I am glad Nick Clegg is having nothing whatsoever to do with the by-election in David Davis' seat. This is high camp politics.
David Davis wants to show everyone what a hero he is and what wonderfully liberal people those modern, caring, cuddly Tories are, so he is using taxpayers' money and the goodwill of the people in Haltemprice and Howden to do it. It's a disgrace. The Speaker of the House of Commons should send him an invoice for the publicity he will enjoy during the by-election campaign.
It's throwing the toys out of the pram to get the attention of nanny.
Yes, David has been vocal in his opposition to 42 days. But I have never sensed from him and the Tories that their approach to the threat of terror would be fundamentally different from that of Labour. Perhaps the fact that this has not been clear is the very reason why he has resigned in order to cause a "comic opera" by-election.
This is an act of petulance aimed less at Labour's terror laws and more at his party colleagues Osbourne and Gove, who opposed his anti-42 days stance until they were quelled (perhaps by the threat of smoke and grenades appropriate to Mr Davis' background).
Davis is now, I presume, duly appointed as Crown Steward and High Bailliff of the Chiltern Hundreds. How appropriately melodramatic. I'd like to see him wearing the bicorn hat and robe appropriate both to that role and the shallowness of this ludicrous act.
UPDATE 15:39: Is Davis standing as an independent in the forthcoming by-election? I haven't seen confirmation of this. I have seen some comments assuming that he must have pledged to do so, in return for Nick Clegg agreeing not to stand a LibDem candidate against him. I believe that the only logical and honourable course for Davis is to stand as an independent. Otherwise his stance makes no sense at all. The whole thing is obviously the result of deep splits in the Tory party.
Update 18:45: Over on The Spectator's Coffee House blog, David Cameron is described as "furious" about Davis' actions.
On Radio 4's PM, Dominic Grieve (the new Conservative Shadow Home Secretary) confirmed that David Davis would stand as a Conservative candidate at the forthcoming Haltemprice and Howden by-election. However, he was equivocal about the national Conservative party's backing. Responding, Eddie Mair, the interviewer, described the position of Davis as a "semi-detached" candidate for the Conservatives. Grieve said that Davis would run his own campaign and not receive national Conservative party financial backing. Grieve said that he (Grieve) and Cameron would attend the campaign to support Davis.
Posts
29 comments:
David Davis's approach would be substantially different to Labour's, to pretend otherwise is rather silly (and seems based in anti-Tory sentiment...)
The rest of the Tory party is another matter, and there are many who'd gladly march through the lobby with Labour...
As for throwing his toys out of the pram - it is getting attention, and that's what's needed.
In today's atmosphere of imperial-presidential government and the subjugation of Parliament to bribes this is a good political move driven by commitment to principle.
I applaud David Davis and wish him all the best.
(also, how much taxpayer's money goes into a by-election - that is money not recycled to Labour through the Unions at least... it must be less than is spent on gimmicks by government which don't get nearly the same level of approbation)
Alistair Darling could deny David Davis's application to be appointed to the office of Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Three Hundreds of Chiltern, which would effectively block the by-election.
"David Davis's approach would be substantially different to Labour's, to pretend otherwise is rather silly (and seems based in anti-Tory sentiment...)
The rest of the Tory party is another matter, and there are many who'd gladly march through the lobby with Labour..."
I agree, which is why Davis standing as an Independent is the only honourable course for him, I believe.
indeed he is standing as an Indy
Perhaps if you stood behind David Davis and applauded what he is doing (like most other mainstream blogs), people mught take you more seriously. You sound like a petulant playground child.
thank you David G. I express my own opinions - I don't seek to copy "mainstream blogs" - whatever they are. It takes about three seconds to see through this.
theChristophe, what's your source for that?
David G: "people mught (sic) take you more seriously"
...Links from Times online and Political betting comments - giving me more hits than I can shake a stick at. If that is not being taken seriously, then I am delighted with it.
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/06/your-david-davi.html
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/06/12/david-davis-resignation-continuation-thread/
the Guardian initially reported it, but they have since changed their story.
See LibDemVoice
Also the Beeb report says:
He said he would be campaigning for Mr Davis in the by-election - but added it would be Mr Davis' own personal campaign and he would receive no financial support from Tory HQ.
Just to confuse matters his updated (post-resignation)Conservative profile has him down as a Parliamentary Candidate...
not the best of days it appears for the Tory media machine
The media are confused about whether Davis is standing as a Conservative or an Independent.
The Telegraph is reporting that Davis will stand as a Conservative.
The Guardian was reporting earlier that he would be standing as an Independent, but they no longer say one way or the other.
Last comment truncated my link add these two together in your browser
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/jun/
12/daviddavis.byelections'
I think the way the tories are acting, is a reason why we should be running in the by-election
Much as I (as a Tory, even) think Davis has thrown his toys out of the pram, must you give succour to the useless Speaker in his hateful attempts to close down any debate unfavourable to Brown, who he has clearly taken under his wing?
Heaven knows the man's smug enough, ruling it out of order any time an MP dares to criticise the PM or talking down to the opposition like some embattled schoolteacher straight out of Molesworth.
I see that idiot home secretary is thrown in the comment about how the Tories are in disarray over this issue, like her party didn't need Ulster members to bail out her own party out, what an utter idiot she is.
Time to sack the Parliament it seems this is just preposterous, Party Politics is dead.
I used to find Politics interesting, I'm somewhere between Tory and Liberal, but I find myself starting to switch off.
I did think that with Mr Bliar out of the way we might make some headway, but Mr Brown has proven he is a dead loss.
The Tories could get in next time but only by default, not by merit. Mr Cameron promised an end to Punch and Judy politics, but now realises that is his best asset so has resorted to type. Mr Clegg, I feel, is the Lib Dems effort at a Mr Cameron, they went for youth and presentation. I suspect under close scrutiny he would start to unravel as well. Such is the 'burden' of the media these days.
Rusty
We must have taken the decision not to stand a candidate very quickly - the news only broke around lunchtime and Simon Hughes seemed to have an email round a couple of hours later.
I don't think we stood a candidate in the Martin Bell seat either? Becoming an Independent when previously a Tory is the biggest PR tricks in politics. He's still a Tory and we should stand against a Tory. It looks awful, like we can't be bothered or can't afford to fight the Tories (or Independent/ex-Tory).
I haven't got the time to blog properly today - can you telk?
:@)
Jo - no we didn't stand against Martin Bell but he was an Independent (and former Young Liberal) while DD is standing as a Tory
£80K to get full attention to the sham politics taking place in the house and the extent to which our civil liberties are being eroded by those we thought were working for us?
Sounds cheap to me
The media and blogs like this seem fixated on how this doesn't fit into lovely politics as usual
I can see how a man acting on principles and firm personal belief would confuse them, he's obviously getting nowhere within the house as Labour resort to bribery and threats, so I can see why he'd take such a step
Mr Davis - I salute you, you are the only man who has come close to convincing me to vote conservative in years
I am all for a stand on principle but I am not sure what a contest with the Monster Raving Loony Party and Murdoch's Millions is likely to achieve. The most likely outcome is a boost in circulation for the Sun.
Surely if he feels so strongly about 42 days he could have waited 23 months and then repealed the law as Conservative Home Secretary. Now, he has no chance to do that.
Completley agree with the sentiments in this post...and the fact that we are positioning ourselves as cheerleaders for Davis in this circus of a by-election is outrageous....Davis never expressed any intention to resign from the Conservative Party and thus is a Conservative candidate as far as I can see....this is going to backfire horifically on Davis, us and our cause
I'm disappointed that after a piece of 'faux' democracy that was the voting of the 42 days affair, that the burbler decides to focus on this issue! Surly the fact it was voted through is of greater weight than DD's bit of posturing.
This 'ego' thing can cut both ways and I feel the blurber himself is guilty of Political sniping.
I was watching the Alan Clark diaries, staring William Hurt. In this episode, he was organising a White Paper about banning animal fur or something. In it, he is told that M.Thatcher PM, didn't want to upset the Canadians on the eve of a visit. He thinks about resigning, but realises he would lose his position he had worked hard at achieving, so he screws the White Paper draft up. He let his ego come before his principles.
Rusty
"he was organising a White Paper about banning animal fur or something"
Fur Trade Labelling, actually.
An interesting comment, Rusty (and it is always mind-widening to consider the "principles" of Alan Clark, who praised what he called the "heroic cruelty" of the Nazis and considered standing as a candidate for the National Front). So, if Clark had done what Davis has done, he would have fought a by-election in Plymouth on the subject of Fur Trade Labelling. That would have been rather bizarre in a constituency more concerned about the future of Devonport Dockyard. Assuming he had won that by-election he would have been isolated on the back benches on his return to parliament. So, the animal rights movement would have lost a powerful advocate in government and Clark would have been powerless to advance that cause on the backbenches. Would good would that have done the cause of animal rights, Rusty?
I am not a Clark advocate, just illustrating a point. If the series was faithful, he didn't resign because he thought he could do a better job in Government for the Fur Trade, he didn't because he didn't want to give up his job.
People have stayed on in Government, thinking better they stay and fight the cause than go and become impotent, Clare Short for instance, but they end-up impotent and looking insincere. Cook, bless him, did the honourable thing in my view.
In any case, I think DD has lost it a bit, but I still stand by my other point that it looks rather churlish to gloat over DD, rather than comment on the actual vote itself, which has taken another chunk out of our democracy. Let's be grateful for the Lords on this I say.
Cheers,
Rusty
E&OE
Rusty
I have made my views clear on 42 days and 28 days and any other amount of days detention without trial, on many occasions, including in the last week.
the burbler, I'm not talking about the pros and cons of detention without trial, I'm talking about how the vote came to be. Was it democratic, people voting for reasons other than the question in hand, i.e because some people felt sorry for Brown, or some Irish were given a nod and a wink! That's what I mean.
Topics of this nature should a free vote in my view.
I wholeheartedly agree with you Rusty. If there had been a free vote then perhaps the Ulster Unionists would have still voted with Brown but about another 50 or 100 Labour MPs would have voted against. That God for the House of Lords, albeit wrongly constituted, which will surely kick out the measure.
Bear in mind, Rusty, that this is my personal blog. I write about what I feel like. I don't attempt to cover all the bases or represent the LibDem party view on anything. I thought that the vote had been liberally commented on and I didn't feel I had anything new to add.
In particular, I have seen Ulster Unionists propping up dying governments before. As Shirley Williams brilliantly describe the Ulster Unionists: “The Undertakers of Parliament. They only show their faces when a government is about to die”.
Indeed, the irony is that they propped up John Major's dying government. By my goodness, to be saving the skin of a Labour PM, that is something else.
I have turned this comment into a blog posting just for you Rusty. Happy?
All the best
Paul Walter
I respect the fact that it is your blog and I only criticised where I felt fit.
For me, an independently minded constituent of the UK and the EU, I felt really sad for democracy that day. I felt however, that having no opinion (at the time) expressed on your blog seemed strange, while preferring to focus on DD's 'Crusade'.
I do thank you for bringing his voting patterns to my attention. That is interesting to read. I do note, after watching QT, Sky round-up,etc, that he seems to have quite a lot of support.
Rusty
Post a Comment