|
...trj...
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: 15:09:31, 12-06-2008 » |
|
I'm not sure how much public money is required to resign from one's post as MP (or even to re-run a by-election that even the party don't seem to be prepared to fund at the moment). Brown's difficulties on 42 days are entirely of his own making, and while the idea of extending the period of detention without trial horrifies me in itself, the fact that it has been approved by the Commons through the means of a weak and embattled leader opening his chequebook to every backbench MP with a gripe about their constituency appalls me still more. How much public money has been promised to pet causes in the last two days I wonder?
No, the Tories' record on civil liberties isn't great, but right now DD's record is better than that of the entire parliamentary Labour Party (less 37).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
|
|
« Reply #16 on: 16:54:40, 12-06-2008 » |
|
By-elections are organised using public money aren't they?
Don't get me wrong: I'm not defending Brown or New Labour or the 42-day bill for one second. All three are thoroughly shameful and disgusting in my opinion. I just think there are grounds for questioning Davis' motives here, given the history of his party's attitudes towards such things. I don't believe what he says about those motives. He's a politician and therefore almost by definition a craven liar.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
George Garnett
|
|
« Reply #17 on: 17:19:42, 12-06-2008 » |
|
I'm not sure how much public money is required to resign from one's post as MP The post of Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds are not onerous ones, so modest in fact that Her Majesty has never seen fit to pay a salary to the long line of her appointees to those posts. I do hope Mr Davies enjoys his timber cutting rights during his term of office there (always assuming that the previous incumbent, Mr Anthony Blair, hasn't walked off with it all). (I'll get me "Dontcha Jurst Lurve UK Parliamentary Procedure" anorak) |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 17:38:54, 12-06-2008 by George Garnett »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reiner Torheit
|
|
« Reply #18 on: 17:26:40, 12-06-2008 » |
|
No, the Tories' record on civil liberties isn't great, but right now DD's record is better than that of the entire parliamentary Labour Party (less 37).
I know what you mean, trj... the, errr, "Labour" party is behind an ID-card scheme and a 42-day detention period... and the "Tory" Davis has resigned his seat to devote time to fighting these loathsome initiatives? Honestly, I leave you lot in charge of Britain while I slip abroad for a decade, and I come back to find it's all topsy-turvy... Dare I ask if anyone else plans exercising their rights as a UK subject to be in Parliament Square at 5:30 this Sunday? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I was, for several months, mutely in love with a coloratura soprano, who seemed to me to have wafted straight from Paradise to the stage of the Odessa Opera-House"
- Leon Trotsky, "My Life"
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
|
|
« Reply #19 on: 17:34:22, 12-06-2008 » |
|
Dare I ask if anyone else plans exercising their rights as a UK subject to be in Parliament Square at 5:30 this Sunday?
I certainly would be if I didn't have a soundcheck at the time. (I thought it was 5, not 5.30.) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reiner Torheit
|
|
« Reply #20 on: 18:20:35, 12-06-2008 » |
|
I was figuring on an hour or two's exercise of my civil liberties before moseying over to Dalston - "on stage" at 20:45 according to the website, yes? I somehow expect that Dixon Of Dock Green and Co will be moving everyone on rather sharpishly after 5pm anyhow, and I don't really fancy spending the balance of the evening at Horseferry Row nick, despite the feeling of outraged iniquity I might momentarily get from that  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I was, for several months, mutely in love with a coloratura soprano, who seemed to me to have wafted straight from Paradise to the stage of the Odessa Opera-House"
- Leon Trotsky, "My Life"
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
|
|
« Reply #21 on: 18:34:45, 12-06-2008 » |
|
I was figuring on an hour or two's exercise of my civil liberties before moseying over to Dalston I think you have plenty of time for that, as long as you don't try anything fancy like a citizen's arrest. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
George Garnett
|
|
« Reply #22 on: 01:00:47, 13-06-2008 » |
|
I just think there are grounds for questioning Davis' motives here, given the history of his party's attitudes towards such things. I don't believe what he says about those motives. I suppose so. The trouble is, going through the standard list of dubious self-serving motives, it's very difficult to come up with one that this course of action would actually further. All very curious. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ahinton
|
|
« Reply #23 on: 06:22:34, 13-06-2008 » |
|
I just think there are grounds for questioning Davis' motives here, given the history of his party's attitudes towards such things. I don't believe what he says about those motives. I suppose so. The trouble is, going through the standard list of dubious self-serving motives, it's very difficult to come up with one that this course of action would actually further. All very curious. It's not easy, I agree, although just the publicity alone is surely not to be sniffed at as a motive. And I don't know how much it costs to resign (although I doubt that it's a lot) or organise a by-election (a substantial sum, I imagine), but whatever these sums may be, they will surely be extracted from that increasingly threadbare, moth-eaten and empty object called the public purse. Perhaps in the present increasingly parlous housing market with foreclosures becoming as common as semiquavers in a Sorabji score and decent affordable mortgages becoming as scarce as breves in one, Davis could also have flung in for good measure a call for abolition of the bizarrely named and heinous Stamp Duty Land Tax just to support his actions - but he didn't (or at least he hasn't done yet)... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
oliver sudden
|
|
« Reply #24 on: 06:31:10, 13-06-2008 » |
|
Still, I think there's something in his words on this one subject for all of us. Davis told the Guardian he thought "the shadow cabinet reaction" was "understandable", but added: "There is a huge imperative to get the public engaged on this issue and get beyond the soundbites. Last week there were polls showing 68% in favour of the government's policy. That 68% could not have understood or read the policy, so the only way to break through that is to get a serious debate going in a one issue byelection."
He said the idea "germinated" as an idea at the weekend. "I thought if we lose the 42 day vote, and it goes to the Lords, and the peers reject it, the government with polls showing 65% support for their position will be tempted to use the Parliament Act in a year's time closer to an election.
"Their discipline will be stronger than ours. We have a few doubters this week, and we might have a lot more, closer to the election, or, if we had a terrorist attack in between, that might change things. I could see a horrible set of permutations where we could end up with a 56 or 70 day or some other politically chosen detention limit just before the election. That has got to be stopped, and I hope I can do it."
He said his decision was made once he realised the government had "bought the vote in a shoddy, shabby way". |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 06:33:37, 13-06-2008 by oliver sudden »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
|
|
« Reply #25 on: 07:15:35, 13-06-2008 » |
|
I just think there are grounds for questioning Davis' motives here, given the history of his party's attitudes towards such things. I don't believe what he says about those motives. I suppose so. The trouble is, going through the standard list of dubious self-serving motives, it's very difficult to come up with one that this course of action would actually further. All very curious. I may be completely wide of the mark, but Davis lost a party leadership contest to Cameron, didn't he? He can be expecting to come out of this with an increased majority (turning the knife in Labour) and a reputation for taking a stand on issues of principle (separating him from both Brown and Cameron). The fact that he's doing this by opposing a draconian and ill-conceived policy doesn't affect these factors. Edit: thinking further about it, I can see it's quite possible that Davis' "stand" will end up being counterproductive. I still think though that it's naive to ascribe it to integrity rather than ambition. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 07:31:54, 13-06-2008 by richard barrett »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
George Garnett
|
|
« Reply #26 on: 08:09:09, 13-06-2008 » |
|
I can see it's quite possible that Davis' "stand" will end up being counterproductive. I fear so. In fact it looks as if it already is. I don't really 'do' trying to divine other people's inner motives but it's difficult to avoid lining up with The Sun  and thinking he has flipped on this one, whatever his motives. He really should have seen that Labour wouldn't play ball and decline to put up a candidate. Either way I can't somehow see the civil liberties issue getting much of a look in over the next few weeks. It's already about sixth billing to the 'Westminster Village' stuff. Looks like we'll have to rely on Their Unelected Lordships again to speak for England, Arthur. You couldn't make it up ... [Later that same morning: "Ex Sun editor Kelvin Mackenzie says he will take on David Davis in a by-election if Labour does not stand." Oh well. End of any chance of this not descending into farce.] |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 09:36:44, 15-06-2008 by George Garnett »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IgnorantRockFan
|
|
« Reply #27 on: 08:56:41, 13-06-2008 » |
|
He really should have seen that Labour wouldn't play ball and decline to put up a candidate. Surely that in itself would be a huge point for the Tories to capitalize on. Really, it's win/win for the Tories as a party. If Labour puts up a candidate, he'll be soudly trounced. If they don't, Cameron can dine out on their 'spinelessness' for weeks to come. It's all very bizarre, but I find myself admiring Davis no matter what his motivations. He's either the most principled man [formerly] in Westminster, or he's the most cunning |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Allegro, ma non tanto
|
|
|
|
Ted Ryder
|
|
« Reply #28 on: 09:38:57, 13-06-2008 » |
|
I thought this might well be a good place to set up a Tony McNulty Appreciation Society. What an impressive gentleman and how very much he deserves our support. Would-be members please form an orderly queue.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I've got to get down to Sidcup.
|
|
|
|
...trj...
|
|
« Reply #29 on: 09:52:41, 13-06-2008 » |
|
I can see it's quite possible that Davis' "stand" will end up being counterproductive. I fear so. In fact it looks as if it already is. I don't really 'do' trying to divining other people's inner motives but it's difficult to avoid lining up with The Sun and thinking he has flipped on this one, whatever his motives. He really should have seen that Labour wouldn't play ball and decline to put up a candidate. Either way I can't somehow see the civil liberties issue getting much of a look in over the next few weeks. It's already about sixth billing to the 'Westminster Village' stuff. Looks like we'll have to rely on Their Unelected Lordships again to speak for England, Arthur. You couldn't make it up ... [Later that same morning: "Ex Sun editor Kelvin Mackenzie says he will take on David Davis in a by-election if Labour does not stand." Oh well. End of any chance of this not descending into farce.] I may be over-optimistic, but I'm not sure this is right. One thing that the Sun's involvement will guarantee - even if Labour don't field a candidate (and they must be tempted, or they wouldn't still be thinking about it) - is several front pages on the nation's most popular paper; which in turn makes it impossible for all the others to ignore. It may not be perfect, but I think a debate about 42 days (and databases, and ID cards, and police arresting protesters who use the word 'cult' on a placard, etc) will emerge from within all that. That's Davis's stated aim - and despite all the comment that has arisen so far I still see no reason to doubt that this is not at least in large part what is motiviating him. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
