I await further revelations with some interest.
275 - I’d strongly dispute Burke’s claims to be consistent libertarian: yes in terms of his attacks of the nationalist, revolutionary state; no, in the sense of his defence of the traditional institutions of society and culture, with the regulation and control of daily lives in time-honoured ways they denoted. And I would point out that, politically, Burke and his friends among the conservative Whigs moved to support Pitt just when he was suspending habeas corpus and bringing in draconian legislation against potential revolutionaries.
259
Actually no.
I am a faairly right wing (for want of a better phrase) Libertarian and have always been scornful of the Lib Dems for a whole host of reasons, most particularly their EU stance.
Now unfortuantely that particular part of their policy portfolio is not going to change in the foreseeable future and as a result there is no way I could vote for them. But I have reassessed my opinion of them on other matters as a result of Clegg’s stance on civil liberties and particularly his willingness to put principle before possible party gain on the Davis issue.
As such, although their EU philia still prevents me suppporting them, I am far more willing to look at their other polices and consider them with a neutral eye than automatically dismiss them.
281: ‘Which is odd, when you consider that the entire Bush administration and pretty much all senior GOP in Congress dodged the draft.’
Another myth of the ‘all the Shadow cabinet are from Eton’ type.
Once again the Beeb demonstrates its total lack of impartiality where Europe is concerned. In discussing the Irish Referendum on the World This weekend, they had four contributions; the Cypriot Foreign MInister (an ex commissioner), Paddy Ashdown and Joyce Quin (ex MEP and ex MP). All parroted the Brussels federalist argument. Then there was a constribution from Lord Strathclyde about why this constitution should not be forced through the Lords on Wednesday.
Why oh why can the BBC not understand that they should try and be impartial?
281 — agreed.
On a slightly different note but, for any fans of ‘Lost’, what is it with so many characters being name after enlightenment philosophers? Is it a red herring or is that one of the clues as to what is going on?
So far we’ve seen Locke, Rousseau, Carlyle, Burke, Hume, Anthony Cooper and Jeremy Bentham with connections to other areas with names like Faraday, Cortez and so on.
Any ideas anyone?
No spoilers for those who haven’t yet seen season 4 please (the ending is a stunner by the way)!
Austin Mitchell on the politics show in the north said “I voted for the 42 days to save Gordon Brown for the nation”. He also added that he thought it was a silly measure and supported DD in saying that he induced a good measure of liberalism into the Tory party on home affair issues.
So whilst he has not said he will campaign for him i note a shift in support towards Davis, the politician have sniffed the wind!
288. I stopped watching that whne they lifted it from terristorial TV.
Something that struck me watching David Davis on Andrew Marr was how the “bottler Brown” accusation has returned. Whether you agree with it or not (and I personally do), accusing the Prime Minister and his party of cowardice, when they’ve only got “it’s a stunt” as a defence, is something that will hit home a lot harder with the general public, than it will with the media.
People wil generally forgive politicians who make mistakes, but they don’t like it when appear venal, or cowardly, and that could become something that really works in Davis’ favour.
283. Oh, I agree. I’ve never yet read any political writer/essayist that a) I agree with 100% or b) whose writings are internally 100% consistent. Human society and its institutions are too ad hoc and transient for any set of rules to be universally applicable anyway.
But those old geezers, compared with the lot we’ve had recently, were giants who not only pondered long and deeply on political philosophy but recognised that it was meant to apply to real people in real situations. Helluva difference to an out-and-out theorist. But it does mean that to get something you personally may be happy with you may have to cherry-pick a bit.
290 - You can get the DVDs or, otherwise, there are places on the net to download episodes as they are broadcast. By far the most interesting drama on the box in my opinion.
289 “I voted for the 42 days to save Gordon Brown for the nation”
This really is priceless, Gee thanks Austin. I am sure the nation will show its appreciation as soon as they can.
Found the Yes Minister quote on the verb to leak.
Bernard: It’s another of those irregular verbs. I hold confidential briefings, you leak, he’s been charged under section 2A of the Official Secrets Act.
Funily enough there was an episode on ID cards and a National Database.
289. “I voted for the 42 days to save Gordon Brown for the nation”.
Is Austin havin’ a laugh? What, does he think Brown is a national treaure or something?
294. Nice to see MP’s voting for the right reason
284. I agree with you. I have thought that there are significant areas where the Conservatives and Libdems can have a sensible debate about the future of the country. The notable contradiction in their stance is as you rightly point out is the EU. Hopefully at some point they will have an epiphany and see how hypocritical their position on it is in comparison with much of the rest of their ethos.
Of course all this is in stark contrast to the impossibility of having any serious debate with Labour who these days seem obsessed with self-preservation at any cost.
288: So many theories on that
Personally I tend towards the idea it’s not specifically related to the characters itself (eg, empiricism and subjectivism are hardly what you associate with Desmond), but more to meta-narrative stuff the writers want considered at that point in the season arc. For example, first season Locke/Rousseau, the state of nature stuff is fairly obvious. Or when Desmond turns up, the faith/rationalist debate - although note not with that character again. As Mikhail (Bakunin, aka eyepatch guy) turns up, anarchy is pretty appropriate.
Google around, plenty has been written
289 I am glad that he saved Gordon Brown for the nation! The longer that idiot stays in power the more certain we get a change of government. Good on you Austin!
294 - Oh good grief, it makes Gordon sound like a priceless relic that needs to be in a museum.
298 I do find it curious that Lib Dems (like Mike S) say Europe is unimportant” but when it comes down to Lib Dem/Tory differences Europe is the major one….
296: I was hoping he meant they were going to stick Gordon in London Zoo.
301. I’m not sure “Indiana Jones and the Scotsman of Gloom” will be a box office hit.
301 only Madam Tussauds refused that too!!!
299 - Could be. Have you seen season 4 yet? If so, any ideas as to the sudden ‘appearance’ of Bentham? I also forgot about Bakhunin, but Sayid and Jin’s family names are apparently of great warriors, and as for the Wizard of Oz references that would take forever!
302. I don’t think it is the major one, I think it is the most obvious one. I’m sure there would be many major disagreements over taxation, defence and over the best way forward regarding the environment. The trouble is whilst the EU sits in the way its too easy to point to it.
272 stjohn - Although Mike describes your lay at 1/20 of the Tories winning Henley as a “goodish bet”, this seems so unlikely that not even St. Jude would contemplate doing likewise. PfP’s first rule of political betting is that “Any candidate/party who/which is 10% or more ahead 10 days or fewer prior to an election cannot be beaten” (with due acknowledgement to Mr. Smithson for guiding me in this direction prior to the London Mayoral election).
Is the intention simply to trade this out closer to the election date?
305 I almost wish GB was a waxwork-he could be melted down
For what it’s worth, as a voter, I think David Davis is acting on principle and should be applauded for it. I’m not at all sure whether I agree with him on the issue, but on balance I think I do. The Westminster village commentary appears to consist of - this is bad tactics, therefore stupid. Which simply doesn’t follow unless you have no principles before.
As a pundit, I’m a bit disappointed that the Lib Dems won’t be standing, ignoring DD’s nomination of issue and simply campaigning on whatever they think their strongest issues were. I think Clegg may have simply acted on principle, perhaps thought he might take a thumping from DD, or decided that if he didn’t pledge his support, DD wouldn’t do it, and the Lib Dems would benefit more from the manoeuvre.
Much as I disagree with McKenzie on almost everything, it would be fantastic political theater if he stood. It seems quite possible to me that he would win, setting all Davis’ calculations on their heads.
What do people think about those verdicts?
309 Mind you,the old saying ‘The brown stuff hitting the fan’ takes on a whole new meaning since last autumn
309 - Then it could be a living metaphor for his government.
We should stop discussing DD. The sooner this vile man disappears into obscurity the sooner our party is returned to power.
293 - someone hasn’t seen The Wire…
310. Clegg’s decision was right, whether it was guided by genuine principle or by tactical considerations. Had the Lib Dems stood, they would have got a very bad result indeed, as today’s poll shows. First piece of good judgment Clegg has shown.
Why are people calling Davis brave and principled? He’s a high profile and popular MP in a safe Tory seat, and he arranged for his closest rivals to stand aside before hand. He cannot possibly lose.
But neither can the H&H by-election be credibly seen as some sort of mini referendum on 42 day detention. Tory voters who support it will back Davis out of loyalty anyway. Labour were already a distant third in the seat before they plunged into the Brown stuff, no one will back them just because they agree with the government on this one issue. And Mackenzie couldn’t even get elected to his local council, never mind the fact he makes the BNP look like the Natural Law Party.
Davis will be comfortably re-elected but it will have made no difference whatsoever to the success or failure of the bill, which would have been blocked by the Lords anyway. This by-election is a con-job and i’m amazed how many have already fallen for it.
Bearing in mind even those who support DD actions think there is a touch of maddness about it, how can Cameron be anything other than supportive of the message and the bravery of the man, but cautious about the ‘mad’ aspect of it.
Its what you would expect of a leader. ie the caution, not the maddness.
Howver emotional the public become, there is a seperation betwenn them and the voting membership.
In the long run, assummimg DD wins, he could become a thorn if popular support and his ego cause him to do this own thing alot/go off mesdsage etc. buthe is less of a leadership threat now than ever.
314 - Police type dramas aren’t really my type of thing I’m afraid, though I liked Life on Mars (I think the fantastical elements are what I look for!).
Anyway, back to the depressing state of UK political discourse.
Isn’t it an essential ingredient of a bribe that it should be secret? And involve exercise of the power of an office of some kind to obtain a private benefit, other than a legitimate reward of work e.g. salary or promotion?
If Davis can create a marseillaise-like spirit of liberty which unites the people then he’ll be on to a populist winner in the short term.
But people will soon see that just as rights are balanced with responsibilities, so liberty is balanced with duty. It’s the same thing, just viewed through a different filter.
310 - I honestly can’t see how any candidate except for the LDs could serious expect to win here. No other candidate (apart from Labour - but only other very different circs) would have the core vote and activists/canvass base to build on in just under a month. DD has his stance: more importantly, his personal record, and the support of the two main parties here, make him impregnable. Voters in this part of the world aren’t fickle.
316. Astroturf alert
315 ….and as I pointed out at #238, at least he showed himself as being capable of taking a decision.
314: Equally fabulous! I like them both for the sheer ambition of their creators’ - Lost in its ever evolving fantasia, The Wire in trying to build a layered social portrait of an entire city. Glorious the both of them.
For all the insults directed at US television (and a lot is dreadful), their dramas makes UK TV look completely amateurish.
Oh no, of course we aren’t heading for any sort of police state.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026496/Pensioners-held-way-airport-protest–inflammatory-T-shirts.html
Re 316, Dodrade “Davis will be comfortably re-elected but it will have made no difference whatsoever to the success or failure of the bill, which would have been blocked by the Lords anyway.”
I could not agree with you less.
Firstly he is changing the debate so that Labour can’t get away with the “The public support it” claptrap, secondly he is likely to increase rather than reduce the number of Labour rebels when it comes back to the House of Commons.
310
Davis will be applauded by many for his courage and in some ways he may gain but as a serious Cabinet figure, he has lost some credibility.
As for Nick Clegg, if he had run they would have risked critisism on many levels and be seen as ‘helping’ Labour.
This is the clearest anti Government/anti politics stance they have taken for some time. There will be downsides, but there always is.
[321] - If Labour were really serious about 42-days, rather than it being a bit of cynical positioning, they could bring in activists from nearby Hull. They would expect to be able to win a lot of support if 69% of the public solidly supported them on the issue - which Davis is making the purpose of the campaign.
Since it is a by-election, Tory voters wouldn’t have to worry about it letting in Labour by voting against their local Tory. They could vote Labour now on this issue and vote a different Tory back in at the GE. They could force the Tory party to come into line with their views on this issue.
That’s all supposing that the public are solidly in favour of 42-days and that Labour truly believe it is the right thing to do. I question both of those, which is why Brown would like to duck out of taking the argument on.
England 307 for 5 from their 50 overs KP 110 not out.
Latest Rasmussen Tracker :
McCain 43% .. Obama 49%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
[325] - Agree with you completely Benedict. I feel that Davis knows what he is doing with this. Brown is lost.
324 - This sort of thing really makes David Davis stance essential.
320. But thats the art of politics. If people see you demonstrate that you are standing up for them and their rights they are far more likely to do their duty by choice. How long that feeling lasts is depends on how long the politicians can demonstrate they are on the people’s side. Given the number of issues that need to be addressed I don’t see that this is necessarily a short-term issue.
This is something that Brown and Labour fail to understand. Instead they try to browbeat and manipulate (in an increasingly transparent manner) and as a result increasing numbers of people are not interested in helping Labour.
New Rasmussen Poll for Arkansas :
McCain 48% .. Obama 39%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/arkansas/election_2008_arkansas_presidential_election
324. Nice one. It’s so easy to find examples like this which demonstrate decisively that the powers that be cannot be trusted not to abuse the power granted them.
The police are no longer ‘Dixon of Dock Green’ characters, but are instead run by PC-obsessed careerists like ’sir’ Ian Blair. Meanwhile today’s politicians consist increasingly of slightly unhinged armchair revolutionaries and immature control freaks.
Neither the state nor most of its servants are the friends of the public, quite the reverse. Go Davis!
Is the Henley by-election definitely going to happen? I saw somewhere - Prospect I think - a rumour that the Tories were trying to persuade Boris to change his mind and not stand down in Henley.
And then what happens to the bet I’ve just put on? Does it stay till the general election? That seems to be what ‘all bets stand run or not’ means. Or does it lapse, and I get my money back?
re 331, Timothy “[325] - Agree with you completely Benedict. I feel that Davis knows what he is doing with this. Brown is lost.”
Crucially, so has Murdoch.
336 - erm it is happening, you cannot unresign.
326- benedict- I did answer you the other day. I have no plans to attend the barbecue this year.
I wasn’t being rude.
309. Has there been a Henley poll?
Incidentally this is how I put the reaction so far on my blog:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2008/06/david-davis-cynics-to-left-of-him.html
Borrowing from the charge of the Light brigade!
333 In order for the public to regain its British liberties, it will have shoulder more responsibility and be more dutiful.
That means looking out for neighbours, the old, the infirm, chasing muggers, not breaking the law when no-one’s looking, etc, ect. That’s the cost-side of Davis’ argument, which hasn’t been discussed yet, but will I hope.
There’s the obvious problem of freeloaders - people who take liberties with doing their duty.
David Davis is finished as a serious politician. He selfishly put his ego before the values of the Conservative party, and now he will have to suffer the consequences of life as a politician on the backbenches.
There is nothing more important to this country than securing a Conservative election victory in the next two years. I’m disappointed Davis lost sight of this reality yesterday. But now we have to move on together without him.
I urge my fellow Conservatives to keep this by-election in the shadows and offer only marginal public support should media attention require it.
Stay focused on spreading our warm message of lower taxes, reducing the upper rate of income tax, addressing capital gains concerns, abolition of the minimum wage, income support, and zero-tolerance on crime.
Together we can ensure this country is once again returned as Conservative Britain. A proud Conservative nation where wealth generation is looked upon as an achievement, not a crime, and a nation that rewards the most privileged, educated and talented individuals with financial wealth beyond their wildest dreams.
Re 339, Tyson, “326- benedict- I did answer you the other day. I have no plans to attend the barbecue this year.”
Shame. Would have been nice to chat face to face.
“I wasn’t being rude.”
I would never assume you were! (I did miss your answer though!)
326. “Firstly he is changing the debate so that Labour can’t get away with the “The public support it” claptrap, secondly he is likely to increase rather than reduce the number of Labour rebels when it comes back to the House of Commons.”
As I said previously, the by-election cannot be credibly seen as a referendum on 42 days no matter what Davis says. People vote for someone for their own reasons, not necessarily those the candidates themselves define as the main ones. It would not surprise me if in private most of H&H Tory voters supported 42 day detention, but they certainly won’t consider it important enough to withdraw their support for him. The Labour brand is so toxic now Davis could be campaigning to send street urchins back up chimneys and he’s still be re-elected comfortably.
Even if it was accepted as a de facto referendum on 42 day detention, it’s only one seat, not the voice of the nation. And the re-election of a senior tory in a safe conservative seat is hardly going to change any Labour MP’s minds at this stage.
Moderation points
There are apparently two people posting today as Tory Boy. One appears to to the regular on the site - the other is a newcomer.
Would the person using Conservatives.com as his URL please find another name?
We also have poster called ANON with a fake email address. Your posts are being held up.
344 “And the re-election of a senior tory in a safe conservative seat is hardly going to change any Labour MP’s minds at this stage.”
No but a few quid might….. that is after all how 42 days got passed.
Stop filtering my posts.
286. I’m not sure about the whole administration, but Bush undoubtedly dodged the draft, which makes some of his painting of the Democrats hugely hypocritical.
Why is Henley so quiet??
By looking at the statistics of the ComRes poll for both Scotland and England and Wales, you get the following breakdown:
CONSERVATIVE 405
LABOUR 181
LIBERAL DEMOCRAT 30
NATIONALIST 14
CON MAJORITY 160
86. Well seeing as they just refused to extend funding for veterans education options, I think people have good reason to doubt them. In terms of giving service to troops, the Republicans aren’t any more committed than the Democrats. What they are committed to is paying huge amounts of government money to military equipment producers, probably because such contractors pay large amount of money to GOP re-election campaigns.
And I reckon a guy that won three bravery medals in Vietnam has earned the right to say whatever he wants about the actions of the military, providing he isn’t leaking national secrets.
Does anyone have any news from Henley?
351 - Friends who have been suggest it won’t be too interesting. Suggest the result will be Conservatives first with 50% or thereabouts. Lib Dems second with about 25% and the rest filling in behind. Once I have been I shall see if I agree.
On Davis, just been mulling it over. DC gets to observe from a distance and gauge the exact depth of public opinion on civil liberties when presented as a campaigning issue. He also gets to see where Labour will go with their ’soft on terror/crime’ angle and he gets to watch the Lib Dems strain at the leash whilst Clegg holds them back on this one only. By allowing Davis off the leash himself and by providing tactically sound support where practical he can bask in the glow should it go that way or stand off and tut if the public turn against Davis (unlikely, the guy is running on principles ostensibly and people like that regardless of their support or otherwise for the position).
I see no downside for Cameron unless Davis uses it to launch a power grab which is highly unlikely from the back benches (if not promoted on re-election) as he has clearly set himself apart form the rest of the party by acting dramatically, and alone.
What I do see is Cameron playing smart politics with Davis principles - smart enough for it not to cause him damage. And I see nothing wrong with that - DC has to hold together a coalition for change across the board, Davis needs to cobble together a single-issue coalition for 4 weeks whilst feelings run high, and inflict maximum damage on Labour whilst he does it.
I imagine the parting shot from DC at their meeting was along the lines of..
‘I think you’re a fool David but if you have to do this, make sure you leave plenty of scars.’
341.Benedict White
I would very interested in your view of the Murdoch press on this. Clearly the Brown’s and the Blair’s were at the party.
Do you think Murdoch was serious and may now have cold feet?
345 - I’m strating to come round to the registration argument, Mike - at least so that we can see comments coming from unregistered people. Not so much to stop these petty squabbles; but because our elected representatives who post openly oculd be damaged by a cleverly malicious forgery; and ramping can occur at the climax of any major event.
Re 344, Dodrade “Even if it was accepted as a de facto referendum on 42 day detention, it’s only one seat, not the voice of the nation. And the re-election of a senior tory in a safe conservative seat is hardly going to change any Labour MP’s minds at this stage.”
Sorry, I think many Labour MP’s are feeling under pressure on this and David Davis has increased this.
Also the actual by election may not be a representative test but the opinion polls on the issue will move.
353. I have to agree there is a great deal the Conservatives can gain from this if they play it right.
Labour, on the other hand can only hope that this goes away as quickly as possible. If it catches fire Labour are deep in the mire again
Re 354, Sally C “I would very interested in your view of the Murdoch press on this. Clearly the Brown’s and the Blair’s were at the party.
Do you think Murdoch was serious and may now have cold feet?”
Well, the Murdoch press seem to want to say anything extreme on this issue, I am sure that Murdoch would have wanted MacKenzie to stand but has realised he is on to a loser so has got cold feet.
Shame really, I would like to have seen the Murdoch press smashed over this one.
Quick question. Yesterday, the Three Line Whip blog was advertising some killer denunciation of David Davis by a ’senior Tory’ in the Sunday Telegraph. I was a touch sceptical myself, but who was it?
The advantage for Labour is if they can successfully paint the Tories as being ’soft on terror’.
Davis clearly isn’t.
The crux is the difference between the treatment of the innocentand the proven guilty.
He/the Tories need to make sure that isn’t lost. If anyone can do that presumably DD can as it seems he would hang them if they were proven guilty.
347. And of course Cheney got FIVE deferments, after he took six years to get through a four year degree, by which point he was 26 and ineligible to be drafted. So he’s either a dodge-drafter or just stupid.
359. Apparently Liam Fox called Davis “selfish” for taking his stand. Though actually, he didn’t….
359
Liam Fox. I think the Telegraph might have oversold it.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/06/the-telegraph-1.html
347. By ‘dodging the draft’ you mean training to fly supersonic interceptor jets used to defend the US by shooting down Soviet missiles?
When Bush enlisted in the Air National Guard (or as it was called 147th Fighter Interceptor Group) national guard pilots were actively involved in combat missions in vietnam.
By the time Bush fully qualified as an f102 pilot, these planes had been withdrawn from combat theatres of war, and used to provide defence to the USA.
Flying planes in the US was certainly less dangerous then running around vietnam with a gun, but dont lets pretend that he was just some rich kid avoiding the draft by doing office work.
358 Think Rupert made a throwaway remark (based on Kelvin’s Red Mist party) that was a jocular suggestion but his acolytes like Mackenzie took it at face vale and rushed to do their Master’s bidding - then the Word was handed down from the Murdoch Mansion “don’t be silly”.
362 - Was it Melissa “I’m flying a” Kite who wrote the story?
356. “Sorry, I think many Labour MP’s are feeling under pressure on this and David Davis has increased this.
Also the actual by election may not be a representative test but the opinion polls on the issue will move.”
Labour MP’s had their chance last week, if they didn’t rebel then they’re not likely to grow a spine now.
As to whether the by-election campaign could shift wider public opinion on the 42 day detention issue, it’s possible. Those who are against it (including myself my the way) certainly feel much stronger on the issue than most of those who are for it. Whilst the majority in favour is high I suspect a lot of it is soft and perhaps could be persuaded otherwise. I am doubtful whether it makes much difference now though. Brown seems oblivious to the fact that even siding with public opinion on this issue is doing him no good in the polls.
“286. I’m not sure about the whole administration, but Bush undoubtedly dodged the draft, which makes some of his painting of the Democrats hugely hypocritical.”
Not just Bush, but Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Ashcroft, Wolfowitz, etc. Same story with senior GOP in Congress, with McConnell/Delay/Lott/ Hastert/Boehner/Gingrich and many others. Also other notable Republicans like Romney/Giuliani.
Other than McCain and Powell, are there any senior Republicans that actually went to Vietnam?
358. Thank you for replying.
I wondered if he was trying to force Brown to put someone up. Less risk for The Sun where a defeat could be blamed on Brown’s unpopularity.
Now he seems to have sensed the wind.
Even if we do not have the pleasure of Kelvin, the intevention has belped DD.
The embarrassing damp squib argument has less traction if big names are in the frame and then back track.
362, 363
Thanks guys. Yes, pure hype. The state of British political journalism is very poor these days.
363. Melissa Kite is quickly becoming the ‘Tokyo Rose’ of contemporary british poltical journalism. Last week she wrote a heavily biased article against Caroline Spelman. This week she tries to stir up more mud. Oh and remember that fantasy she wrote last year about the Shadow Cabinet reshuffle?
364. They weren’t drafted for the war though, and Bush wrote “do not volunteer” on his form.
He also might have qualified as a pilot a lot sooner if he was (a) better than the 500 odd pilots who he leapfrogged in the queue and got higher scores than him and (b) turned up for duty the whole time.
363
I am surprised anyone reads the Telegraph. i gave up some time ago.
373 - it is second to none for sport and foreign news.
365. So wait, Kelv (M) is out?
The Sun will only back a winner (Thatcher, Blair… etc). Mackenzie would lose. So the Sun will not back him. So he won’t run.
374
It may well be, but I don’t like its political stance, and I’m not going to cough up a fiver each week just for sport and foreign news.
I wonder what ‘dirty tricks’ the Government will cook up for the H&H by-election this time; will they stay with the tried and tested top-hat and tailed activist shouting “Posh”?
Or try something new with the likes of public schooled educated Harperson and Balls-Up shouting ‘Chav’?
With GB’s recent record on shafting the low paid, perhaps the latter could be a vote winner!
368. Chuck Hagel. Though he is something of a maverick.
What crap. Fox could have answered “No” to the question “Is he selfish?” Instead, he said “it’s not a collective decision” LOL
:)
Truman: “Are you beaten yet?”
Hirohito: “The war has turned out not necessarily to our advantage..”
375, 376 - It is ludicrous to watch whilst Labour insanely try to get someone to stand in their stead because they do not want to be crucified in a by-election.
YP is, as usual, wrong. The H&H poll was taken AFTER it was made known that the Lib Dems would not be standing (otherwise there would not have been a byelection in the first place).
This poll says nothing about the Liberal Democrats or their standing generally.
FWIW, I found several Conservative voters in Henley who were seriously considering voting Lib Dem on the basis of what Nick Clegg has done. He has taken an anti-traditional-politics stand too, you see. So Richard T is not the only one.
379: Ahh, good call.
Ironically, Hagel is one of the few Republicans calling for an Iraq withdrawal. Meanwhile, the draft-dodging rest of them are happy for others to fight their wars.
Marr: “Why are we seeing this torrent of abuse against you from fellow Conservative MPs?”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7455424.stm
9. Sorry to go far back on the thread but Coldstone’s jibe about Territorial’s is just shocking. In the past years since conscription stopped Territorials have been a major part of this countries defence force. A quick look at this article</a. might show some of what the Territorial’s are doing currently.
One of our relations was awarded the MBE last year for his service in the Territorials (after service in the army) particularly for service abroad in various hotspots including Iraq, Kosovo etc.
A quick glance through the roll of those killed in Iraq shows at least 5 of these to have Territorials.
Re David Davis, Who Dares Wins.
How can Davis accuse Labour of “gutlessness” when he only went ahead with his fandango once he was assured his principle challengers were neutralised?
385. Please can we have a comment preview facility!
386
Because they are perhaps?
347: Making a false allegation when ‘not sure’ seems a tad silly.
387 - i’m with you there. When you read what you thought you had posted…………..
385
I didn’t jibe against them, (although they were a pain when they clogged up the NAAFI bar, which they were very keen to do) I merely pointed out that seant wasn’t quite correct referring to Davis as SAS, he was in their territorial branch, not quite the same thing.
p.s.
My father served in a Territoral Regiment during WW2
pps
I joined up straight from school, and if I hadn’t ruptured my eardrum, (due to a silly prank, I was prone to those) I’d have probably done the full whack!!
re 386. Rod - you are about 48 hours out of date. The media narrative has moved.
392. I don’t follow media narratives, and there’s no evidence to back up your statement anyhow, Mike. Opinion is sharply divided and will remain so.
I trust my own instincts, for good or ill…
375 Almost certain Kelvin won’t stand.
He’s out of touch and would fail miserably. The Scotsman had a killer quote from him on his target reader when he was Sun editor “He’s the bloke you see in the pub, a right old fascist, wants to send the wogs back, buy his poxy council house, he’s afraid of the unions, afraid of the Russians, hates the queers and the weirdos and drug dealers.”
Replace Russians with Muslims and that’s probably close to Mackenzie’s target audience still.
DD has stated that he is standing on the issue of the surveillance society. This includes ID cards, CCTV, finger-printing of children, snooping by councils on members of the public for minor misdemeanours, medical databases, etc, etc, as well as 42 days. A long, long list.
Labour has a problem in finding a candidate who will defend the Government’s line in all these matters, and do so convincingly.
If as seems likely, Labour don’t put up a candidate, DD will have essentially won the argument on surveillance, long before a single vote is cast.
380. If Fox had said ‘he isn’t selfish’, that would have been to get involved in personal support for Davis which is not his business. It was a ‘do you beat your wife?’ question.
Not reported in UK media, there are three other countries where Lisbon is unlikely to be ratified besides Ireland. LINK.
re 393. The media narrative is what drives much of public opinion in the country - you ignore it at your peril if you trying to predict things as I do. So from the mass of hostile criticism on Thursday it’s moved on to David the valiant.
Maybe it will all get forgotten and go down as a little footnote in your excellent Wikipedia by election pages. But the mood has changed and Labour has a problem with the Gibsons and Marshall-Andrews’s of this world.
394. Yep Mackenzie’s manifesto might be something like ‘prison for strikers, bring back the cat, kick out the….’ [err enough]
394 I agree, KM propably won’t stand, and this will put more pressure on Brown to field a candidate, as he will no longer be able to argue that Kelvin’s name on the ballot box would turn the By-Election into a joke contest.
If I’m right, in true Shadsy style, I’d say it’s 5/6 either way on Labour fielding a candidate or not.
I guess Brown has to decide by tomorrow, probably based on what The Times leader has to say, or he’ll face further charges of being a ditherer. It seems to me Labour has little to lose by standing - they were a distant third last time anyway, whereas he will be accused of cowardice should he duck out altogether.
397. “…go down as a little footnote in your excellent Wikipedia by election pages…”
It’s in there already due to one of my little helpers, Mike.
However I think we need a new category… “by-elections intended to make pointless populist gestures..”
397. It seems to me there is a very good chance that 30-40 Labour MPs are going to become more or less detached from their colleagues over the next couple of years. Quite a few will either be a) retiring or b) know Labour is heading for a massive drubbing and therefore have no reason to stick to the party line any longer. Discipline is going to collapse.
The parallels with 1976-1979 may become even more pronounced than they already are, and an early forced election is a distinct possibility.
401. “… and an early forced election is a distinct possibility.”
I hope so.
It’s all very well wanting Gordon and his chums to slowly rot over the next two years so as to ensure an even bigger Tory majority, but in the meantime a lot of people are going to pay for Lab ineptitude with money and in some cases hardship that at best could be avoided or at worst last for a shorter period.
I don’t particularly like Cameron and Clegg is a nullity, but I want the present governmental oafs out asap.
We need a fresh start. If it doesn’t work at least we will have tried something, and something, anything, is better than this parcel of paralysed weasels obsessed by counter-productive targets and pointless verbiage.
395.”If as seems likely, Labour don’t put up a candidate, DD will have essentially won the argument on surveillance, long before a single vote is cast.”
I would agree with that analysis, every time that Labour try to defend their position on this issue some journalist will remind them that they did not bother to defend it in this by election. Clegg has neatly maneuvred himself to be able to comment on the campaign despite not fielding a candidate. Cameron was clever enough to leave himself plenty of wriggle room to turn and campaign for Davis.
And Brown….well, he spent the 24 hours dithering before he came out and announced it was a stunt. He has now spent the weekend desperately hoping someone will come along and stand who will back up his claim while spiking DD’s guns, and all the time we are being told that the party probable won’t stand a candidate, but won’t decide until Monday or later.
So contrast that with the two other leaders who came out in front of the camera’s within a couple of hours of DD’s statement and clearly stated their intentions. I do think that it was a particularly clever manoeuvre from Cameron to manage to convey a least three different messages and positions to cover him and the party in one statement. That is what Labour are so sadly missing right now.
Taking the evening off from politics, so just a passing remark: Austin Mitchell is *always* having a laugh. He’d be much entertained by the comments here taking his words seriously.
Re 404, Nick Palmer “Taking the evening off from politics, so just a passing remark: Austin Mitchell is *always* having a laugh. He’d be much entertained by the comments here taking his words seriously.”
Yes, I know! But saving Gordon for the nation? I ask you