Feeds

back to article Top Tory resigns on principle over 42 days bill

Shadow home secretary David Davis has resigned from Parliament in protest at the Commons' passing of government measures to allow police to detain suspects for 42 days without charge. Davis will fight a by-election in his constituency of Haltemprice and Howden on the issue of detention. He will stand without the full support of …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Go

Go for it!

Good on yer, my son. Not often I get to back a Tory, but for once one of them is doing the right thing.

Peter

0
0

Wow!

And I was considering many attempts at trumped up charges, to make a careeer out of it.

...dash!

0
0
Thumb Up

Hmm

"Davis said he believed the work of politicians was a "noble endeavour" up until yesterday but viewed the Terrorism Bill ......."

Strange really as before I read this article I had thought the (recent) work of politicians was "the scrabbling of unprincipled scum"..........

0
0
Thumb Up

Good for IDS, shame about the Tories...

It's great to see a senior Tory highlighting the police state that this country has become and actually doing something about it.

However, I can't hep thinking that IDS's course of action seems uncannily close to that of Edward Heath calling a general election over the miners' strike.

I hope he wins handsomely, but the elephant in the room is "If re-elected, what will he then be able to do that he can't do now?".

It's also very sad that the Tory Establishment is already distancing itself, stating that it's a personal decision, rather than giving firm assurances that they will repeal 42 days and dismantle all the rest of NuLabour's Surveillance Society.

0
0
Thumb Up

1 down

600 or so to go.

0
0
Bronze badge
Paris Hilton

So let's get this straight...

Incredible - a Tory standing up against Labour in support of civil liberties, in protest at a bill which passed, despite an enormous rebellion, due to the corrupted support of a few supposedly principled Northern Irish MPs.

Politics got even more confused yesterday. How long before the BNP set up a immigrant support centre to help educated refugees seeking British nationality to get to work and help us prop up our faltering economy?

Paris, of course, cos she's a whole lot less confused than those leading our country.

0
0
Coat

Be interesting to see...

...whether he has correctly judged the temperature of joe public on this . Some of the rabid hang 'em and flog 'em lot might thing 42 days is not enough.

I don't know much about his constituency but any opponents will only have to whip up a bit of paranoia over furrners trying to blow them up and he could come unstuck. The biggest downside of that is that Gord can claim to have the popular support. Which might get him the impetus to try again if(when?) the upper house chuck this in the bin.

Time to get in some popcorn and watch the fun...

I'll get me coat and leave before I go into full on Twat-O-Tron mode ;)

0
0
Unhappy

BBC Coverage... shameful

Typical of that snivelling Robinson numpty - sidestepping the issues being presented (Tony Benn's comment about being in Parliament the day "Magna Carta was abolished sets the tone I think) and instead concentrating on how Davis vs. Cameron is 'just like' Brown vs. Blair. I think he would have been better just keeping schtum for once. I wonder what the real news will say about it? Hopefully looking forward to Mr Snow this evening...

I being to wonder if Nick Robinson actually understands that politics actually affects people lives and not just viewer ratings.

0
0
Thumb Up

Good Lord!

Ethics? Principles? In a Tory politician? Have I fallen asleep and woken up in some strange pseudo-alternative version of the world?

At least one of them seems to have a pair, then. Get's my vote next time.

0
0
Coat

Bye bye and thank you for the fishes

And the answer to life, universe and where really "Al Qaida" is...

42

May Douglas Adams rest in peace

My towel please (using the coat icon as there is none for a towel).

0
0
Alert

Tory? Principles? What?

I have nothing coherent to say.

0
0
IT Angle

Brilliant...

It's only a shame the Labour Rebels won't follow.

But it's a good day for democracy.

IT? None but who cares!

0
0
Stop

Conspiracy or what?

When i tried to go the conservative website for more information on David Davis

http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=people.person.page&personID=4881

I get this error

"Site Temporarily Unavailable

We are currently carrying out server maintenance. Please check back later."

And when i follow the wikepedia link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Davis_%28British_politician%29

I get this error

"You typed in 'www.david-davis.co.uk'.

This is either a KEYWORD or

INVALID WEB ADDRESS"

Obviously i have tried typing the direct url but same response. Given the reason David Davis resigned, Conspiracy or what?

P.S You defo get my vote Mr Davis

0
0
Thumb Up

Good on him...

It's a fairly safe seat, but it's pushed the issue into the open, and we'll have to see how the public sides.... I for one fully support him.

0
0
Paris Hilton

There's novelty

Tory, MP and principle all in the same sentence!

Paris cos she never got banged up for 42 days, banged maybe...

Efros

0
0
Ash
Thumb Up

Good, and bad

Wow, i'm amazed. Good on David Davis.

Now the two main parties are so centrist and close to each other in policy that a politician has to resign from his party to hold any vaguely radical (ie non-murdoch) idea.

0
0

A politician with principles?

I never suspected David Davis was in any way a man of principle. He's gone up a great deal in my opinion because of this.

That said...it's equally possible he's well aware he stands a very strong chance of being re-elected. I wonder if there's any real risk to his seat.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

<no title>

So he has resigned from his party because they support his views on a particular topic. Must be a first.

Anyway I'd lay odds on that he'll win his safe seat back again. After invvoling all his constituents in the hassle of an unnecessary by-election. Still he got his face in the papers.

0
0
Thumb Up

Well done David

We all have had enough of this Stalinist Labour Government that wants to get rid of every personal freedom and right, back dated to the beginning of time. If I were in his constituency he certainly would have my vote.

A note to Mr G. Brown:

I am not a F%^&£)g number, I am a free man !

0
0

Bill has the support of 60% the public acording to latest polls........

I bet if those 60% were asked the question "Would you mind being locked up for up to 42 days whilst the police desperately search around every part of you life, your family and friends for a reason why they arrested you in the first place”, the percentages might lessen somewhat.

I'm reminded of Lincoln's quote about how, when he heard someone extoll the virtues of slavery, he felt the urge to see it practiced on them.

(I don't know where these 60% live 'cos I have not met one yet)

0
0
Boffin

non Reg Readers

While Reg Readers are familiar with the issues around Surveilance Britain, much of the GBP isn't. It really isn't very far up their list of things to find out about, certainly nowhere near who's being evicted from Big Brother. They have mostly swallowed the Daily Fail propaganda about Reds (I mean Islamists) under the bed and feel we have to "do something about the terrorists who threaten our way of live".

What DD has done here is to precipitate a single issue bye election - a straw poll on civil liberties. What fascinates me is how the MSM will cover it.

0
0

Shows how crap the BBC are at reporting.

At last someone fighting against this NuLab Nazi Government continually removing our rights all in the name of "anti terrorism". So how does "Aunty" report it - internal fighting within the Tories? WTF? This is not just over 42 days detention without trial, but ID cards, CCTV Surveillance society.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

< no title >

<begin rant>

Hmm okay may it is a loss of civil liberties BUT how would you feel if the law hadn't passed and some "brainwashed" fundamentalist came along and blew up your office / town centre and killed innocent people and it emerged that hmm we could have gotten him if we had more time, we kept working and proved it but too late to prevent this...

That is how I see it, as for the Ulster MP's voting the way the voted - you forget they've all lived through not knowing if they will wake up the next day or when someone's going to try and blow them up or shot them because of who they are..

He shouldn't have resigned really he had a point to try and make, no-one listened so the toys got thrown out the pram and he resigned.

I mean let me think surely MP's are meant to vote for / against something based on what they believe in, how their constituents want them to as after all IF you voted them in, they have a duty to listen or is that just all lies and they just do as they please..

The labour rebels are just idiots, some may say GB is an idiot too at least he's trying to do something to protect YOU the public at large..

Hmm having seen MP's on TV, I've seen school kids better behaved.

<end rant>

0
0
W

"Robinson numpty"

Ex-ITV, innit. 'Nuff said.

As for Davis. Kudos for him for giving the electorate a chance to give Labour a good kicking in the polls. Woulda been nice to see him defect to LD or Indie, but that's probably a bit much to ask seeing as his party opposed the 42 days. Still no chance of me voting red OR blue though.

Meanwhile, I'm not the world's biggest Diane Abbott fan (to say the least) but her speech yesterday deserves to be read/heard by as many folk as possible. See http://tinyurl.com/5qrrfg - I've del.icio.us-ed the article and stuck the link in my facebook status. This Week should be an interesting watch tonight (assuming she's on it).

0
0
M
Alert

Classic Catch 22

I think this is very interesting.

People are saying that the best way for Labour to combat this is to not field a candidate, however Davis will say that Labour don't even support their own 'important' right wing policies.

If Labour do field a candidate (and in all probability lose), then there will be a clear perceived 'mandate from the masses' that they don't agree with the erosion of civil liberties.

Davis will then go back to being Shadow Home Secretary, now an honourable and principled MP.

Fascinating stuff.

0
0
Thumb Up

Good on him.

At least there's one who'll stand up for his constituents.

0
0
Stop

He actually believes in what he is doing

You might find it hard not to be sceptical about anything said or done by politicians in this country, but in this case you'd be wrong. The man truly believes in what he is standing for as his past actions and statements will confirm. I saw him speak in private on the erosion of freedoms in this country. Dave Cameron's reaction unfortunately indicates that he's not nearly as committed to freedom as his former home secretary.

His actions might be seen as fairly safe because he'll stand uncontested, but how else does he make a dramatic statement? He could resign entirely but that would be foolish, as any of us can attest once you are on the outside you have no voice at all and he's not going to change this country sitting in retirement at home.

0
0
Thumb Up

Good on him

At least he has principles.

Sad-sack Brown hasn't, even with the extreme arm-twisting & bribery that went on behind the scenes, they only managed to scrape through by 9 votes, yet still claim it as a "Major Victory". Pah.

The sooner he's out the better.

The sooner The Lords reject this, also the better.

0
0
Unhappy

sorry Grandad

They get my vote.

0
0
Thumb Up

David Davis

Man who was in the SAS, has principles and a funny name!

Legend!

0
0
Coat

Re: So let's get this straight...

How do you know the world has gone mad?

It's when the world's best golfer is black, the world's best rapper is white, the French accuse the Americans of being snobbish, and Germany refuses to go to war.

Add to that - when a Tory shadow chancellor has principles and stand for civil liberties.

Me coat...

0
0
Stop

@<no title>

No, he resigned from Parliament, not the Tory party... mind you it does say 'without the backing of his party" ... but I suspect this may be incorrect. The BBC says he has full support from his local party and some support from Cameron.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@Be interesting to see...

"Some of the rabid hang 'em and flog 'em lot might thing 42 days is not enough..."

Do they feel strong enough to vote against the Tory on this issue? I reckon the people who think this is appalling would vote against Labour on this issue, but that the people who agree don't feel strongly enough to go against every other reasons to vote these fookers out.

So, you're a man, you view internet p0rn0, Jacqui's just made you a potential arrestable target for viewing the wrong type, but you agree with 42 days vs 28. Which issue counts more to you? The fact you can be locked up, and put on a sex offenders register, or the fact people can be detained for an extra two weeks before being charge (or not). I reckon the one that criminalized you is more important to you.

Your kid is a teenager, and you suspect he smokes pot, although he denies it. Jacqui's made possession a criminal offence. But you agree with the 42 days vs 28 days. Does that make you happier that your kid is at risk of a criminal record over 'lethal' pot, knowing it's not lethal? Does that outweigh the 42 day issue?

Do you want to see your teenage boy on a sex offenders register with a criminal record for viewing internet porn? Do you think that's fair? You agree with the 28 vs 42 day limit, but does it outweigh the other issue?

Have you ever been stopped and searched under the anti-terror stop and search laws? Do you think anyone who has been stopped, would ever vote to let the police detain people without charge? Would they ever vote Labour again?

The cumulative effect of this crap is to make Labour unelectable. As long as Cameron represents a change, then he'll win. I reckon Davis is pretty safe on this.

I bet Jacqui Smith would never have the courage to do the same. She and Brown must know they're unelectable. They should have had a proper leadership campaign instead of letting Blair choose his successor.

0
0

@AC

Erm.. he resigned from Parliament not his party...

0
0

Well, that's a first...

Watched him give his resignation speech outside the Commons today and caught myself nodding at every word. My ghast is flabbered. A Tory with principles, who'd have thunk it?

0
0
Gates Horns

It's a trick... get an axe!

It's got the LibDems to not stand against him, and libertarian tradionally-Labour voting bods on his side. He'll be elected on a landslide and back to being a c*nt immediately.

OK, I admire the principle... but it's a Tory dammit!

0
0
3x2

Good start

Hopefully might persuade a few more will do the same.

Switching off the Twat-O-Tron for a moment it really isn't terrorists I fear any more - it's my own government. Clowns in charge of live ammunition. Creating a State that the Ministerium für Staatssicherheit would be embarrassed to be part of.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Leadership move?

So while I disagree with the whole 42 day detention thing, I applaud David on his principled move.

That said, when he gets re-elected, he's going to have more Kudos with th public and fellow Cons than Cameron, is that the real objective here?

0
0

@EmoSys

if you are that desperate!!!

http://web.archive.org/web/20070814175052/http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=people.person.page&personID=4881

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@ Ranty AC

"...how would you feel if the law hadn't passed and some "brainwashed" fundamentalist came along and blew up your office / town centre and killed innocent people and it emerged that hmm we could have gotten him if we had more time, we kept working and proved it but too late to prevent this..."

You obviously don't understand the process. If they knew about such a clear and present threat, they could arrest the intended perpetrator and (before yesterday) they'd have 28 days to find something, *anything* to charge 'em with and justify holding them. In other words, if they hadn't got enough evidence to even charge after 28 days they subject would be released automatically.

In my opinion, 28 days, even, is too much time. If the police had suspicions, a fortnight should be plenty to find something confirming *some* of them. There have so far been *no* cases inn which more than 28 days have been needed to find enough evidence to lay charges against the suspect, after which they can be remanded in custody. Why extend it by another fortnight? The criteria for charging someone are no where near as stringent as the criteria for finding them guilty, and the Police can work on getting the additional evidence once they've been charged.

Your example doesn't even have the terrorist in custody. How the fuck would extending the time the police could've held 'em have stopped the murderer going off when they did? Get your head out of your arse.

0
0

@AC

>Hmm okay may it is a loss of civil liberties BUT how would you feel if the law hadn't passed and some "brainwashed" fundamentalist came along and blew up your office / town centre and killed innocent people and it emerged that hmm we could have gotten him if we had more time, we kept working and proved it but too late to prevent this...

On balance, I would be absolutely fine - I feel that any victim of a terrorist is a sad, terrible, dreadful loss, but they're also martyrs in the name of freedom.

I've been on the receiving end - I have had my office/town-centre blown up and had innocent people killed, including a friend. A longer detention period would have done absolutely nothing to stop the Bishopsgate bomb, or July 7th on the tube, both of which I was very close to.

I would challenge you to mention a single terrorist case in the UK where if the police/intelligence services had been able to detain someone for longer, they would not have been able to commit the crime.

The best defense against terrorism is not to alter what you stand for, and I stand for liberty.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

<no title>

party / parliament / slip of the keyboard / makes no real odds.

Resigned when his party was in agreement with him. One could understand someone resigning from government when disagreeing with proposed laws, but that is a different matter.

Interesting "Catch 22" situation noted by M though. But there again, surely the public aren't so daft as to be fooled by that? There again, they might be (unless the polls that claim support for this law resulted from just asking cabinet members).

0
0

WOW! A politician with principle!?

Aren't they a dead species? The last politician with principle I can remember was also a Tory, Michael Heseltine who resigned a cabinet post in protest over the then Tory government's dealings with the whole Westland affair.

Anyway, good on the guy, It's a pity that no one else had the courage to do this, perhaps then the legislation he's protesting wouldn't have been passed?

You know, it's a real pity that our politicians no longer view their jobs as roles of statesmanship. Time was when more of the people going into politics did so for reasons of duty, or a feeling of wanting to make things better. Now it seems as though most simply want power. Curiously, I think that is what makes the House of Lords in the UK such a great balance to Parliament. Most of the folks there already have all the power they need, or were born to it. So their personal agenda is somewhat more based in duty and care that those who are making a career in the halls of power...

0
0

Ulster Unionists

Why does everyone pick on the DUP when there were 306 other scumbags inthe same lobby as them, the vast majority of them Labour MPs? Why does the 9 at one end of the line get all the flak and the 306 in front get by on "oh, well, we knew THEY'D sell the country down the river"?

0
0
Flame

@AC

'how would you feel if the law hadn't passed and some "brainwashed" fundamentalist came along and blew up your office / town centre and killed innocent people and it emerged that hmm we could have gotten him if we had more time, we kept working and proved it but too late to prevent this...'

So, they'd arrest someone AFTER an atrocity and need to lock them up for 42 days to find some evidence? Can you really not see any problem with that?

0
0
Thumb Down

@ Ranty AC

"...how would you feel if the law hadn't passed and some "brainwashed" fundamentalist came along and blew up your office / town centre and killed innocent people and it emerged that hmm we could have gotten him if we had more time, we kept working and proved it but too late to prevent this..."

The same way as I felt when the Hungerford massacre happened. It was a really bad thing, but not an excuse to deprive every person in the country of some of their freedom.

Peter

0
0
Thumb Down

Expensive Stnut

And how much will this stunt cost the tax payer?

0
0
Silver badge

Come on Tony McNulty

Home Office minister Tony McNulty should stand down from his seat; immediately announce he's the Labour candidate and will also be fighting the campaign on the 42-day issue. Then we can see how the arguments really stack up.

The prospect of seeing McNulty (a man with the face and personality of a cat's slapped arse) being bulldozed by David Davis would be a pleasure.

Labour is screwed on this one.

Today was going to be the first day of the PM's fightback, but now it's dominated by DD and the botched vote over 42-days.

And it doesn't get much better for them. If Labour choose to fight the election; they will lose (they came third at the last general election) AND they face the prospect of having 42 days in the news *every* day (Guido is reporting that the Labour candidate for the seat opposes 42-day detention, so that'd be fun).

If they don't fight then the Tories will make hay about Gordon Brown being afraid to face the voters.

Jeez, I'm living in a World where I'm wishing all the best to a Eurosceptic Tory.

Help!

Just tell me Paris is still beautiful.

0
0
Thumb Up

I fully agree

The man deserves a medal. To all those suggesting this is some attempt to challenge David Cameron, perhaps you've missed the part where Cameron has led the Conservatives to their biggest lead over Labour for ages. Cameron is not even remotely at risk of losing a leadership challenge.

Davis on the other hand, clearly feels strongly enough about this to effectively take a demotion from the front bench. I support Cameron, but also support this decision based on principle. It doesn't fit the electioneering plan of the Conservatives, but some things are more important than winning elections.

I hope he wins by a landslide, and Brown can stop gloating about how 60% of the electorate support the extension to 42 days. What this issue needs is a proper debate - and David Davis is forcing that debate, and we should thank him for that.

0
0
Silver badge
Flame

@AC

"Hmm okay may it is a loss of civil liberties BUT how would you feel if the law hadn't passed and some "brainwashed" fundamentalist came along and blew up your office / town centre and killed innocent people and it emerged that hmm we could have gotten him if we had more time, we kept working and proved it but too late to prevent this..."

You are a moron.

Detention without trial does not prevent people blowing things up; it just turns the state into a terrorist. In the UK it was introduced as an attempt to deal with terrorism in Northern Ireland. Some of the terrorists in Northern Ireland were funded by Americans - NORAID - which made them "freedom fighters" to some people. "Freedom fighters" such as the "contras" are okay as they are not brainwashed or fundamentalist and the relatives of any they kill are bound to understand. Neither are the twats who think it's fine to blow up doctors who carry out abortions. Now, hand over your weapons and leave the rest of the world in peace!

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.